Is Time Travel, Especially Into the Past Possible? | Matt Szydagis | TEDxSchenectady

Another explanation is fatalism: if you try to assassinate Hitler, your gun will always be jammed. Personally I think this is a poor and unsatisfactory explanation from a rational point of view. Then there's a third explanation, but it's not often explored, even in fiction, because it's really strange. The idea is that if you really try to create a paradox, the universe will become a Möbius strip. And you have two

time

lines that exist simultaneously; so if you go back in

time

and kill your grandfather or your mother, you are alive and dead, like Schrödinger, the chances of being alive are half.

But what does this mean? This is a difficult question because quantum mechanics is about particles. We are made of a large number of particles. (ten to infinitesimal), so we still don't know exactly what effect these strange quantum effects will have on large collections of atoms, like us. Therefore, all concepts, including parallel universes and paradoxes of fate, will always appear in the plots of novels, such as "The Flash", "The Twilight Zone", "Star Wars", etc. From time to time, there is supposed to be evidence of time

travel

in real life, although it is always easily revealed to be fake, such as the infamous cell phone in Charlie Chaplin's The Circus.

It was easily revealed to be... a headset for. people with hearing disabilities. These are always easily exposed. We don't have any solid evidence that there are time

travel

ers among us. Except, of course, there was a composer, Gustav Mahler, who was a lot like me. (Laughs) I actually used this photo to cheat on my wife on Facebook. She said, "How do you take a daguerreotype photo? It's amazing!" And I thought, "Well, that's not me." However, Stephen Hawking and Neil deGrasse Tyson always mentioned visitors from the future. I hope you see it on YouTube, I hope it attracts attention, because I, a young professor at the University of Albany, am going to tell you: you are wrong about something important.

That's why I want to boldly declare: the reason time travel is denied is not because there are no people from the future. The reason is simple. In fact, because I am not an expert in general relativity, but they are, they should know, because in general relativity this is very easy to prove: for example, wormholes are a very classic example. Even if time travel is real, you can't go back to before the machines were created. So if I use a wormhole as an example of time travel, the day I open the wormhole will be the first day I can go back. —That day comes from the future—I cannot go back to a time before creating the machine or the phenomenon.

Of course, there are exceptions. If naturally occurring wormholes exist, they have existed since the beginning of time. Exceptions like this. But overall, I'm not worried about not having time travelers from the future, because that just means time travel hasn't been invented yet. So I don't think it's a problem. In general, the problems we have with time travel, according to our current knowledge of physics, are unfortunately many more: it is necessary to go faster than the speed of light, build an infinitely long device, use negative energy or energy infinite, I also need something antigravity. If we start to speculate: - As I said before: "Increasing gravity slows down time and takes you to the future" - and to go back in time, you need something that we don't know, that we don't know.

We even have hypothesis models that can be used to predict the type of negative energy and what type of particles or

matt

er is needed. I then concluded that it is unlikely that humans can travel through time, at least not using a time machine with a switch to go back in time, like the ones we want in novels. But my bold, optimistic hypothesis is that once we figure out how to combine relativity and quantum mechanics, and have a complete theory of everything, I believe time travel will be

possible

for subatomic particles, so that Opportunities can communicate. each other. —For example, using some type of space-time telephone or telegraph—I will make a bold prediction—although there is no evidence to support me—that within 100 years, human technology will be able to transport subatomic particles one second into the past. inside, but initially it does not contain any useful information.

For all of this to be feasible, time travel has to be taken seriously (and that's not the case right now) and no one is taking it as seriously as Ron Merritt. I don't know anyone who takes the study of time travel with the same seriousness. —As far as experimental physicists go, there are many theoretical physicists who have written papers and are working hard on general relativity. But other than Ron Merritt, I didn't know anyone serious enough to try to build something. And I believe that for my optimistic prediction to come true, this topic must be taken seriously and a large number of experts must invest in research. (although it takes 100 years to come true), my colleagues find this prediction too optimistic.

But the average person who is not a scientist will say, "No, that's not enough. What subatomic particles are you talking about? I just want to travel in a time machine!" Therefore, my conclusion is: Obviously, without Einstein's! innovative research, much of what I talked about today will not be

possible

. And I always show everyone this photo of Einstein, because we have to remember that he was not born with gray hair. He was just a baby when he was born. There were days when he didn't have gray hair. That's why I always like to show you this photo.

This is my speech today, thank you.