Tuesday, May 6, 2008

The Rocket That Ran Into Itself (Or So We Wish)

A time machine without motion is doomed to collide with itself once it begins its transit back in time. This is easy enough to understand: once the stationary time machine begins the time-travel process, it will occupy space and time already occupied by an earlier incarnation of the time machine itself. Of course, this seems to be a self-abortive process.

It also seems that this may offer a clue as to why time travel (into the past, that is) has not yet been accomplished (that we know of). A corollary to this idea may be that it prevents faster-than-light (FTL) travel as well. As a rocket approaches the speed of light, there are relativistic effects, from the vantage point of a stationary observer, that prevent it from ever reaching the speed of light. The rocket’s length along the direction of travel decreases and approaches zero. The rocket’s mass approaches infinity. Time aboard the rocket, according to the stationary observer, becomes eternity.

Could this threshold, the speed of light in a vacuum, be rooted in the same property of space-time that inhibits the stationary time machine from its journey into the past? Could it be that the would-be FTL rocket simply starts to run into itself?

Scientists define inertia as the property of matter that causes it to resist acceleration. It is represented in the textbooks as mass. This mass is one of the primary studies in physics; it has rules, structure, and function, and its behavior can be observed. Where is the inertia hidden in matter? Is it a property of space-time? Bernard Haisch, in his book The God Theory, discusses his work with the zero-point field, describing it as “a sea of quantum light,” the very energy that is everywhere in the vacuum of the cosmos. He and a collaborator have developed a theory that it is this zero-point field that causes mass to resist acceleration. While not being fully embraced by most of the physics community, it has become a subject of serious discussion among physicists.

With all this being said, there are some questions that arise:

  • What thresholds does the zero-point field introduce?
  • Does the zero-point field behave differently for bodies approaching the speed of light?
  • Could the zero-point field prevent time travel?
  • Does the zero-point field act as some sort of guardian to prevent bodies from transitioning from one reference frame to another?

A more basic question is: is inertia simply the universe’s way of keeping us from running into ourselves?

Sunday, May 4, 2008

What About Time?

When I was a child in a rural part of southern New Jersey, I dreamed of two rustic fishermen walking through the nearby woods. They would come upon a great toaster, pop the lever, and out of the toaster would rise the Sun into the sky.

It is an odd dream, but the Sun has historically been the center of our gauge of something called time. So what is time? Is it a marker for stages of our lives? Is it an identification for levels of world history? Or is it more? We think of time sort of as a river, moving in a straight line, flowing from past to future. We ride in a small boat called the present. Some people believe the future is as unpredictable as the number of fish under the boat. Others believe that the future is fixed, just like the course of the river. We may find, in time, that time is not so easily defined or categorized as either fixed or uncertain. Time may turn out to be something different than we thought all along

In physical terms, time is an interval between cause and effect. Recent scientific developments show that there is more to time than this. Einstein’s theory of relativity shows that the properties of an event are inextricably linked to the size of the time interval in which the event occurs. Take, for example, a rocket flying through space. At velocities well below the speed of light, we need not calculate its flight time with any other than classical equations. However, as its velocity approaches appreciable fractions of the speed of light, we must use Lorentz transformations (equations of motion that are used for near-light speed bodies) to find the rocket’s relative velocity and relative time interval: at those high velocities, the passage of time decreases, that is, time slows for the rocket. We should also consider the presence of dense matter in space. It causes folds in the fabric of space-time; this causes gravity to exist. Where there is gravity, time dilates; that is, it runs slower within the gravity well than it does outside.

A science called quantum mechanics dictates the behavior of matter on the microscopic level. Quantum mechanics hints that time is not so linear as we perceive. Heisenberg proposed that on a small enough level, there is an uncertainty in the position and motion of anything physical. This phenomenon is known as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Take, for example, an electron (the moving, negatively charged particles usually bound within atoms). An electron emitted from a cathode tube can be controlled by electromagnetic forces to follow any particular trajectory. Yet there is a fundamental uncertainty as to when and where it will finish its journey, possibly being absorbed by an ion as a valence electron.

This uncertainty has been has been illustrated by the paradox of Schrodinger’s Cat. Suppose we have a sealed metal box, its interior completely opaque to observation. A mechanical apparatus is within, containing a vial of poisonous gas. A photon (the particulate unit of light, whose properties are similar to those of an electron) emitter is positioned across from a sensor, which, when tripped, will signal the actuator to open the vial. We place a cat inside the box, seal it, and press a button that will trigger the photon emitter.

What happens inside? Well, because of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, we don’t know if the photon will actually enter the sensor. Therefore, we won’t know if the cat will be dead or alive once we open the box. If the cat turns up dead, we won’t know exactly when he expired. It turns out that we can only really know the starting point and ending point of the motion of the photon; we can’t be certain of its path. So, while the box is sealed, the cat is in a temporal “limbo” from our perspective. It is neither dead nor alive. In the interval of time between the sealing of the box and its subsequent re-opening, time is discontinuous for the cat (in the perspective of us, the observers). We shall return to Schrodinger’s cat momentarily.

If the motion of matter behaves this way on the quantum level, what about matter on the macroscopic level? For any object in motion, its Heisenberg uncertainty is

(change in energy) X (change in time) = ½ Planck’s constant,

or

(change in position) X (change in momentum) = ½ Planck’s constant,

where Planck’s constant (a fundamental quantity related to particulate bodies) is equal to 1.06 X 10^-34 Joule-seconds. Do not be intimidated by these equations; I illustrate them only to show that only either energy or time or either position or momentum can be known to a good degree of precision. Now, these uncertainties are far from negligible on the quantum level, but for a baseball they are of little consequence in conventional terms. Nevertheless, this uncertainty exists during every single time interval that the ball is in motion. From the time the ball is thrown, there is a standard deviation (albeit small) in the position of the ball at every time interval. This deviation is cumulative, that is, this uncertainty adds up from the time the ball is thrown to the time it is caught. On a long enough trajectory, the uncertainty in the motion of the ball becomes something of consequence: There is an entire range of times, velocities, and positions the ball could have stopped at.

One might ask, why does this matter? We know that we will actually only see the ball take one amount of time to get to its destination, traveling at a single speed, landing in a single position. This question ignores one thing: there is no time interval within the standard deviation for the position and velocity of the ball. Time intervals have their own deviation. Thus, the ball can be seen as being in more than one place at once. Since we can only view a single four-dimensional trajectory of the ball, one must assume there are additional causal paths for the ball that we cannot see. I will refer to these causal paths as potential time, or alternate time. By inference, we can also say that possibly an infinite number of these timelines exist concurrently and in parallel.

If a baseball has multiple timelines, what about planets? Or rocks? Or humans? Even if we ignore the uncertainty effect on living things, we cannot ignore the fact that the baseball is observed and has a causal effect on our lives. If the author watches the ball land here, another version of the author must see the ball land there. Therefore, people also have multiple timelines.

Let us return to Schrodinger’s cat. Within the box, he waits for the photon emitter to fire. Here he will face either his liberation or his doom, depending on the trajectory of the photon. Since the photon has multiple trajectories at once, the cat simultaneously suffers death and enjoys continued existence. Within the box, the cat is causally isolated from the rest of the world. He cannot have an impact on the observers until they are able to see the outcome and know his fate. Hence the limbo of the cat’s existence; the uncertainty in the trajectory of the photon prevents any guesswork on the life or death of the cat until the box is opened.

Remember that the deviations (in velocity, position, and time) add up. Two variations of your birth may be identical, but the timelines will diverge due to different nuances in each one. I ask you to think carefully about this for a moment. Basically, all choices, all circumstances that can happen, do happen.

What does this mean for free will? Consider, for a moment, the solar system. Certainly there will be random occurrences in the system: for example, free objects can pass through, or the Sun may have random (small) fluctuations in its luminosity. However, we know the Sun will still shine, and the orbits will remain fixed (although there are minute changes over time.) Likewise, there are things in our lives that will remain certain. As long as we are alive, we will breathe air. When we trip, we will fall. We know we will all eventually die. We follow a path of certainty until a choice comes, either on our part or on the part of something acting upon us. The path of certainty is of arbitrary duration.

Here, I propose a model that reconciles free will and fate. In the course of time, a “subject” (person, baseball, etc.) follows its own courses of action and experiences the resulting consequences. From the point of origin, the subject is on a fixed path (straight road) until it comes to a crossroads: a decision, or the decision or random act by another subject. In the frame of the subject and all mortal observers, the subject can only go straight or pick one of the turns. The straight road is fate, and the crossroads is free will. Of course, only living things have free will, so in the case of the baseball, the free will must occur on the part of someone who throws it.

You may ask, how can this model include fate if I say fate constantly changes? There is another element to the universe to consider; it is called entropy. Entropy has been referred to by physicists as the arrow of time. Entropy is the degree of disorder in any system. In the case of the universe, entropy always increases, no matter what. Relating entropy to fate, we can say that no matter what small paths the universe takes, the overall path always leads to increased entropy. Due to conservation laws, we may also say that no matter what path the universe takes, the final entropy of the universe is certain.

I will give a simple illustration of why entropy tends toward increase. Imagine a jar one-quarter full of blue marbles. Now add an equal volume of red marbles. Shake vigorously. The more you shake, the more mixed the red and blue marbles become. The “mixedness” of the system is a degree of disorder; it is called entropy. Shaking the jar even more will never return the system to its original state, with the red and blue marbles being separate. The marbles will always become more mixed until the system reaches maximum homogeneity.

Entropy is studied in a science called thermodynamics. We study thermodynamics to understand the energy properties (temperature, pressure, volume, etc.) of physical systems. Thermodynamics also describes a phenomenon called equilibrium. Equilibrium is a balance of all things in the environment, bringing it to either stasis or steady state. In time, things become balanced; in a sense, nirvana is achieved. This is the ultimate fate of the universe and all things in it. It is not just science that tells us this. Anyone who keeps any sort of faith does so with the knowledge that a certain balance of all things is to come.

It may seem that I have diverged from the topic at hand, but these things I have discussed are inextricable pieces of that enigma we call time. Time passes, and this passage is affected by the properties of the motion in which time is a gauge. Time began with the Big Bang, and it may have an ending. We do know where time will lead. It will lead to maximized entropy and nearly total equilibrium. These are notions of fate. The uncertainty in time allows for all choices and happenings to exist in parallel.

I personally believe that time, fate, and God are all one. There are mysterious workings to the universe, and somehow the chaos that runs rampant leads to order than reigns. We see this in our everyday lives, in history, and in faith. The way things work out tells me that there is an omnipresent and omniscient guide to reality. Our only window to this guide is our collective memory and a clock. The clock ticks away, and time, for me, is still the ultimate concept to aspire to. As for time for the cat: let us hope that his time is dictated by his own whim, rather than by the elusive photon.