1. Latest News
  2. Submit Press Release
  1. PR Home
  2. Latest News
  3. Feeds
  4. Alerts
  5. Submit Free Press Release
  6. Journalist Account
  7. PRNewswire Distribution

Australian Physicists Show How Photons Could Time Travel Through Wormhole - Marshall Barnes Did It

In computer simulated experiments, Australian physicists have shown how photons could theoretically travel back in time through a wormhole without paradox. Last November, Marshall Barnes did real experiments showing his Verdrehung Fan(TM) doing that.

 
 
Marshall Barnes' 2014 ISDC Speaker Badge (Copyright 2014)
Marshall Barnes' 2014 ISDC Speaker Badge (Copyright 2014)
PRLog - Jun. 25, 2014 - YELLOW SPRINGS, Ohio -- Two Australian physicists from the University of Queensland have simulated time travel for two photons and avoided the grandfather paradox. Tim Ralph and Martin Ringbauer used a computer program to do the experiment, showing how a photon could enter a wormhole and encounter a past version of itself and in another case, the photon encounters another photon caught in a closed time-like curve. The fact they were working with models of photons, and a wormhole, is remarkably similar to the actual physical research being done by Marshall Barnes with the first actual time machine in the world, the Verdrehung Fan™. At the International Space Development Conference last May, Marshall presented his peer reviewed paper, Technological and Theoretical Foundations for Travel Through Traversable Wormholes explaining in great detail how theories for torsion physics from Einstein's theory of teleparallelism, John Archibald Wheeler's theories of microwormholes in quantum foam and the operation and experimental evidence from the Verdrehung Fan™ combine into a model for creating a traversable wormhole for travel to distant locations in space or even time travel. The presentation was enthusiastically received as Marshall was meticulous in covering all the pertinent information and had ready answers for every single one of the questions asked by the attentive audience. However, Marshall, the world's definitive expert on time travel and time machines, sees flaws in the work of Ralph and Ringbauer.

"The problem is it's a computer simulation and as we used to say about computers back in the 70s - 'junk in, junk out.' In this case, Ralph even admitted in one of the interviews, 'However, I emphasize it is a simulation – we “cheat” when we prepare the 2nd photon that represents the time traveler in the past' (see http://thespeaker.co/time-travel-simulated-australian-phy... ). Well that cheating is the obvious evidence the simulation is flawed. What isn't obvious is the space-time model they're using is wrong. They're ignoring the fact that any time travel to the past must, and I emphasize - must involve parallel universes. There's no other way around it. It's in-escapable and to those that think it's cheating, I say grow up - this is real physics I'm talking about, not one of your Dr. Who episodes. This is the way the physics says it happens".

Marshall continued, referring to information he has in his new book based on his time travel report to the U.S. Congress, Paradox Lost:The True Geometries of Time Travel.

"So they have a situation where a photon goes through a wormhole to the past but they ignore the past has to be in a parallel universe. In the other example, with the closed time-like curve, each iteration of going back will be another parallel universe. If it doesn't, then you have the geometry that Stephen Hawking talked about in his Chronology Protection Conjecture which I proved wrong with a physical classroom experiment in 2012 (see http://network.nature.com/groups/time/forum/topics/10468 ), the details of which are in my report. The proper geometry is a spiral, not a simple, 2 dimensional embedded Einstein Rosen bridge shown in their illustration. That illustration shows exactly why they're wrong - it violates the Copenhagen interperation of quantum mechanics. Ralph makes some comment about preparing the photon so that they get 'consistent evolutions in situations where we would expect paradoxes for classically described macroscopic objects'", which to me makes no sense because it doesn't matter what you do with the photon or anything else - its the geometry of the space-time that counts, and since Ralph admits to cheating with the set-up, the experiment means very little as far as serious time travel science goes. He seems to think that quantum rules don't apply to macroscopic objects, but Ian Walmsley and his team at Oxford achieved entanglement of diamonds without special preparation and macroscopically. There've been other such experimental results. So, it doesn't matter which scale we're talking about when it comes to paradoxes.

"What they've done," Marshall continued, "is create a scenario that fails my MCEBPS formula which tests for paradoxes and if they're there, it kicks them out (MCEBPS stands for Marshall's Copenhagen Everett Barnes Paradox Solution). In this case they send a photon to the past in simulation where it meets itself. That's a violation of the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum physics because we have a photon in the past that's now meeting itself from the future which didn't happen before and Copenhagen says you only get one outcome per measurement which means this new outcome has to exist in a parallel universe. Notice, it has nothing to do with the quantum state of the photon, but where it is in the space-time geometry, in this case, the past. So, the parallel universe part of this is provided for by the Everett/Wheeler hypothesis which is the 'E" part of the formula, thus providing a foundational alternative to Copenhagen. Next is the B for Barnes part of the formula where I weigh in with my contribution which is to insist on either having created a record of the past event when it was the present, or using evidence from the past to show we now have a new past which exists in a parallel universe. In this case, since it's a computer simulation, we know the photon is in the past and alone. By introducing its future self through the wormhole, it becomes obvious it didn't happen before, so this new encounter requires a parallel universe solution".

Marshall says the overall results of the Ringbauer/Ralph experiment do mirror those of thought experiments of Igor Novikov and his Principle of Self-Consistency that Marshall referenced in his paper, Experimental and Theoretical Analysis of Chronology Protection Conjecture Failing On The Discovery Channel. However, though Novikov's calculation shows how paradox can be avoided, it ignores the space-time geometries that result from true time travel and his experiment violates what Marshall calls, a FAOC or first action of cause. In this case, although Novikov claims his principle proves any event that gives rise to a change in the past would have a probability of zero, he ignores that the act of time travel to the past causes a change, just by taking place because it didn't happen before. The arrival in the past, from the future, would be the FAOC which then renders Novikov's idea moot, despite its self-consistency.

"The bottom line is there's so much misunderstanding and misinformation about time travel, because no one in physics is actually getting paid to figure this out and there's so much reliance, conceptually, on ideas from science fiction which are not the science part but the plot twists for the fiction part."

Marshall will be doing a special presentation on time travel at Harvard in July. For more info on him, you can see his profile page at http://about.me/marshallbarnes


--- End ---

Click to Share

Contact Email:
***@publicist.com Email Verified
Source:Fame Plan
City/Town:Yellow Springs - Ohio - United States
Industry:Research, Science
Tags:marshall barnes, Tim Ralph, Martin Ringbauer, stephen hawking, time-travel
Shortcut:prlog.org/12340430
Disclaimer:   Issuers of the press releases are solely responsible for the content of their press releases. PRLog can't be held liable for the content posted by others.   Report Abuse

Latest Press Releases By “

More...

Trending News...



  1. SiteMap
  2. Privacy Policy
  3. Terms of Service
  4. Copyright Notice
  5. About
  6. Advertise
Like PRLog?
9K2K1K
Click to Share