JoshuaZ comments on Particles break light-speed limit? - Less Wrong

9 Post author: Kevin 23 September 2011 11:00AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (170)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 28 September 2011 02:41:31AM 1 point [-]

In the context of almost every proposed causality violation mechanism I've seen seriously discussed, it really is can't, not won't. Wormholes aren't the only example. Tipler Cylinders for example don't allow time travel prior to the point when they started rotating. Godel's rotating universe has similar restrictions. Is there some time travel proposal I'm missing?

I agree that when considering anthropic issues won't becomes potentially relevant if we had any idea that time travel could potentially allow travel prior to the existence of the device in question. In that case, I'd actually argue in the other direction: if such machines could exist, I'd expect to see massive signs of such interference in the past.

Comment author: wedrifid 28 September 2011 02:56:02AM *  1 point [-]

In the context of almost every proposed causality violation mechanism I've seen seriously discussed, it really is can't, not won't.

There are plenty of mechanisms in which can't applies. There are others which don't have that limitation. I don't even want to touch what qualifies as 'seriously discussed'. I'm really not up to date with which kinds of time travel are high status.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 28 September 2011 03:00:19AM 2 points [-]

Ignore status issues. Instead focus on time travel mechanisms that don't violate SR. Are there any such mechanisms which allow such violation before the time travel device has been constructed? I'm not aware of any.

Comment author: MugaSofer 25 September 2012 09:47:09AM 2 points [-]

Alcubierre drives.