Quantum Time Travel --"Can We Receive Messages from the Future?" ( Nothing to do with Mr Trump )

Thought this subject might be interesting to post. A recent article added on The daily Galaxy site. With the worries of today have we ( or some of us ) maybe been pre-warned already ? Worth a look, some of the brains on ATS will make more sense of this than I..
Around ten years ago researcher Dave Bacon, now at Google, showed that a time-travelling quantum computer could quickly solve a group of problems, known as NP-complete, which mathematicians have lumped together as being hard. The problem was, Bacon's quantum computer was travelling around 'closed timelike curves'. These are paths through the fabric of spacetime that loop back on themselves. General relativity allows such paths to exist through contortions in spacetime known as wormholes.

www.dailygalaxy.com...

a reply to: skywatcher44

some of the brains on ATS will make more sense of this than I..

Thank you, let me see what I make of it and I will get back if there's anything pertinent.

a reply to: skywatcher44

This guy Bacon made a quantum computer that can travel/access wormholes? I'm so confused...

This one might just be over my head. I tried reading up on the NP-complete but it's very technical
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: skywatcher44

Yes that is what I am doing right now. Thank goodness at last they have cottoned on to this technology. All along I have been making use of this technology. There are a few more out there, too. One made a film called "Predestination" which the cinemas in your time should have showed by now (for you) then (for me). I like time travelling on ATS. I have been back to 2011. That is the random date I chose to join on. I thought I better do things linear fashion according to your time or I might get spotted.

Ok, serious answer: I think this is all a little running before one can walk. Science has by no means proved the existence of worm holes. They remain a theory and hypothetically part of general relativity theory, a theory of a theory. Even in the relativity theory they only MAY exist.

Personally I do not think they exist. I don't think time exists like that. That is just my theory. The past does not exist once it becomes past. In our memories and evidence it remains, but even the memory and the evidence is corrupted and loses more of its tangibility and accuracy as the present progresses. Only the present exists as a physical action. Yet even the present cannot precisely be pinned down. Much of what we think of as time is only a human measurement from a human perspective.

Yes images can give the illusion of time travel because light has a fixed speed, but it is only the image. It is just a visual effect (if there are any eyes to see it that is), really like a photograph of sorts being transmitted.

Good question. I don't understand a bit of what they're saying in the article but I have wondered before about the question. Maybe it is impossible for people to time travel but I wonder about information.

a reply to: Revolution9

So are you saying time is an illusion? Just curious.

While not scientific when I read "messages from the future" I remember the John Carpenter Horror film Prince of Darkness which deals with quantum physics in a specific way.

www.imdb.com...

"with Prince of Darkness: the ideas come fast and furiously, blending theology with quantum physics and macabre horror imagery with time travel"

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Good question. I don't understand a bit of what they're saying in the article but I have wondered before about the question. Maybe it is impossible for people to time travel but I wonder about information.

As information is mass-less, there is no temporal constraint, as far as I can see.

a reply to: opethPA

Thanks for that link .. Found it on ffilms.org
ffilms.org... ( Film Link )
It works for me in that onscreen JWplayer just go full screen.

It googles up as legal.
goo.gl...
ffilms.org...

originally posted by: NateTheAnimator
a reply to: Revolution9

So are you saying time is an illusion? Just curious.

There is a difference between perceptual/philosophical time and physical time.

Physical time is equivalent to distance. As Wheeler put it, it was like we measured North, South and East in meters but West we only measure in seconds because it is 'different'.

Einstein's equation reveals that time is only a spatial dimension (like the direction 'West') and we can measure it in meters, too. One second = 299,792,458 m along the axis of time.

It might be worth some people spending a little money to see if they can build a receiver to pick up signals from Earth's future. I'm not sure how to go about it, though. One thing that might make it a little easier is that we know exactly in the sky where the Earth will be at any point in the future, and we can point our trans-temporal radio telescopes at that point.

Maybe the future people will even help us out by sending a message back to us. If they're not destroyed, of course.

originally posted by: skywatcher44
The problem was, Bacon's quantum computer was travelling around 'closed timelike curves'.

Now all you need is an infinitely long, massive, rotating cylinder, or some negative energy. Maybe exotic matter.

The article is basically saying that if entangled particles could be sent through open timelike curves then they could solve very difficult problems very quickly. I'm not exactly sure where receiving messages from the future comes into it. But imo it's probably impossible for such timelike curves to exist and so this none of this will work in the real world anyway.

There is a caveat -- not all physicists think that these open timeline curves are any more likely to be realisable in the physical universe than the closed ones.

Speed of Light = 186,282 miles/sec, 299,792 km/sec, 2.4 x speed of light through diamond.
Distance from Earth:

• Moon = 1.3sec (vacuum), 2.0sec (fiber optic)
• Sun = 8.2min (vacuum), 12min (fiber optic)

Point: It takes time to see anything, and every other known human sense is much slower. We are creatures constantly (ironic?) living in the past...or passed (as it were). In other words, by the time we've had the experience, the experience has already passed, even as we we're experiencing it.

When we look at the moon, we are looking 1.3 seconds into the past (time varied by atmospheric congestion), or, the actual moon existing as we think we're looking at it, has already passed 1.3 seconds further along it's path in the sky (further west).

When we look at the Sun (don't do this without protection), we are looking 8.2 minutes into the past (time varied by atmospheric congestion), with even more interesting effects during sunset and sunrise.

When we look at our hands in front of our face, we are indeed looking into the past by a minute fraction of a second, as it takes "time" for the image of our hands and everything around it to reach the retinas of our eyes, and then be objectified by our brains.

When we touch a basketball, it takes "time" for the signal to reach our brains, and to respond with action that takes even more time (if we're trying to dribble per say).

When we taste the first bite (and every bite after) of that amazingly life-altering Dutch Apple Pie with crumbs on top, it takes time for the sensation to reach our brain, for the emotion to take hold, and for the frenzy to begin. And then, of course, for the sense of longing afterward.

It doesn't matter what we see or do, we are constant creatures of the past, and yet Pink Floyd was still rather enlightening when they said,

"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be."

To whom? To someone else living in the past.

Source of info: Wolfram Alpha

a reply to: lagnar

Great comment - thanks for posting

originally posted by: lagnar


When we touch a basketball, it takes "time" for the signal to reach our brains, and to respond with action that takes even more time (if we're trying to dribble per say).

Creatures of the past who have adapted to use learned experience to produce foresight, premonition or technique that offsets the logistical delay in information transfer.

BBall is a good example ( or any fast moving sport) as top players tend to be the ones who can best anticipate correct outcomes (based on experience) without spending too much time processing unlikely outcomes.

Not only does this work on the fast moving things like no look pass slam dunks that involve 10000000000000 variables, (all occurring in real time across multiple localities).
It also works for the manager sitting on the sideline who uses the same anticipation (gained through experience) to predict events well off into the near future (such as tactical changes).



Our quantum computers (brains) are always receiving messages from the future but I doubt any computer will be able to emulate this until it has experienced a similar evolutionary journey and developed the ability out of necessity.

a reply to: opethPA

One of my all time favorites.

Cult classic


OP, interesting read

originally posted by: Blue Shift
It might be worth some people spending a little money to see if they can build a receiver to pick up signals from Earth's future. I'm not sure how to go about it, though. One thing that might make it a little easier is that we know exactly in the sky where the Earth will be at any point in the future, and we can point our trans-temporal radio telescopes at that point.

Maybe the future people will even help us out by sending a message back to us. If they're not destroyed, of course.

I think Speilberg figured this out in the 80's, and that's how he was able to write most of Back to the Future II. What a coincidence that this question comes up in 2015 eh?

a reply to: Jukiodone

Indeed, my point exactly.

Simply put, we are all time-travelers AND psychics, constantly living in the past and predicting (perceiving) the future, and some of us are REEEEEEAAAALLLY good at it.

Will computers EVER be this good? Well since I believe we are currently living inside a simulation, of a simulation of a simulation * 10 to the whatever, surely it must eventually be commonplace.

Prolly a few good books in there somewhere.