Traveling back in time
Science Today
The Theoretical Interpretation of Spacetime/motion


Misconceptions in the Theory of Relativity:

"Traveling Back in Time"

By

Charles William Johnson

2014 Copyrighted

In my view, there are various deficiencies in the reasoning employed by theorists of relativity. One particular idea concerns the possibility of "going back in time" or, "traveling back in time".

Certain misconceptions serve as the basis for their idea about time travel. Relativists consider that the speed of light in a vacuum is the upper limit of velocity of all matter-energy (with counted exceptions about phase velocities, tachyons, muons and such). They generally state that it is impossible for a material object to attain the speed of light in a vacuum due to the energy required to reach such a speed.

If, as they affirm, it is impossible for a material [mass] event to attain the speed of light in a vacuum, it makes no sense that they speculate about "length contraction" or "time dilation". The absence of logic within their own reasoning appears to escape them. They supposedly measure "time dilation" as observed in different clocks flown around the world (obviously not at the speed of light). They have also supposedly proven the so-called "length contraction" of spacetime events.

They propose theses about luminal velocities, but offer sub-luminal examples as proof, and then even offer speculative superluminal examples as proof of the luminal propositions of their theory. I find such the relativist science discourse to be disorganized and full of misconceptions. As I have demonstrated in other essays, the write about speculatively "observing" luminal velocities of spacetime events (299792458 m/s), when the human being cannot even observe the 770 ft/sec velocity of a .45 caliber bullet.

They also toy with the idea of what would happen if some material event were capable of attaining a speed over and above the identified/measured speed of light in a vacuum (299792458 meters/second). Here is a popular example of this kind of reasoning (or lack thereof):

"For these reasons it is often said that nothing can travel faster than light. Strictly speaking this is not true. Only material objects cannot be accelerated through the 'light barrier'. There is no known reason why there cannot exist superluminal bodies, provided they are always superluminal, i.e., cannot be slowed to less than light speed. Indeed, such bodies (in the form of microscopic particles) have been actively searched for by experimental physicists in the last decade or so. They have even been given a name ---tachyons. So far no tachyons have been found. If they ever are found, it is expected that they would only interact with ordinary matter in an uncontrollable way, otherwise it would be possible to use them to send messages. This would then be the cause of an apparently unresolvable paradox, because it may be shown from the theory of relativity that tachyons can travel backwards in time [emphasis mine], so that their use as a signalling device would facilitate communication with the past. One could then construct a booby-trapped device which would destroy itself by a coded signal sent into its past, thereby removing the possibility of sending the signal in the first place ---an obvious contradiction!" [Cited in: Davies, P.C.W., Space and Time in the Modern Universe, Cambridge University Press, London, 1977, p: 47.]

This represents an excellent summarized statement of the misconceptions in contemporary theoretical postulates of relativity. A book-length comment is required to undo this statement (read my book). Some brief comments are in order here.

a.- The cited author does not recognize the faster-than-light speeds of phase velocities of the electromagnetic particle-waves.

b.- The cited author's view is limited to a theoretical posit about non-existing so-called tachyons.

c.- The concept of faster-than-light velocities is only conceived as of the possibility of sending a signal for communication. (This affirmation denies the fact that the light signal already constitutes what carries the signal for communication.)

d.- There is no purported paradox. The paradox lies within the deficient reasoning and logic of the postulates.

e.- The author toys with the popular concept of "traveling back in time", effectively separating time from space.

Finally, I can only wonder what is meant by "ordinary matter". I would suspect it refers to all matter-energy that has a velocity of below light speed in a vacuum.

Now let me make some brief comments.

First, one must understand that all light received at the retina of the eye is showing us past events. The time-lag in the arrival of light is ever so infinitesimal but it exists. Actually, materially we are always seeing past events. No sooner has the Future arrived, it becomes Present and we view it as Past. In a material sense, we never see Now-events, only Past ones, as light arriving from events gone by. Physically, it is impossible to view Present events. By the time light particle-waves reach our retina, we are viewing events that have already occurred.

This is more comprehensible when considering the light coming from the Sun that takes eight minutes or so to reach our retinas. With light coming from distant galaxies, millions of light-years distance from us, the time-lag is that much greater and more easily comprehensible. Nonetheless, the time-lag of existence occurs with every object that we observe around us, only the closer to the objects that we view, the time lag appears to be almost non-existent ---yet it does exist.

Traveling Back in Time Space

Flaws in Reasoning Physics

" This would then be the cause of an apparently unresolvable paradox, because it may be shown from the theory of relativity that tachyons can travel backwards in time [emphasis mine], so that their use as a signalling device would facilitate communication with the past. One could then construct a booby-trapped device which would destroy itself by a coded signal into its past, thereby removing the possibility of sending the signal in the first place ---an obvious contradiction!" [Davies, P.C.W., Space and Time in the Modern Universe, Cambridge University Press, London, 1977, p:47.]

You cannot go back in time, because you cannot go back in spacetime.

Physicists who tinker with the idea or the possibility of "traveling back in time" violate one of their own relativist posits about the unity of spacetime. By their own conceptual measuring rod, they are considering a partial view by invoking time without space, to travel back in time, you must consider traveling back in space. By considering only travel back in time, they are considering space as though it were outside of time.

Merely because Albert Einstein posited the idea that the speed of light in a vacuum is the limit that matter-energy can travel, many physicists have held on to this idea for over one hundred years. As in the cited case, physicists toy with the idea about going back in time when they reason the possibility of traveling faster than the speed of light.

First of all, the idea that the speed of light in a vacuum is the limit to matter-energy travel is erroneous in my understanding. The speed of light in a vacuum is measured along a non-existing midline axis from points A to B on a straight-line path. Electromagnetic particle-waves, light included, travel along spiraling particle-wavepaths, not along idealized straight lines in spacetime.

In order for the electromagnetic particle-wavepaths traveled to cover the idealized measured straight-line wavepath of 299,792,458 meters per second [luminal velocity], the electromagnetic particle-waves must travel at speeds over and above that measured amount. They necessarily travel at superluminal velocities.

The relativist thesis of luminal velocity launched by Einstein in 1905 is promoted still today in 2014. Almost 110 years later, physicists disregard the spiraling curvilinear particle-wavepaths of the electro-magnetic fields of the entire electromagnetic particle-waves spectrum, not just the part referencing visible light. This is confirmed in their defined concept about the wavelength of an electromagnetic wave, which is measured along the straight midline axis, which is absent of any matter-energy event. What is theoretically and practically required is to measure the wavepath-length of the actual spiraling electromagnetic particle-wave.

In other words, all electrogmanetic particle-waves (from radio waves to gamma waves) travel at superluminal velocities along their corresponding particle-wavepath in order to achieve the measured definition distance and speed of light in a vacuum measured along the straight midline. [See my essay at www.earthmatrix.com.]

Physicists deny the possibility of matter-energy exceeding the velocity of light in a vacuum. They deny it because firstly Einstein said it and, secondly, because they are disposed to believing it. No scientist or anyone has been able to prove the correctness of the theoretical posit about the maximum velocity of matter-energy to date. All so-called proofs to date are suppositions based on a denial of the meaning of the electromagnetic particle-wavepaths, based on the abstracted straight midline wavelength ---an abstraction in the methodology of geometry.

Secondly, they erroneously reason that if any material object were to be able to travel at the speed of light in a vacuum then that object would become light. They deny the possibility that any material object, for the same reason, can actually become light or travel at its speed due to the amount of energy required to propel its mass in order to attain that speed. They also deny that any material object might travel over and above the speed of light in a vacuum since this would cause a paradox of time.

They erroneously play with the consequential idea in their mind that the superluminal travel of matter-energy would mean that a material object traveling at a superluminal velocity would be capable of "going back in time".

Again, matter-energy cannot go back in time, because it cannot go back in spacetime.

By toying with the idea of traveling back in time, physicists disregard their own supposed theoretical conception about the unity of spacetime. Supposedly the grand achievement of Albert Einstein was to have united the conceptual category of spacetime, denying the separate treatment of space and time.

Nonetheless, it becomes obvious that they break up the unified theoretical concept of spacetime when they affirm the idea of "going back in time". They do not talk about "going back in spacetime". With such a statement they have effectively reverted back to the separate concepts of space and time in their supposed reasoning about time travel.

Every statement ever made by any physicist regarding "going back in time" since 1905 then is a misconception, a misstatement; one that represents speculation outside of their own theoretical concept for reasoning about spacetime.

It is materially and physically impossible to reason about "going back in time" without forwarding considerations about "going back in spacetime". This is not a point of technicality, it represents a reasoned fact about how matter-energy exists as spacetime/motion.

If one wants to consider and discuss or reason about the possibility of "traveling back in spacetime/motion", it would be necessary to question the direction of spacetime/motion in terms of whether it is possible to reverse the direction of matter-energy events in spacetime/motion. Every practical spacetime/motion event of matter-energy around us illustrates the answer to this speculative academic question.

Physicists thus reveal an essential flaw in their considering the isolated possibility of traveling back in time, and not in spacetime. It is meaningless to entertain the thought of traveling back in time as postulated and questioned by physicists for the past hundred years. For they isolate and separate time from spacetime in their speculations. It is impossible to reason time without reasoning space. By separating time from spacetime, reasoning matter-energy events in spacetime has been absent in their discourse.

It is not possible to travel back in time because it is not possible to reverse spacetime/motion. The current "look back in time" thesis employed in astronomy becomes glaringly deficient when considered from the perspective of the possibility to "look back in spacetime".

© 2014 Copyrighted by Charles William Johnson. All rights reserved. Reproduction prohibited.

*****

Misconceptions in the Theory of Relativity: "Traveling Back in Time"

By Charles William Johnson

©2014 Copyrighted

 

Earth/matriX: Science Today

www.earthmatrix.com                                                       charlesjohnson@earthmatrix.com

Earth/matriX Editions

P.O. Box 231126, New Orleans, LA 70183-1126 USA

Earth/matriX: Science in Ancient Artwork Series ISSN-1526-3312
©1995 - 2016 Copyrighted by Charles William Johnson and Jorge Luna Martinez. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any from is prohibited. All of the content text, images, drawings, designs and material ideas on this web-site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, copied, or redistributed by any means or in any form. Contact the owners, Charles William Johnson and Jorge Luna Martinez
.
charlesjohnson@earthmatrix.com and kawil@earthmatrix.com for information on licensing and/or any other aspect pertaining to this web-site and the material contained herein

 

THE PHYSICS CHALLENGE
 
EINSTEIN'S FORMULA: MASS CONFUSION
 
CODATA, PLANCK CONSTANTS, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
Our Price $17.95
Paperback In Stock
 
Our Price $19.95
Paperback In Stock
 
Our Price $18.95
Paperback In Stock
The physics paradigm today is based mainly upon the concept of c-square, the squaring of the speed of light in a vacuum. Numerous fundamental physical and chemical constants provided in the physics literature [CODATA] reflect numerical values based upon powers of c, the speed of light in vacuo. The speed of light in a vacuum is determined to represent the upper limit of movement of mass|energy by physicists.
 
The upper speed limit for a light photon is 299792458 meters/second. The square of that number produces a numerical value that does not exist in any form of matter-energy. The c-square actually represents a number that corresponds to a near massless event: a light photon. The author goes beyond a critique of Albert Einstein’s famous formula based upon this unreal number. The rejection of Einstein’s formula is explored through basic math, the summation of powers in the equation’s terms.
 
A common procedure followed in deriving many of the CODATA recommendations is to divide certain fundamental physical constants by the value of the elementary charge, e, 1.602176487. With regard to the Planck constants and units of measurement, the case is argued that Max Planck may have simply reversed engineered this procedure in order to derive his natural units.

    The Formula in Einstein's Equation
  1. Einstein's Formula: Mass Confusion E = mc2  is simply c9 =  c7c2
  2. Fundamental Physical Constants Notes: Fractal Multiples and Einstein's Equation
  3. Einstein's Formula: A Special Case: The E = mc2 equation is really E3 = m1c2.
  4. Einstein's Formula Stands for Powers of Speed of Light, Not the Conversion of Mass|Energy: (c9 = c7 c2 the Basis of E = mc2)
  5. Einstein's Formula and Varatioins of Redundancies
  6. The Formula in Einstein's Equation
  7. Einstein’s Formula: A Sleight of Hand
  8. Planck Mass and Planck Energy Questioned
  9. Planck Units of Mass, Momentum and Energy: c7 , c8 , c9 Respectively, Powers of the Speed of a Light Photon
  10. The Earth/matriX: Table of Selected Fundamental Physical Constants Derive ~ c9 Fractal Numerical Value ~ 1.956078711
  11. The Speed of Light in a Vacuum is Not the Maximum Speed of Matter-Energy
  12. Electromagnetic Particle-Waves [EMPW]: Superluminal White Light and Its Colors
  13. Superluminal Velocities: Electromagnetic Particle-Waves Always Travel Faster than the Defined Speed of Light in a Vacuum
  14. A Spacetime/Motion: Analysis of Relativity Theory and The Speed of Light in a Vacuum
  15. Misconceptions in the Theory of Relativity: "Traveling Back in Time"
  16. A Content Analysis of Selected Word-Concepts in Albert Einstein's 1905 Article "Concerning an Heuristic Point of View Toward the Emission and Transformation of Light"