Geneva, Switzerland – In a 'long shot' theory, physicists propose that the world's largest atom smasher could be used as a time machine to send a special kind of matter backward in time.

The scientists outline a way to use the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), a 17-mile long (27-km) particle accelerator buried underground near Geneva, to send a hypothetical particle called the Higgs singlet to the past.

There are a lot of "ifs" to the conjecture, including the major question of whether or not the Higgs singlet even exists and could be created in the machine.

"Our theory is a long shot, but it doesn't violate any laws of physics or experimental constraints," physicist Tom Weiler of Vanderbilt University said in a statement.

However, if the theory proves correct, the researchers say the method could be used to send messages to the past or the future.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scit...chine/#ixzz1GyorWGra

That's how they reported it on Fox News.

The original journal article is titled "Causality-Violating Higgs Singlets at the LHC" and it begins as follows:

We construct a simple class of compactified five-dimensional metrics which admits closed timelike curves (CTCs), and derive the resulting CTCs as analytic solutions to the geodesic equations of motion. The associated Einstein tensor satisfies the null, weak, strong and dominant energy conditions; in particular, no negative-energy "tachyonic" matter is required. In extra-dimensional models where gauge charges are bound to our brane, it is the KK modes of gauge-singlets that may travel through the CTCs. From our brane point of view, many of these KK modes would appear to travel backward in time. We give a simple model in which such time-traveling Higgs singlets can be produced by the LHC, either from decay of the Standard Model Higgses or through mixing with the SM Higgses. The signature of these time-traveling singlets is a secondary decay vertex pre-appearing before the primary vertex which produced them. The two vertices are correlated by momentum conservation.

Or to put it in the more commonly understood language of Fox News:

The test of the researchers' theory will be whether the LHC shows evidence of Higgs singlet particles and their decay products spontaneously appearing. If it does, Weiler and Ho believe that they will have been produced by particles that travel back in time to appear before the collisions that produced them.

The theory is based on M-theory, a "theory of everything" that attempts to unite the forces of nature and describe everything in the universe. It's based on string theory, which posits that all particles are fundamentally made up of tiny vibrating strings.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-18-2011).]

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: However, if the theory proves correct, the researchers say the method could be used to send messages to the past or the future.

B-E--S-U-R-E--T-O-D-R-I-N-K--Y-O-U-R--O-V-A-L-T-I-N-E

lol - nice way to go

make a box
when something appears in box - it must be from the future
TA-DA!

Even if they CAN do this, and people are able to alter the events of the future, does it matter, on a cosmic scale? Saving a person, winning the lottery, heck even "saving the planet", is like changing one skin cell, one piece of sand on the beach...almost insignificant

I'm a little dubious about the "sending messages backwards or forwards in time" concept.

But it would be fascinating if a Higgs Singlet were detected, and the only explanation that they have is that it was produced by a collision between subatomic particles that had not happened yet.

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Even if they CAN do this, and people are able to alter the events of the future, does it matter, on a cosmic scale? Saving a person, winning the lottery, heck even "saving the planet", is like changing one skin cell, one piece of sand on the beach...almost insignificant

Regardless of how small or insignificant it may be, how would you deal with the massive paradoxes that resulted from this?

I send messages forward in time all the time.

quote Originally posted by Jake_Dragon: I send messages forward in time all the time.

Ah, but time is relative What you see as forward, the recipient sees as past

If i wanted to get a message in the future I would just mail a letter to myself...or buy a delorean.

A few years back Scientific American ran a story on particles coming from black holes. Seems a mathmatics guy came up with a proof showing the particles were not coming from the black hole, that would be impossible, the math showed the particles going into the black hole in reverse time. We just perceived them as coming out in our time frame. The math was good though.

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Even if they CAN do this, and people are able to alter the events of the future, does it matter, on a cosmic scale? Saving a person, winning the lottery, heck even "saving the planet", is like changing one skin cell, one piece of sand on the beach...almost insignificant

think of the butterfly effect. the difference on the entire universe between me going to work tomorrow, or not going to work tomorrow, might not be apparent but eventually it will cause IMMENSE changes. maybe so far in the future it is incomprehensible, but still it will have major impact. everythig matters and everything makes an impact, on everything.

I got a spam email the other day that wa dated 1999.. so that means someone in Nigeria (where it origionated) is living in 1999 while I am in 2011 and he sent an email 12 years into the future asking for my help. So if the nigerians can do it, we can too!!

lol

Actually just watched a 4 season show on "time travelling/wormholes to other times" called Primeval. Lots of CGI and cant be taken seriously, but still a good series and worth watching. (UK show)

Why does ANYTHING matter, if in the end, we end up rebooting the entire universe (everything gets sucked back and then we have another *bang*, or end up with one mind-numbingly vast cold 'dead' universe (after all the suns burn out) or everything gets sucked back together into a singularity, or (whatever ending there is)

Yeah, we all existed. and we 'changed' stuff. Made choices and said words and had kids and ate pizza. But did we impact anything, really, in the long run, if everything gets destroyed (or ends up 'dead' in the coldness of an energy-depleted universe)?

Don't get me wrong, I totally 'dig' all this time travel jazz and everything, but what's the point? What's the purpose of it all? Maybe we are destined to find a way to make a change significant enough to survive past the ebb and flow into the next cosmic cycle, (big universal reboot) where some species will evolve to the point that they will be able to comprehend what we have done, and will allow them to use it to "jump over the wave", and survive into the next cycle. Or maybe we'll be able to make the jump ourselves, if we make it in time.

I guess the point is, to keep on living. Keep pushing ourselves. Learn lessons and truths from other living creatures, and make the most of the brainpower we have to keep asking "WHY?" Maybe one day, we'll "figure it all out". But till then, keep keep picking up starfish and try to improve the world (With ACTIONS, not Dollars).
Tomorrow, I'll tell myself this today, that I argued with myself over the futility of it all. But all things have a purpose, even if it's just to help hold things together till the big "whatever" occurs. "Don't mourn the passing of a leaf, for it brought nourishment to the tree by capturing sunlight and Co2, and now, will be a part of a nest for a squirrel, who unknowingly planted a few of the acorns if DIDN'T eat, which will in turn, grow into new trees. That leaf will eventually fall to the ground and become nourishment for the tree, and help the tree grow more leaves, and acorns..." - told by Fred the ant, on the way back to the anthill, carrying a leg of a grasshopper.

DINNERTIME!

[This message has been edited by FieroRumor (edited 03-19-2011).]

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Even if they CAN do this, and people are able to alter the events of the future, does it matter, on a cosmic scale? Saving a person, winning the lottery, heck even "saving the planet", is like changing one skin cell, one piece of sand on the beach...almost insignificant

See Chaos Theory: Sensitive Dependence on Initial Conditions. Simple, seemingly insignificant acts can become amplified over time into much greater effects.

Think of a pebble tossed into a pond. It will create small ripples that propagate outward from the point of impact, and most of these ripples will soon just disappear (into heat). But occasionally one of these ripples will interact with another ripple, resulting momentarily in a bigger wavelet. Then imagine the same thing on a larger scale. Wavelets on a lake or ocean can interact to become waves, waves interact to become swells, swells impinging on land become surf, surf carves away at the continents, etc.

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: It's based on string theory, which posits that all particles are fundamentally made up of tiny vibrating strings.[/i]

Great. So what the heck are the strings made of?

quote Originally posted by Jake_Dragon: I send messages forward in time all the time.

If I want to go back in time, I take corporate jet, leave here at 4:00pm and arrive in Hawaii at 4:00pm

[This message has been edited by IMSA GT (edited 03-19-2011).]

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Even if they CAN do this, and people are able to alter the events of the future, does it matter, on a cosmic scale? Saving a person, winning the lottery, heck even "saving the planet", is like changing one skin cell, one piece of sand on the beach...almost insignificant

Even if they can, will we ever know?

If they send a message to the past, then when they are sending it, they already know it has been received because it was in the past.

But wait... if they don't tell anyone they are sending a message, but tell the recipient to appear at 1234 Physics Drive on that date at a specific time, then they would find out if it worked or not.

But if that person didn't believe it, it obviously wouldn't work because they wouldn't show up.

That wouldn't necessarily prove the process wrong though. What if someone got the message but couldn't make it that day?

Time is linear. We cannot alter the past. Whatever has happened, may have been influenced by the future, but we wouldn't know, because it has already happened. It is in our linear space.

If Sam dies in a car wreck, and his best friend sends a message to save his life, and it DOES happen, that timeline will stay the same. Sam will still be dead... the messenger would not have noticed a change. However, in the past, when the message was received, Sam lives. This creates another timeline. However, those timelines can never interact. So how do they know the message was true? How do they know that Sam really would have died...? Or was it just some prankster who told them he would? They'll never know, because they cannot converse with the now separate timeline that confirms that Sam is dead.

So how many decisions have you made today? Is there another timeline that branched from every one of those decisions, that chose the other choice? We can't know, because we can't converse with the other timeline.

In the end, does any of it matter? As Rumor said, we are all so small in the grand scheme of things. So maybe we discover time travel, and use it to further our existence until another species of intelligent life finds the secret as well and humans die out, passing on their legend.... who cares? Eventually, won't the entire universe run out of life? Eventually, maybe quintillions of years down the road, all life will cease to exist in the universe. There is a finite amount of matter/energy. Matter can be converted to energy, and energy to matter. If all of the extraterrestrial beings use so much matter to create energy, which is then converted back to unusable matter, then eventually usable energy will run out, and the beings across the entire universe will die. Eventually, that would happen, right?

And even if that wouldn't happen, considering we don't live more than around 100 Earth years, why do we care? We will not see that end to the universe. But, because we see it as evident, does it not make sense to just off ourselves and let the universe go? Why do we matter? What is our purpose, if we have one?

That is why many people cling to a Higher Being... these questions go unanswered, and it confuses us, and frustrates us. If we really have absolutely no reason to be here, then let's just all die! But that's depressing. But what exactly does it mean to be depressed? Emotions do not play a physical part in our existence, unless we act upon those emotions. But that doesn't mean anything except we chose to do an action. That can happen regardless of emotion involved. So why be depressed? It's meaningless.

I believe in God. I believe in God because of my own experiences. But are my experiences tainted by my extreme desire for there to be a god? Did my mind, a marvelous thing in itself, create experiences in order to satisfy my own desires? It's completely possible.

But then in the end, hypotheticals are meaningless, because all we know is what we know. We need to live in the here and now, and quit pondering the hypotheticals because they don't matter to us besides a philosophical standpoint. Save a starfish every day... because small things are tangible and meaningful to today, regardless of if it is meaningful tomorrow.

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Yeah, we all existed. and we 'changed' stuff. Made choices and said words and had kids and ate pizza. But did we impact anything, really, in the long run, if everything gets destroyed (or ends up 'dead' in the coldness of an energy-depleted universe)?

Makes all the mind-numbing stupid political arguments here seem like even more of a colossal waste of time.

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Even if they CAN do this, and people are able to alter the events of the future, does it matter, on a cosmic scale? Saving a person, winning the lottery, heck even "saving the planet", is like changing one skin cell, one piece of sand on the beach...almost insignificant

According to M-Theory time travel is possible, but not practical. For example, if you where able to fly a ship to a black hole, the closer you got too the black hole, time and space gets stretched so much by the black hole's gravity, that the closer you get, the slower in time you move compared to normal space time.

So say you and a friend flew your space ships to a black hole.. Your friend decides to move close enough to the black hole that he is on the edge of the "event horizon". Now for him, time would seem to be moving normally, he would notice no change.. But as you watched him approach the edge of the black hole, he would start moving slower and slower and slower until eventually he would appear to just stop in time. In reality he didnt stop.. From his perspective, he went right down into the black hole. But from your perspective he looks like he stopped in time. But in reality his space/time is moving so much slower compared to your space/time that it would take millions and millions of years of watching for you to actually see him fall into the black hole.

So if you wanted to travel too the future.. Just get into a close orbit too a black hole.. Live there for about a year, and over 100 years will have passed when you finally return home to earth.. So like i said, possible, just not practical.

Of course when people usually think of time travel, they think of the Hollywood version, like in "Back to the Future".. Where you can instantly travel back and fourth through time. Which M-theory predicts is possible with the use of wormholes.. But right now wormholes are only theory, because none have been proven to exist.

Also according to M-theory you cannot change the events of time.. At least not within the universe in which you exist. So if you where to send a message back in time, it would create an alternate universe with the new information. So if the lady died of cancer, and you sent information to help her after her death.. In your universe nothing would change, but in theory it would split off an alternate universe where the lady might have been saved..

This kinda stuff is a hobby of mine, but it can give you a headache trying to wrap your mind around it all.

[This message has been edited by Jonesy (edited 03-20-2011).]

quote Makes all the mind-numbing stupid political arguments here seem like even more of a colossal waste of time.

Not really.


(if they get back to Jan 18, someone ask them to watch where I laid my glasses please----that's the last day I remember having them.)

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 03-20-2011).]

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Not really.

Yes actually.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Yes actually. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

I think, because of the fact that we don't matter at all in the grand scheme of things, we should focus on now. If only in order to stay sane.. focus on now. Politics directly influence us now... so it's something that should be discussed.

This is an interesting book for those with wee ones interested in time travel :
http://www.amazon.com/Icaru...id=1300627199&sr=8-1

quote Originally posted by theBDub: Politics directly influence us now... so it's something that should be discussed.

Go ahead, give it your best shot! Lotsa fun as long as you toe the party line.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Go ahead, give it your best shot! Lotsa fun as long as you toe the party line.

More fun if you never sway from your own beliefs, regardless of party affiliation, and hold a clear view of both sides to every situation. With this, it's a blast to hold a conversation with a like-minded individual, even if you vehemently disagree with each other. Otherwise, talking to a slave of a party system is a chore... not fun at all.

quote Originally posted by theBDub: More fun if you never sway from your own beliefs, regardless of party affiliation...

Bingo, that mind-set is exactly why I stated what I did.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Makes all the mind-numbing stupid political arguments here seem like even more of a colossal waste of time.

They found it! The high energy particle that travels backwards in time!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_3v-_p3ESo

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Bingo, that mind-set is exactly why I stated what I did. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Patrick: Makes all the mind-numbing stupid political arguments here seem like even more of a colossal waste of time.

[/QUOTE]

I misspoke. I meant, rather than not sway our beliefs, to not sway them BECAUSE of what party says them. As in--if I were a Republican, and am for the War on Terror, to not be against Obama's attack on Libya.

Sorry for the confusion. I hope that clarifies what I meant.

Time has never been observed to move in any direction but forward, but there are some equations in physics (e.g. quantum electrodynamics) that only work if you treat them as if time could move either forward or backward. For example, you can treat an antiparticle (e.g. a positron) as a real particle moving backwards in time and the equations work out just fine.

From this link:

"On page 118-119 of his biography of Richard Feynman "Genius" (Pantheon books, New York, 1992), James Gleick recounts a meeting between Feynman, J. A. Wheeler, and Albert Einstein [in 1941] in which the three of them agree that the fundamental equations describing the absorption and emission of light waves by atoms are symmetric with respect to the sign of the time parameter - that is, there is no directionality of "time's arrow" at the microscopic level of phenomena; it is only at the macroscopic level that the irreversible character of time begins to assert itself, and then for no other reason than probability.
...
Apparently Feynman himself eventually became disenchanted with the notion of antiparticles moving backward in time, disavowing his work with Wheeler and "retarded waves", claiming (during his Nobel acceptance speech) that such ideas were not essential to his final formulation of quantum electrodynamics (see page 381 of Gleick's book)."

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 03-21-2011).]