Why time travel is impossible

Blog 20160106 Why time travel is impossible

Kudos to Fred Frees for this heads up on the latest embarrassment for regressive physics and those who actually fund this stuff:

I think that the only thing correct about this headline is the question mark. The article has more BSPL (BS per line) than anything I have read outside of The Onion, which at least does not pretend to contain anything factual.

Note that these guys did not send “particles of light” anywhere at all, much less through “wormholes” to meet their former particle selves. The whole thing is merely theoretical nonsense based on indeterministic assumptions. It is a total mathematical fiction, like most of quantum mechanics. Readers know that light is not a particle. It is a wave in a medium filled with particles, which is a big difference. Many of the weird effects proclaimed here and in QM in general are simply what you must have if you are in aether denial. Put aether in the interpretation and the actual experimental data are what we would expect.

Be aware that whenever “time travel” is mentioned, you are either enjoying a sci-fi movie or experiencing the travails of regressive physics.

Readers know that time is motion and that universal time is the motion of each microcosm with respect to all other microcosms. That is why we can only measure specific time, the motion of one single thing with respect to another single thing. Thus, by convention, we select the rotation of Earth with respect to the Sun. Claims to disprove the Seventh Assumption of Science, irreversibility (All processes are irreversible) invariably overemphasize the microcosm and ignore the macrocosm. The analysis in the article is typical of systems philosophy, which tends to be myopic, focusing on a microcosm without considering its macrocosm. The disproof of time travel and its required reversibility is simple: the night sky is unique for each date. To “travel back in time,” one would have to move all the galaxies and all their stars into the positions they would have had on the date you select for your fantasy. Good luck with that!

There are numerous transgressions of "The Ten Assumptions of Science" in the article. Anyone care to list them all?

No comments: