Tuesday, 7 January 2014

The Subject of Time-Travel

It's one of those oddball questions that a guy would ask in some pub....is there any evidence of time-travelers among us?  Usually, there'd be three folks at the bar who respond....mostly discounting the idea, or suggesting that they were themselves....time-travelers.....who had a bit too much to sip for the evening.

It came out this week....that astrophysicist Robert Nemiroff....a Michigan Technological University professor with no real projects on his plate.....took some of his students onto a project.  Could anyone use the internet and 'history' and find episodes where time-travelers might have laid down a card, or left some hint they'd been around.

The result?  Nothing.  They used phrases like "Pope Francis" to see if anyone used the term in the decade prior to him coming into the office.  They used the term "twitter" to see if someone used it before it ever took off.  Answer?  No.

Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Bing were the chief items used.

Course, a guy could say....none of those exist in the year 2183.  So maybe these travelers are careful about how they browse or leave trails.

The general belief?  Well....the science guys are of some belief that sooner or later....some idiot is going to crack the time-travel thing, and either accidentally or on purpose.....do it.  Government-approved?  I kinda doubt it.  Once you ship a guy back with the intent of changing one single circumstance.....it likely changes forty additional events, and maybe makes things twice as bad as they were before.

The other professors at Michigan Technical University?  Well....I'm guessing they are a bit peeved that they aren't allowed to do bigfoot studies, Loch Ness reviews, cattle mutilation studies, and UFO analysis.  The thing is.....you gotta study something and conclude some evidence on it.  Even if you studied mail-route delivery times, nutritional positives of pop tarts, or acid-reflex numbers of Dr Pepper.  So we can conclude.....no time traveler using Google or Facebook.

Course, maybe they turned up at Auburn this year, ensured that the Iron Bowl went against Alabama, and helped to get a third-rate team all the way to number two in the nation.  Well....it could have happened this way.

1 comment:

matthew Marsden said...

Hi, I'm following this work by Dr Nemiroff and co, and 'time' or 'the problem if time' is a hot topic. But I sincerely think most/all of the problems come from jumping to conclusions, and not checking correctly our most basic assumptions. I have tried to explain how and why here >


It is said *"...time travel remains a topic for serious scientific consideration. "It's not likely," - "but you can’t point to laws that preclude it." *

But, logically, we do not actually see a past or a future, we do see matter existing and interacting, some of this interaction forms the patterns in our minds, which scientifically can be shown to just be 'here' - but from which we conclude there 'is' a past, and thus time.

In 'on the electro dynamics of moving bodies (S1)' Einstein only actually shows that moving things can be compared ('trains' and hands on dials), and assumes a thing called time exists and passes. A light 'clock' similarly proves only that light can oscillate between mirrors, but not,also, that a past, future, and thing called time exists or flows.

Thus, perhaps " you can’t point to laws that preclude it.(time travel)" * - becasue you have not shown that the 'time' thing itself exists, despite ;'argumentum ad populum'

just my considered opinion.
mm (a brief history of timelessness)