Just In Time For 2018: The Current Truth About Time Travel

I was honored when Steve Higgins asked me to write about time travel for Higgypop. It gives me the opportunity to clear-up a number of common misunderstandings that appeared in his previous article. The nature of time and the potentials for time travel are two of the most difficult and misunderstood areas in physics and no amount of logic is going to get a person through it. It demands study in the areas of beyond Relativity theory and quantum mechanics, but temporal mechanics and more. I'm going to use this opportunity to prove exactly why. I've been studying and researching the nature of time with the intent of solving the issues related to both, for over 20 years, which is different from just studying the topics. That's why I'm in the position I am today, the de facto leader in both fields. Here's why -

First of all, although there are scientists who say they have an interest in time travel, and claim that they're working on it, I know of none who are serious, and I say that just by looking at their work. Steve's article cited two things that these scientists agreed on:

1. Time travel is theoretically possible.

2. The most likely method of time travel is via a wormhole.

The first point is correct, however, not the second and that is my first proof backing up my statement. A year ago I would've agreed with the wormhole concept but, because I'm actually doing constant research work in that field, with the full and honest intent on accomplishing time travel, guess what? I made a breakthrough which relegates wormholes and the entire Einsteinian approach to time travel, null and void. That's why I'm selling the technology that I developed that could actually come closest to creating a stable wormhole, which Steve mentioned in the previous article. But I digress…

Steve mentions Brian Greene, who talks a lot about time travel but doesn't even work in the field. Let me explain…Being a PhD theoretical physicist means nothing when the discussion comes to the subject of time travel because time travel is not a subject that you have to study in order to get a PhD in theoretical physics. Just because a PhD talks about time travel doesn't mean he knows anything beyond the most shallow, pedestrian level information that any well read geek girl would know. I've never seen Brian Greene discuss anything much beyond that, so let me back-up my statement by looking at what he said in Steve's article.

"Scientists, Brian Greene says, 'we know how to do it [time travel to the future] because Einstein showed us the way over a hundred years ago."

That's telling a statement right there, for 2 reasons. First, because he says that we know how to time travel to the future, and second, because Einstein showed us how over a hundred years ago. Well, think about that last one. If anyone was really, really, working on time travel, you'd think they'd come up with more ways than some really non-solution that's a hundred years old, right? But why did I say that Einstein's way is a "non-solution"? I mean, c'mon, it's Einstein right? The answer's in the rest of Greene's statement.

"He showed that if you go out into space and travel near the speed of light, and you turn around, and you come back, your clock will have been ticking off time more slowly. So, when you step off it's going to be the future on planet Earth. You will have time travelled into the future."

There you have it - a non-solution-solution if there ever was one. What do I mean? This is where knowing something about advanced concept physics comes in real handy. Notice how Greene says if you go out in space? Well, that takes a space program to do that. No space program, no going to space. So that puts a big dent in this solution being practical and what we want is a practical solution. Second, he said "and travel near the speed of light". Now that's 186,000 miles per second and as it stands now, there's nothing that comes anywhere close to that. Not even worth mentioning, but there's more. Greene left out the fact that for the amount of time that you want to "travel" to the future, you have to be flying at that ridiculous velocity for that long. BIG PROBLEM. It's called FUEL. Every physicist that quotes this example always forgets about the fuel requirements because this is just a rhetorical exercise for them and they aren't thinking about what it will take to do it for real. Whatever means that you use to fly as close to the speed of light as you can, you're going to need to be sure that you'll have the fuel that will make it happen, and that's a lot harder than you think. So this solution is a non-solution. It's entirely theoretical without any basis at all in reality as far as actually doing it.

He added, "this is not controversial stuff, any physicist who knows what they're talking about agrees with this."

See what I mean? But they don't know the objections I just raised because none of them are working on time travel! Not even Ronald Mallett, who is famous for claiming that he is, but who has done nothing but talk about it for 15 years!

And forget about some kind of warp drive that would solve the problem because a warp drive won't. You see, any warp drive works by contracting space in the front of the space craft, at least (the rear expansion isn't actually required because space will expand on its own there) and thus creates a area of space-time where the spacecraft is that's not accelerating. Without that acceleration, there'll be no time dilation and it's that time dilation that will keep your clock from running at the normal speed. So no time dilation, no time travel which exposes a central flaw in the whole idea - time dilation isn't really time travel. Why? Because you have to fly at some ridiculous velocity for the amount of time that you want to go to the future for. You want to see the future of 2118, you're going to have to fly for about 100 years, but if time isn't dilated for you, you'll be dead. You might as well put yourself in some kind of suspended animation tank. In fact, that would be a much easier and practical way of time travel to the future. Time dilation isn't real time travel - it's age retardation. Period.

So you might as well talk about the day pigs sprout wings and fly as this type of time travel. The same goes for using a black hole or a neutron star's gravity to create time dilation. Sure, they both have them in spades but there's one HUGE problem. They're too far away. The closest black hole is 1,600 light years away. That would require 1,600 years of flying at the speed of light just to get there and remember - we can't go that fast. That means either sending a robotic crew on a mission that will take at least 3,200 years to arrive and then waiting around another 1,600 years to get any data from their experiments radioed back. Guess what? No one's paying for something like that! It's not going to happen. The same goes for a neutron star - the closest one is around 280 light years away. So you can see I'm correct about these physicists that talk about these forms of time travel, because you've never read about them talking about these kinds of facts. Like I said - they aren't working on time travel.

More evidence backing my position when Greene talks about time travel to the past.  Greene says "this is where the arguments start to happen because many of us don't think that time travel to the past is possible."

Of course they don't! They haven't tried researching it with the intent to find a way that it will happen! You have to realize these physicists are almost all like the joke about the drunk who's crawling around on his hands and knees under a street light one night. When asked what he was doing by a passer-by, he responds he's looking for his car keys. When the passer-by asks where in the area under the light he thinks he might of dropped them, the drunk responds, "Oh, I didn't drop them over here, but the light's better…"

Brian Greene, Brian Cox, Michio Kaku, Ronald Mallett, and more, are all like that drunk. They'll look for time travel solutions as long as they come from one of the theories of Relativity despite the fact that there are no, good solutions to be found in either the General or Special theories of Relativity. Then what's the point? The point is that it gives them something that sounds exciting to talk about because most people have no idea what they're actually talking about anyway.

Steve's article mentions an astrophysicist, Ethan Siegel who said that time travel to the past is theoretically possible by creating a wormhole.

News flash! That was known back in the '80s when Kip Thorne proposed it. I've never heard of Siegel and when I looked him up I knew why, he's just a science popularizer. His peer group is Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye, not Kip Thorne and Jospeh Polchinski. He's earned my disdain for invoking the idea of paradoxes and using a family tree of Philip J. Fry from Futurama to do so, when there's no scientific basis for time travel paradoxes except in the minds of those who've never done any serious work on the subject - whether scientist or not. I've done more on the issue of paradoxes than anyone else, and authored a special report to select members of Congress on the issue (now the book, 'Paradox Lost: The True Geometries of Time Travel') so that in the wake of growing talk of trying to do time travel, they didn't have to worry about someone going to the past and undoing their election. 

Siegel is quoted as saying that, "we haven't discovered any yet [wormholes], but according to all the rules of theoretical physics, there's nothing forbidding it."

I can do you one better than that - the late great physicist, John Archibald Wheeler, who coined the term wormhole, said that micro wormholes should be found in the quantum foam of space-time itself, rapidly closing and opening at a size too small for any particle to get in. Scientists in the know (and that certainly doesn't include Siegel) have talked for years about the possibility of grabbing one, teasing it open and making it larger and then injecting some kind of exotic matter or negative energy inside it to stabilize it. No easy task, which is why none of them has ever tried. Like I said - none of these guys are working on time travel.

I'll skip the erroneous description of wormhole physics that follows and just go straight to the true facts.

 

1. The smart people know you don't create a wormhole, you grab a micro one and enlarge it.

 

2. There is no "other end". This misconception is due to the idea that you could have a two wormhole mouths separated by space and time, but that concept is derived from the 2D embedded diagrams used to illustrate wormholes. In reality, both mouths are actually part of the same structure, not just connected by a throat. If you have a micro wormhole hole, you can bet that there is already an opening connected to it somewhere else.

 

3. You don't open up a wormhole now in the present day and create a matching "quantum entangled" wormhole at some point in the future, expecting  to travel back to the day the first wormhole was opened.

This is where the need for understanding temporal mechanics comes in. Temporal mechanics is the physics of time and its operation as part of our reality. The statement, that we could go back to the day that the wormhole was first open is a common example of not having an understanding of temporal mechanics. Why? What do you think is happening once the wormhole connection is made, regardless of whether it's to the future or the past? Do you think that time is just frozen there so that as long as the wormhole remains open that it will always be connected to the first moment? No. That would require the wormhole mouth to do something that wormholes don't do - macroscopically quantum tunnel continuously to that first moment in time, which would cause another big problem. It means that as soon as you went through, it would disappear because now it's trying to reacquire that same original moment in time and that moment is gone!

4. This doesn't resolves the question "if time travel is possible where are the tourists from the future?", in fact that question is a red herring, an indicator that the person asking or using it, has no business even discussing time travel. First, it was raised by Stephen Hawking as a quip, to support his chronology protection conjecture, and whenever Hawking makes a wise crack about something, you can be sure there's no real physics behind it. In this case, no one smart enough to do time travel and then smart enough to turn it into a business, is going to endanger their clientele by allowing them to be recognized as time travelers. They don't even do that in sci-fi movies! Second, Hawking is horrible with the quantum mechanics of time travel and misses the point that any travel to the past would by neccessity, end up in a parallel universe copy of the past, which means we wouldn't be seeing them here, unless we happen to be in one of those near infinite number of copies. 

 

5. The whole idea of not being able to go back before a wormhole has been created, also reflects an ignorance, not only of temporal mechanics but also the engineering of the space-time metric. Part of this stems from the idea that physicists have been afraid until recently of even discussing time travel, and only began to do so when they discovered closed time-like curve solutions in General Relativity and decided to call those, "time machines". That's like calling a waterfall - a washing machine. The solution is to "condition" the micro wormholes, a process I learned about from H. David Froning's work, so that they open up to where you want them to. This is where the information that is available becomes restricted by necessity. In 2004, the Air Force released their teleportation physics study, written by Eric Davis, PhD and the following year I wrote the only private sector analysis of it, which stated in part it never should have been released to the public since, according to the study, it would only cost $25M to study everything in it to see what might be discovered. Plenty of enemies of the U.S. have that kind of coin. And so it is with practical time travel - there are certain elements that don't even involve the complete realization of it, that can be weaponized, and the method of conditioning wormholes to determine where they lead to, would certainly be one of those. My reticence to reveal such info is why I don't get harrassed by the government - they know I'm not going to reveal sensitive information just to satisfy nerds and geeks who probably wouldn't understand it anyway, which isn't the point - it's you never know who's reading it that just might and have a budget to do something about it. I'm followed by people from over 19 different countries on platforms like Researchgate.net and many of them are nations hostile to the U.S.

 

Which brings us to Steve's article section on yours truly, however, there were some mistakes. First, yes, I did build the first time machine, the Verdrehung Fan, in 2012 which we believe is opening and keeping open micro wormholes over time so that IR and RF waves can enter them and disappear, from either direction. Why? Because radio and broadcast engineers (including a NASA radio antenna architect), as well as a number of physicists I've talked to, agree that what the Verdrehung Fan does violates Special Relativity unless it is opening micro wormholes and they have no other explanation for why the waves disappear or where they go. However, as I demonstrated conceptually at the 2014 International Space Development Conference SpaceUp session, if you apply the physics of torsion to the quantum foam of space-time where micro wormholes are, you could get the effect where they would be forced to stay open longer and made larger, eventually allowing photons through. This idea is supported in part by the research of Luke Butcher of Cambridge University in the UK who believed micro wormholes could be kept open long enough for photons to enter if they can contain the Casimer effect, which is negative energy. Coincidently, his research was featured in an article in New Scientist magazine the day after my presentation. Also coincidently, in 2006, Iranian physicist Mohammed Mansauryar described the identical configuration of micro wormholes possible with the Verdrehung Fan at increased power levels, which would form a ring that would cause the space in the center to collapse, forming one big, traversable wormhole. It's worth noting that issues regarding stability and traversability are largely resolved by the fact that unlike 100% of all the other examples given by those physicists not doing any serious work, the Verdrehung Fan causes to rotation and stability to begin with, much like a constant supply of water in a sink will keep the whirlpool going after you've pulled the stopper out.

The dramatic details, and scientific basis for this, can be read in my Quora answer to "Can you tell me your opinion on time travel Do you think its-possible?" . What this means is that the Verdrehung Fan is now obsolete, along with all the other brute force technology that you see in sci-fi TV shows and movies. The only thing left to do is determine the best method by which to trigger into causation a new, parallel universe copy of a desired past, such a causation would instantly translate the time traveler there, just as experimenters have always been viewed to be in new parallel universe copies of quantum measurement experiments. We're talking real, seamless, instant time travel with no violations of conservation of energy or entropy increases because the past that you get is a copy that didn't exist before you did the time travel, so everything is self-consistent. 

 

This is the technological approach that I'm using for the time travel program that Steve described as my "Elon Musk-esque move" that costs $1,000 per ticket that is good for four people a piece. Each ticket is financially linked to an ownership percentage in a documentary about time travel breakthrough research, called The Dawning of the Age of Time Travel. Ronald Mallett, the anti-christ and false prophet of time travel, colluded with scam artist Scott J. Cooper to sell what they called a "theoretical commodity" named Time Travel X, for $799 that was supposed to fund Mallett's time machine research. They claimed that the value was linked to Bit Coin but in reality, it was only linked to Mallett's non-existent research. You can read all about it and the Federal Trade Comsission crack down, at  'A Critical Analysis of Ronald L. Mallett, PhD: How Motherland Magazine Was Seduced by The "Crazy Professor"' . So when I knew I was going to offer time travel tickets, I knew it made sense to link their value to something that was real, to avoid people thinking it was a scam like Time Travel X. The movie will be documenting the current state of time travel research, including a couple of attempts to use technology derived from theories of Nicola Tesla. So ticket purchasers know they're not just throwing their money away on some crazy idea. It's backed-up with something real. 

 

The purpose is the same as those two Silicon Valley billionaires who are funding research that they think will get them out of what they erroneously think is a simulated universe. Survival. I don't believe in the future and I'm doing something about it. People all over the world have been contacting me for the same reason, even before I came up with this idea. You can read more about what I plan for myself at Preparation Diary of a Time Travel Scientist. 

 

On a parting note, no, I don't believe Noah the Time Traveler is real. All of his claims about the future are well within any futurist predictions and he never once mentioned any thing about how the technology of the time travel program he was supposed to be a part of, worked. 

 

I want to thank Steve Higgins again, for the opportunity to shed some much needed light on this exciting and much misunderstood subject, as we approach the time of its ultimate realization.

Twitter: @Paranovation

Blog: paranovation.wordpress.com

CV: lanyrd.com/profile/paranovation/bio