From: Damien Broderick (damien@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Fri Oct 23 1998 - 11:59:27 MDT
At 03:36 AM 10/23/98 -0400, wolfkin@phonetech.com wrote:
>Actually, AFAICS, *all* of the possibilities have this
>feature. In general, time machines which make use of
>relativity require large twists in spacetime (like
>Tipler's cylinder), and so you can't travel to a time
>when the artifact didn't yet exist.
>
>I am not aware of anyone proposing time machines that
>*don't* use this sort of method...
Just so. This is a good reason why we shouldn't expect to see time
travellers swarming the streets. On the other hand, it's plausible that
any number of *natural* time loops exist (cosmic strings, etc) and are the
strict and ferociously protected property of whoever reaches them first.
These might allow (non-paradoxical) passage almost back to the Big Bang.
It means that early time travellers are first of all space travellers.
Since interstellar travel takes a gruesome amount of energy unless you're a
nano-upload, one reason we don't see the time travellers is that we're
inhaling the sneaky little buggers. The other reason is that they are
three feet tall and have big black wrap-around eyes.
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:41 MST