meon schreef:Blue-Sky schreef:Indien dat waar zou zijn, moeten heel wat zaken herzien worden, zelfs aan de relativiteitstheorie.
Tijdreizen! Quantumverplaatsing! Sneller reizen dan het licht!
Spock, wat zegt uw logisch Vulcan-brein hierover?
Imagine an imaginary journey to Andromeda, some 2.2 million light years away. For the time being ignore the problems of propulsion (like they do in all Sci-Fi films!). Firstly, lets assume a Newtonian Universe and we'll ignore the effects of gravity and friction (not much of this in space anyway). The first problem: how fast do we accelerate? Well, if we could accelerate at an infinite rate we could reach an infinite speed instantly and reach our destination in no time at all! Unfortunately, if we were to do so we would experience infinite acceleration forces and be crushed to an infinitesimally thin film instantly. Not much use. The gravitational field of the Earth of 1g (9.81 m/s per second) is however a comfortable acceleration to subject us to, so lets assume the acceleration of our spaceship will be 1g.
So how long to Andromeda at 1g using Newton's theory? We will add the condition that we wish to stop when we get there, if only to turn around and come back. The best time we can make is achieved by accelerating for the first half of the journey and decelerating for the second. The total time for the trip can be calculated to be some 2,065 years. Rather a long time really. Consider the same journey in an Einsteinian Universe. We now have a limited maximum speed (the speed of light), which at 1g is reached in 30,000,000 seconds, or a little under 354 days. After we reach this speed, how much longer will it take to reach Andromeda? The answer is no time at all! For the distance to Andromeda will have shrunk to zero for the spacecraft. However to the people back on Earth a considerable length of time would pass: some 2.2 million years.
For practical reasons, such as having no way of navigating in an infinitely thin universe, we would stop just short of the speed of light at the halfway point and reverse engines to come to a halt at Andromeda. The entire trip would have taken a little less than 2 years at a comfortable 1g. The same is true of a trip to anywhere within the Universe. We can get literally anywhere in a little under two years: four for the round trip. The main problem is the ageing of the rest of the universe while we are travelling. The other problem is that the mass of the spacecraft rises greatly as it approaches the speed of light, so an enormous power source would be required.
What about power? For the Newtonian case the power requirement is enormous, even assuming perfect efficiency. The energy required would be 5.1*10^26 Joules for a 10 tonne spaceship. This is rather a lot. NASA's space shuttles are not really up to it I'm afraid. In the Einsteinian Universe the power is still huge since the mass of the ship rises and becomes so large! And unless you get very close to c the distance to Andromeda will not shrink very much and it will take ages to get there.
Unfortunately there are still a few little problems: the friction associated with such a high speed and of course the dreaded time dilation effects.
Friction: though space is essentially empty, with increasing speed the little matter that there is would become increasingly concentrated. In addition, its relative mass increases, consequently, we would encounter it with ever greater density. Indeed as we approach the speed of light the whole Universe becomes concentrated into an infinitely thin, and consequently infinitely dense, barrier in the direction in which we are travelling. The force of friction would increase accordingly.
The second problem of time dilation means that when we return from our trip to Andromeda we would have aged less than 4 years while the Earth has aged around 4.4 million years. One or two changes would have undoubtedly taken place back here on Earth! This would seem to be an insurmountable drawback, and one which will be discussed at some length later.
The idea of travelling from world to world, having strange and exotic adventures with even more strange and exotic creatures, and then dropping back later for the odd chat about old times, is just not on. The old times would be just too old for those left behind to survive the wait! The galaxy is, after all, about 80,000 light years across, and this immediately converts to a minimum travel time of 160,000 Earth years. So travel as we know it is just not possible. Sailing off across the depths of space on five-year missions is all very well, but whose five years? Obviously sub-light travel puts severe restrictions on what we can reasonably expect to do. But what of travel at speeds faster than light?
Faster than light travel offers the hope of a way around these temporal limitations. It is the mechanism by which we can re-establish the absolute time that approximates so well here on Earth. As a literary device there is nothing at all wrong with faster than light travel, but as an accurate depiction of life in an intergalactic culture there are some problems. It is a shame to dispel these illusions, but the universe is as it is. So that about wraps it up for faster than light travel or does it?
Special relativity tells us that it is impossible for us externally to accelerate a solid object up to the speed of light, because this requires an infinite amount of energy. This is true for a spacecraft, you, or even something as small as an electron. In fact true for anything that has a finite rest mass. For, as we impart energy to an object, its mass increases at an ever-increasing rate and we can never get to the speed of light since mass becomes infinite. To make progress we must move to the physics of general relativity and beyond. It is known that once the density of matter-energy becomes large enough in a region of space-time the laws of quantum mechanics take over and uncertainty becomes the order of the day. This means that we could achieve a quantum tunnelling through the light barrier to reach trans-light velocities. The only way to amass such energy is to play with black holes. More on this elsewhere.
Until now, we have simply been recapping standard textbook physics. It is now that the speculation begins. When a velocity greater than light is introduced into the equations of special relativity we are left with the conclusion that an observer who is travelling faster than the speed of light relative to us is also travelling backwards in time. Equivalently, we are travelling backwards in time relative to him, from the intrinsic symmetry implied by travelling backwards in time. This symmetry further implies that, just as on our side of the light barrier sub-light velocities add to produce sub-light velocities, so to must pseudo-sub-light velocities sum to pseudo-sub-light velocities, for observers on the other side of the barrier
One criticism that springs naturally to mind is why do we not observe such reverse time particles? To answer this, consider two objects, one on either side of the light barrier. We will start with them stationary, and pseudo-stationary, relative to each other. Now can we expect them to be attracted towards one another by the action of gravity, or do objects on opposite sides of the light barrier have a gravitational repulsion? Lets assume it's an attraction. We would therefore see the particles approach one another, but would an observer on the other side of the barrier see this? As his time runs backwards, he would see the objects move apart. Yet to him it is our time that is running backwards and so he would reason that objects on different sides of the light barrier must have a mutual repulsion. Similarly, if we begin by assuming that such objects repel we will find they attract for the observer on the other side of the light barrier.
We can reason the same way for all forces and, indeed, all interactions in general. Therefore there can be no interaction of any kind between objects on either side of the light barrier. If such objects do exist we have no way of observing them directly. There could be an entire Universe moving backwards in time and we would never know!
We really do have the possibility of travelling faster than light, and as a natural consequence the possibility of travel backwards in time. We even have the possibility of crossing the light barrier with a finite amount of energy in a finite proper time without it taking forever as far as the rest of the Universe is concerned.
Once we are on the other side of the light barrier, travelling backwards in time, what do we do then? Well, we could always cross back again. If we time it right we could return at whatever point in history we wish. As we have seen, we can get anywhere within the Universe in a little under two years travelling below the speed of light. By travelling super-light, or more correctly on the other side of the light barrier, we can arrange to arrive back here at any time. With a little planning, we could arrange to return to Earth after the passage of the same Earth time as our proper shipboard time. This is true faster than light travel and with it comes the power of travel in both space and time. With it also comes the possibility of undershooting our departure time, arriving back before we left and even interfering with our own departure. It seems that this is still the only serious objection to time travel.
This is the great time paradox problem.
The evidence for travel in both directions in time exists in special relativity, general relativity and thermodynamics, and generally throughout the physical sciences. Without reverse time travel there are considerable philosophical and theoretical difficulties, such as that posed by Dirac's multiple infinite negative mass-energy background.
Time travel has been extensively investigated in connection with Schwartzchild wormholes linking different space-time continuums. Alternatively, it has been proposed that in a curved space-time they could link different points in the same continuum. This allows for the possibility of using a wormhole to travel to a previous time in the same Universe, which puts us at liberty to interfere with our personal histories with all the paradoxes that this entails!
.
