Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dholowiski 5384 days ago
I'm not smart enough to explain it properly, but basically if information can be transmitted faster than the speed of light, it makes time travel possible. Read "Black Holes and Time Warps" By Kip S. Thorne for a 624 page explanation of why.

More likely, it's experimental error.

.0025% is meaningless compared to the scale of the earth, but over hundreds of light years it's huge.

1 comments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel#Via_faster-than-lig...

If we can send information even a little to the past, we can then send it a little more to the past, and by induction we can send information anywhere in time.

So we have infinite power computers. Singularity starts here.

If you can send data a little into the past, compute something, then send the result back to the beginning, you can do an infinite amount of computation in a finite amount of time, just by reusing the same time over and over again. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Closed_timeli...

edit: OK, this blows my mind (from https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Tachyon#Speed):

It has been argued that we can avoid the notion of tachyons traveling into the past using the Feinberg reinterpretation principle which states that a negative-energy tachyon sent back in time in an attempt to challenge forward temporal causality can always be reinterpreted as a positive-energy tachyon traveling forward in time. This is because observers cannot distinguish between the emission and absorption of tachyons. For a tachyon, there is no distinction between the processes of emission and absorption, because there always exists a sub-light speed reference frame shift that alters the temporal direction of the tachyon's world-line, which is not true for bradyons or luxons. The attempt to detect a tachyon from the future (and challenge forward causality) can actually create the same tachyon and sends it forward in time (which is itself a causal event).

Your mind isn't properly blown until you read the next paragraph which ends with the thought: "Although remote, the possibility of backward causality is not a real challenge to the principle of causality, but rather a novel way of understanding an additional aspect of it."