I like to imagine that as soon as we discover FTL and break spacetime, the simulation crashes and the higher beings are annoyed they have another bug to fix

@MarcyTheKindaCoolWizard

Жыл бұрын

"God damn it i didnt think they would actually get to it! Now i gotta program a whole new enviorment and items"

@lucasmoers

Жыл бұрын

“There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.” ― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

@insidejob8309

Жыл бұрын

Na no crashes (But i like the thought) I'm thinking just level 2 of the sim. It does not crash until 999,980 like the old arcade defender game.

@MetalFan10101

Жыл бұрын

@@lucasmoers Can confirm. Same thing happened with my father.

@noti7510

Жыл бұрын

human scientists are the higher beings who put a sim into effect at a higher speed than their own reality to see the future, then when paradoxes occur, they have to wind back to when it happens, and figure out what's meant to happen then, and to do that they have to study the sciences which the sim people developed, but they can't figure it out, so one frustrated technician just removes the people who did the faster than light stuff, and resumes the sim.

"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." -Carl Sagan

@duran9664

2 жыл бұрын

Our physical bodies live in physical dimension out of many. ⚡️⚡️⚡️In multi-dimensions existence, causality wouldn’t be violated. Abrahamic secret texts of Jews, Christians & Muslims have hinted that “instantaneous” travel is indeed possible if we live within multiple dimensions. Each dimension has its own speed limit. When u reach certain speed, u jump into a deferent dimension & u loose direct connection to ur initial one until u slow down to within its speed limit. 🤔

@letsbehonest4221

Жыл бұрын

Thats kind of a Captain Obvious thing for Carl to say..🤣🤣

@tylerdurden3722

Жыл бұрын

@@letsbehonest4221 You'll be surprised how many there are who don't understand something so obvious.

@user-uu9vl2qx9r

Жыл бұрын

Then for who is it

@letsbehonest4221

Жыл бұрын

@ΝΙΚΟΛΑΟΣ ΗΛΙΑΚΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ not who..what .. For its self ...

If FTL does exist, the universe might have some way of blocking any information/matter from interacting with the ship/crew travelling FTL. Similar to how the event horizon of a black hole stops any information from escaping it where time and space flip beyond it ( which would also break causality if information could escape ).

@sentientglitch

6 ай бұрын

Why would it break casuality?

@MechDragon108

6 ай бұрын

@@sentientglitch Because space and time flip past the event horizon of a black hole, the only way to escape the event horizon after previously entering it would be to use Backwards Time Travel which by nature would create time paradoxes just by its existence. This video explains why time and space flip inside a black hole if you want to know. kzread.info/dash/bejne/eYWOlbRxYczfdZM.html&ab_channel=ScienceClicEnglish

@GAURAV_RANA_

6 ай бұрын

But why are we perceiving things from the perspective of the STL ship when things happened at FTL ships pace. The STL didn't know about anything. When they finally visit vega everything would had already happened. So how is causality broken? And anyways the FTL ship will anyways break the space time laws so how can people even think of explaining it with our known knowledge?

@odinson4184

6 ай бұрын

@@sentientglitchwatch the video

@robinfrost5439

6 ай бұрын

@Mech...you mean the universe may find some way of blocking messages to the crew of the STL ship..am I right here ?

It's very rare and special when someone can explain such a complicated topic in an easy to understand and follow way. Thank you.

@jgunther3398

2 ай бұрын

favorite channel on 'tube. needs to have as many subscribers as real academically estimated by columbia star count

@user-kb6mj7zq8t

2 ай бұрын

In a way thats easy to understand and follow*

@user-kb6mj7zq8t

2 ай бұрын

​@@jgunther3398whatever

@prestonwaters1088

Ай бұрын

Except you can find a good explanation for just about anything on KZread.

@nathanwhitmore3980

Ай бұрын

Alcubierre drive Krasnikov tube Worm hole

Does anyone realize how crazy it is that we can even theorize something like this

@randomcubing7106

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks to Einstein

@Vort_tm

2 жыл бұрын

I mean, on a certain level it's completely intuitive. You can't shine a light at something and then arrive before the light hits it, or conversely the light we see from stars has been traveling X light years to reach us, so to travel faster than light we would travel to the source before it was sent. But I will agree that it's crazy that we have actual equations and models for it, thanks to the work of giants (upon whose shoulders we stand).

@masteur

2 жыл бұрын

If you think about it, maybe it is just a breach of the time line where earth after the ship send the reply to turn off the ftl transmitter, so you have a time line where the crew reply and a other where the don't receive any message because earth did not send it. So in the end 2 time line exist and no loop or paradox.

@AboveEmAllProduction

2 жыл бұрын

It's just the brain being brain lol, so smart it had to name himself

@eddycolon1986

2 жыл бұрын

We usually dream bigger as humans with the knowledge we have. Just think about Egyptians about death.

There once was a young lad named Mike. Who could run faster than the speed of light. He took off one day, In a relative way, And returned on the previous night!

@dudew.5272

Жыл бұрын

6.67 out of 10

@EbbandFro

Жыл бұрын

@@dudew.5272 How about "11/10" because a score greater than 10 is impossible.

@ophysic2861

Жыл бұрын

@@EbbandFro ackchtaly 🤓🤓☝️☝️☝️☝️

@vanillaicecream2385

Жыл бұрын

what we gotta do is rip open a hole into hell itself and travel through in these giant bubbled ships so we aren't eaten by demons

@BPJJohn

Жыл бұрын

@@EbbandFro Spinal Tap says otherwise

I'm no expert, but, it seems that the ultimate paradox of sending the messages back in time before the event happened only appears if you switch between the two frames of reference. Which you do (we are talking about material around 19 min of video). To explain, you mark the signal of supernova travelling from earth to the stl ship instantaneously as observed from the earth and then mark how the signal to switch the FTL transmitter travels from the stl ship to earth as observed by the stl ship. If you were to draw the signal lines corresponding to single observer only, they will almost overlap and be parallel. Given a slight time delay in the machine that receives and interprets the signal and sends the signal back (a computer constrained by the speed of light for example) the signal to switch off will be always slightly later. Causality violation will never occur from a point of view of a single observer and no-one would ever be able to experience it, including the machine that sends out the supernova signal and receives the switch off signal, unless they can be in two places at the same time and be able to switch between the two frames of reference freely.

@naveedrehman6083

Ай бұрын

This is exactly what I 100% believe. The line at 18:12 drawn down-left is impossible even if you send message at 1 million x speed of c. The lowest it can go is horizontal (right to left). Thanks for sharing!

@Amehdion

Ай бұрын

Yeah this confused me as the message back from the ship from earths perspective should be traveling upward and left instead of downward and left. In which case no paradox happens. Earth will always send the message before the ship sends the reply.

@jordancook8511

Ай бұрын

It's because this is all wrong and your velocity has nothing to do with altering space time. Relativity proves this but everyone likes to misinterpret Einsteins findings. The epxlanation with the clock moving slower the faster you go to lightspeed was not an example of altering time. It was just an example of how the light behind you would react if you approached light speed.

@SpaceCitizenFaye

Ай бұрын

THHHIIIIIIISSSS

@xkinsey3831

Ай бұрын

​@@naveedrehman6083the horizontal line is earth's reference frame, not the universal one (there isn't a universal one). That line is possible given the space line and the null line of the STL ship.

What if the solution is a combination of two rules? 1. Anything that is going FTL cannot physically interact with anything going STL. 2. When exiting FTL, your world line is also precisely what it was before you engaged FTL. For example, an FTL ship cannot instantly travel to an STL ship, and exit out of FTL with zero relative velocity to the STL ship. This would make the STL ship intercepting an FTL message impossible. The only way to send messages FTL is by way of literally sending a physical ship that exits out of FTL at the destination. A message that simply travels through space and can be arbitrarily intercepted by any observer is just not possible. The FTL ship could also fly out to the STL ship at FTL, but in order for it to ever get back to Earth earlier than it left, it would have to accelerate to have a zero relative velocity to the STL ship from this example. But then that acceleration would take time, preventing it from getting to Earth before it left. I dunno, I’m no physicist, so I feel like I have to be missing something here, because that type of restriction doesn’t feel too arbitrary to me. This could just be me not yet picturing some other diagram following those two rules that still break causality. Seems like the isolation within FTL, and your relative velocity from your departure being conserved in the jump, both feel like they might be more of like natural consequences of how an FTL drive might actually work.

@this_dood_right_here

2 ай бұрын

I agree with you and just said something similar in response to another. I think we collectively miss the fact that radio messages are transmitted absurdly slower than any speeds we are trying to achieve physically. So we wouldn’t “know” what happened to a vessel on the other side of successfully achieving FTL speeds unless that vessel signaled back. And how long would that take? “God only knows” as they say. That’s assuming we couldn’t return the vessel home with its findings. All wild thoughts. But science and logic tells us it’s possible. Still solving the “how”

@thejoshuahatcher

2 ай бұрын

Was just thinking about this concept of world line alterations as I was (re)watching this video. The notion of intercepting an STL message while in FTL somehow confused me/didn't seem like it should be possible in that reference point.

Well, I don't know about time travel, but a fascinating thing to think about is that if you could travel FTL and have a way to look at earth from any distance, you could go far enough away from earth to see the past.

@jakecutter1487

8 ай бұрын

​@@rodrigues.iVery easy point to understand. We're here on Earth looking out into space. If we look at the sun we're all seeing the sun in the past, as it was 8 minutes ago because that's how long light from the sun takes to reach our eyes. So likewise, if we could instantly transport to a point next to the sun and then looked at Earth we'd be seeing Earth as it was 8 minutes ago in the past. If we could instantly transport to Alpha Centauri and stare back at Earth we'd be seeing Earth as it was over 4 years ago because that's how long it takes light to reach our eyes from that star system. Get it?

@paulshlasko3608

8 ай бұрын

Not only that, if you then turned around and went back, you would BE in the past, and that is a simpler way to show the FTL violated causality, right?

@davidkatzenbach7189

8 ай бұрын

No... Wrong

@mw2zorzest

8 ай бұрын

@@davidkatzenbach7189 If you mean me, how exactly is it wrong? If you move at FTL speeds you would see 'old' light once you stopped, therefore you would see the 'past' of the planet, which is why we see stars not as they are, but as they were many years ago, some stars already died, but we still see them because they're so far away that light from the time of their death has yet to reach us, same way we see planets, which reflect the light from stars. Light speed isn't instant, it's just really really fast. Thats what Lightyears are, we see a star 1 lightyear away as what it was like 1 year ago, because that's how long it takes for light to travel to our visible space. If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me, I am not omniscient, I can make mistakes, but I don't think I did here.

@mw2zorzest

8 ай бұрын

@@paulshlasko3608 No, because as you would get closer to earth you would see less and less into the past, @philgiffin1487 explained it perfectly, the closer you are to a planet the less the time difference would become. I explained it in my other reply more thoroughly.

"It almost seems like a cruel cosmic joke that the universe be arranged such a way that we are able to look out and glimpse its wonders and yet are trapped here by the speed of light." So well said

@foxtayle683

Жыл бұрын

Like God said "You can look but you can't touch".

@AKa-qi2ov

Жыл бұрын

Blind people have eyes yet they can not see. Be grateful for what you have.

@STho205

Жыл бұрын

It is only a cruel joke, due to human avarice. The concept of continuing to climb stairs to silver level, gold level, platinum level, diamond level luxury and status ...and be temtped by yet another staircase. The fire door locks behind you and you're trapped on a dirty roof with a noisy AC compressor.

@chemplay866

Жыл бұрын

@@AKa-qi2ov Some don't have eyes.

@AKa-qi2ov

Жыл бұрын

@@chemplay866 some don’t have brains and like their own comments 😂

I watched the entire video, and I get the sense you broke the rules of your own diagram. You drew two diagonal lines at the start, indicating the speed of light. You set the premise that any line between the time axis and this diagonal line is something moving slower than light (STL). Any line between the diagonal line and the space axis are faster than light (FTL). You then start speculating about FTL transmitters able to send a message instantaneously, meaning horizontally to the right. I'm with you so far. This is where you break every rule that has been set. You draw a line that goes downward. We've not established any reason why a line would do that. Your made up transmitter can only go up to a limit of a horizontal line (instantaneous messaging). These paradoxes start popping up because you've suddenly decided this message is being sent to the past. The FTL transmitter is now a time machine for no reason. Like I said there might be some physics I don't understand. However in the diagram you've been using, there has been zero explanation of why any line would ever go down. The established rules were that lines could only be in the STL or FTL directions. Once you start going downward you break your own rule set.

@digammaf7060

3 ай бұрын

Indeed, why is the first message drawn according to earth's POV but the second one is drawn according to the ship's POV? There's no explanation for that

@tb3099

2 ай бұрын

​@@digammaf7060it's sent from the ships pov because that's where that particular message was coming from. However the original comment is correct that it doesn't make sense on this graph as if you map out time/ space for the the ships pov the line going downward would indicate that the message is sent faster than instantly from the ship back to earth. However if you send the message ftl but not faster than instantly than I don't think any causality is broken

@digammaf7060

2 ай бұрын

@@tb3099 Take 3 points, the first one being the emission of signal, the second one being the relay of the signal on the ship, and the last one being the reception of the signal on earth. Place those three points in a similar configuration as in the video. From earth's POV there is a downward worldline, but if you apply the Lorentz' transform on all three points to obtain the ship's POV there is no downward worldline anymore. In fact, the downward worldline becomes an horizontal worldline, relevant with the idea that the message is transmitted instantaneously from the ship's POV. I just checked that using a graphing calculator, the original comment is not correct about that, and you are not correct about that either. I would gladly share the Geogebra file but I don't know how.

@tb3099

2 ай бұрын

@@digammaf7060 interesting I was trying to figure out how to do it but I don't have a graphing calculator or know what app to use on my phone. On your graph is there a point at which the ships the ships transmitter can send something faster than light but not break causality.

@digammaf7060

2 ай бұрын

I will explain it to you so you can reproduce it exactly. It's not complicated. The Earth's worldline is the line defined by x = 0 (vertical line perpendicular with the x axis). The Ship's worldline is the line defined by y = 1.18x (arbitrary speed close to the speed of the light). The light's worldline is the line defined by y = x (45deg line). The Signal emission Ma is located at (0; 4), the Signal relay Mb is located at (3.38; 4), the Signal reception Mc is located at (0; 1.14). Now you have the world from Earth's POV. To get the Ship's POV, we will apply the Lorentz transform on Ma, Mb and Mc. First, the speed of the referential we are using is 1/1.18 (we are using the natural units in which c = 1). According to the wikipedia page of the Lorentz transform, we should first compute a factor called Gamma which in our case is about 1.884 (remember to take c = 1 and v = 1/1.18). Then, for each point Ma', Mb' and Mc' which are the equivalent of Ma, Mb and Mc from the Ship's POV, we can compute the coordinates like this: Mx' = Gamma * (Mx - v*My) My' = Gamma * (My - (v*Mx)) (I simplified the equations seen on the wikipedia page because c = 1) We are left with: Emission' = (-6.39; 7.54) Relay' = (0, 2.14) Reception' = (-1.82, 2.15) As you can see, Relay' to Reception' is not a downward worldline from the Ship's POV, the only downward worldline is Emission' to Relay', which is a direct consequence of breaking the speed of light and not relevant. This is not worth discussing because the real issue is not the shape of the worldline: that wouldn't be a problem for causality if both message worldlines were drawn from the same perspective, and that's why I'm telling you that you are not on the right path. The real issue here is that EVERYTHING on the diagram is drawn from Earth's POV, everything BUT that one message reply which is drawn from the Ship's POV, which doesn't make any sense at all. When you are drawing a spacetime diagram, you draw everything from the same POV. Imaging drawing the inside of a house, but for some reason that one couch is drawn as seen from the outside. This is non sensical. When drawn correctly, the diagram is Emission = (0; 4) Relay = (3.38; 4) Reception = (0; 4) As you can see, Emission-Relay and Relay-Reception are the same line segment, which is relevant with the idea that the communication is instantaneous. When switching to the Ship's POV, both Emission-Relay and Relay-Reception are downward worldlines (since we broke the rule of the light speed then it's not surprising to see other funky things happen) but both are the same line segment, breaking no causality at all.

The greatest explanation so far. I've been trying for months to understand this by reading forums and watching youtube videos. None were able to explain this. I still need to understand it more intuitively instead of through looking at lines, but this definitely opened my eyes. This is by far the best and most simply explained video so far on this. Thank you

@kenny.speaks

2 ай бұрын

Imagine a yellow star 10 light years away If you were to travel at the speed of light, it would take 10 years to get there right? lets say your friend is watching it in a telescope, 24/7 [LIGHT SPEED] - fly to star at light speed (10 years) - turn star purple - fly back home - (10 years later) you and your friend see in the telescope that the star turned purple [FTL] - instantly travel to star - arrive at star 10 years in the past - turn star purple - you might say, well the friend would see it instantly change - think about if instead of instant-travel, you travel with the speed of light back. toearth.. shouldnt it be purple the moment you land since you were traveling with the purple light? - also.. what happened to all the light that was traveling to earth? think about a middle-planet only 5 light years away from. the star instead..what do they see? -- at least how I understand it I think haha, but. who knows maybe there is infinite universes and you just jump to some alt dimension that is 99.9999999% the same except that the star turned purple at one moment instead of the other

I like how Terry Pratchett said it better than the way Hawking did: Everything that happens, stays happened.

@JROD082384

2 жыл бұрын

I wouldn’t even bet my lunch on that smug assumption.

@mkohlhorst

2 жыл бұрын

I like Jim Butcher's version Law For the Conservation of History. Postulating that there is a force similar to inertia for temporal events. Essentially after an event has occurred a strong force will ensure that it remains unchanged

@Itherageli

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah it might be a bit naive or misunderstanding some implications of our current understanding of quantum mechanics, but it always seemed more intuitive to me that the future is set and that "change" is just a matter of viewing the universe from a different position within the spacetime and there is no need to "invent" a force preventing causality to break when the universe was already set (though this being true would probably make closed causal loops impossible).

@elmoteroloco

2 жыл бұрын

​@@mkohlhorst The "Good Doctor" Isaac Asimov described the inertia of the time stream in "The End of Eternity", an interesting read even today.

@elmoteroloco

2 жыл бұрын

So... "Everything that happens, try to stays happened"

"The cosmic speed limit, the speed of light is so diminutive compared to a galaxy. It almost seems like a cruel cosmic joke that the universe be arranged in such a way that we are able to look out and glimpse its wonders and yet are trapped here by the speed of light. Fated to only ever peer through the bars of our cosmic prison and dream." -- This is so beautifully spoken...

@obothehobo173

8 ай бұрын

That's a carl sagan quote right?

@buioso

8 ай бұрын

But isn't true. You don't need FTL to visit the Galaxy, as long as your speed is very close to the speed of light, your proper time slows down a lot. For example, at 299,792,456 m/sec (just 2m/sec less than c) you can reach a destination 720 Light years away in just one month at your clock. But for the rest of mankind, so your family, relatives and friends you are disappeared forever and no communication is possible. This is the real problem.

@ProfShibe

8 ай бұрын

@@buiosoyeah that’s why it’s basically useless. The few people on board the ship or w/e is traveling would get to experience it, but upon returning the civilization probably wouldn’t even exist

@davidt8087

8 ай бұрын

I'm sorry but I.dont see a paradox here for the ftl ship. There's so much trickery and perspective here. Imagine you are on the other side of earth and you discover the country you're in has learned of an atomic bomb strike coming at them, then you see the atomic.bomb on its way, it doesn't mean the warning came first. It's just the order of information you received that's changed, not the ORDER of ACTUAL events. Why do physicists put MORE emphasis and make EM WAVES the MOST fundamental aspect of the universe but not the ACTUAL mass and energy aka atoms which emit them in the first place? Think of em waves as Carrier waves. They don't matter at all. So what if i travel faster than light and I arrive at another planet, stop, and then someone using a telescope sees the light from my body arriving later starting from near the end (where light is closest) and appearing to go back. We would know the light is just an illusion. The ACTUAL FUNDAMENTAL ATOMIC MATTER AND MASS MATTERS MORE THAN ITS EM RADIATION IT OUTPUTS. But we instead only focus on the atomic OUTPUT aka em waves and base ENTIRE THEORIES AND PHYSICAL LAWS around THE EM WAVE. Who cares about light? We've seen that atoms can "communicate" at "infinite speed" via the double split experiments. If particles can communicate faster than light they are MORE fundamental than light. Now sure information can only travel faster than light but why focus on information as if it's more fundamental than the MASS energy? Particles can communicate instantly at infinite distance, and while the information is limited at light speed, so what. Light is just em waves with no mass. Could we make life out of em waves? No. So who cares. If we did travel faster than light THEN saw the light of our travel arrive, I'm sure NO ONE would say "wait how come you're here but yet I see you still on the way?". Everyone would know that it's just an illusion. So I don't see any paradox

There's a great scifi series on a subreddit where humans are using C+ canons that send projectiles using something akin to "slipspace" to travel faster than light to target, and in universe from the target's perspective they get hit before the canons are even fired.

@wehrewulf

2 ай бұрын

Cannons, not canons.

@Alex-dh2cx

2 ай бұрын

@@wehrewulf bud, im typing on a phone, v relax

@elliotvanhijfte

Ай бұрын

​@Alex-dh2cx what is the series called? On the hfy subreddit i assume?

@Alex-dh2cx

Ай бұрын

@@elliotvanhijfte HFY, First Contact by Ralts Bloodthorne. That particular bit is a good ways into the story, which is over 2 million words. I THINK it was in one of the historical flashback chapters, but I'm currently in the Nova Wars series set far in the future from that part, i can't quite remember where in the story that came up, was just a small thing mentioned. They use some sort of special temporal tech to even be able to target things at great distances. It's probably the best long running series on the subreddit. The story of how it all got started is pretty amazing as well, the first few chapters are part of an introductory anthology, and the first chapter he wrote while serving in desert storm back in the 90s.

I enjoy that you are actually including the possibility of breaking the universe in this video. That is why we stopped increasing speed, in my warp engine space ship.

Omg this diagram finally explained why and how space and time are connected. Thank you so much. I always thought I understood this concept but I was just repeating info not fully grasping it.

@w0tch

2 жыл бұрын

You need to look at curved spacetime diagrams (this one is flat) to understand the link between space and time :)

@caitlyn9972

2 жыл бұрын

@@w0tch thanks, I will.

@caitlyn9972

2 жыл бұрын

@@N3KRoM3KHANIKaL Yes, I completely agree. We do not have enough information and may never get it. And relying only on math is most likely not the answer. It's a very "human" way of trying to solve things.

@dlayman101

2 жыл бұрын

Even then it's still a massive stretch, we don't even know it time is linear, parallel, or circular, we can observe evidence of what we experience as the passing of time, but quantum physics seems to be bending our undersanding of the rules of time, energy and matter. Remember 3rd law of thermodynamics, entropy "TENDS", why the word tend? Because at this point it is outside the realm of our current paradigm of awareness as well as the technological capabilities as it relates to se sensory data acquisition to be able to define that theory with a more resolute likely useful definition. Aka our current level of understanding is the first black and white television. Imagine, give it colour and increase its resolution to 8k, I'll bet its a picture you can draw a more detailed understanding from. Crude metaphore I know, but there is no such thing as the best answer, only the "currently knowable" best answer. Don't act like it's a doorway to a new world of understanding, but all the knowledge you learn is simple a small stepping stone for you to leap from into the universe of the unknown, for the purpose of stumbling upon new unseen, unknown, and untouched wonders. Big and small. Seen and currently unseeable. The final frontier is not the beginning of the last mission, but the beginning of the first mission, that never ends.

@SkywalkerSamadhi

2 жыл бұрын

@@N3KRoM3KHANIKaL maybe so.. but that doesn’t mean we give up trying. Ever. The only real failure that exists is in not trying at all. Otherwise every attempt to find FTL or unlock the mysteries of the universe bears fruit in the end, even if ultimately that fruit is just another way in which we learned how not to make a lightbulb.

In the Halo extended lore (books and etc), their use of slipspace creates time paradoxes like, constantly. It's not uncommon for a ship to arrive at it's destination hours, days, or WEEKS before it left. And everyone's collective reaction to the existence of these paradoxes is just to kinda shrug, say "hey man, don't worry about it too much," and move on

@deephorizon1365

Жыл бұрын

That's great, i fucking love it

@brandenmarcum430

Жыл бұрын

“Hey if we keep doing this the universe might break” “Cool”

@nickmalachai2227

Жыл бұрын

Every time I learn something about Halo lore it sounds completely tonally dissonant from the games I played. "John Halo is a brainwashed child soldier alongside every other Spartan, and the people who commissioned the Spartan Project belong in the Hague." "The use of slipspace at all is an existential threat to all the universe." "the UN created the Spartans to suppress rebellions with legitimate grievances" this is a space marine game about fighting aliens and being badass, what the fuck is all this genuinely horrifying secondary lore?

@HorseDe-luxe

Жыл бұрын

@@nickmalachai2227 I'm glad to see someone else say this, I feel basically the same way. The deep lore fans irk me bad, it just sucks all the wind out of the sails for one of the most fun series of games I played as a kid. Like, I actually used to enjoy wiki diving and reading some of that lore- some of it was cool- but then every time I see people get up on a pedestal about how the UNSC are some evil Nazi-equivalent authoritarian regime, "the real baddies" (Compared to the Covenant? Those genocidal maniacs? Seriously?) and the spartan child soldier stuff, it makes it feel like none of it was worth it. Like, way to ruin a series; not only are the games after Bungie moved on arguably kind of mediocre, but then the books and other secondary lore retroactively hurt the Bungie games too. There's just nothing left to enjoy. It makes me so sad.

@nickmalachai2227

Жыл бұрын

@@HorseDe-luxe I actually like the secondary lore, for the most part, I just wish the games were tonally consistent with it. Granted, I'm a Star Wars and Transformers fan. I'm used to worse bullshit than this.

This video is amazing. Thank you for this simple explanation of such complex issues. I have discussed your diagrams with a couple of colleagues last night and we had an amazing time 😊

I landed at the same "strict rules" conclusion back in 2007 when designing a sci-fi setting with FTL. I borrowed a bit from Douglas Adams and ended up with a version similar to one you hinted at. That any attempts to perform an action which would result in a paradox would be met with increasingly unlikely events to prevent it from occurring in the first place. Thus, before sending any FTL comms, or engaging in certain kinds of travel, you have to draw the light cones and think through the implications as shown in your video. Thanks for putting this together. It was nice to see someone think through the same things and tie it into a neat package.

@just_me2797

Жыл бұрын

I am doing a copy and paste from a quick thought I had. "Just spitballing here, because I am not a physicist nor time traveler, but perhaps it needs to be viewed in other dimensions rather than with a 2d graph. Say for example someone makes a device that in theory can send an FTL message. They turn it on and send a message, but nothing happens so they think it didn't work. However thinking in the infinite universes model the senders universe continued on it's time line, but the message was received in a multitude of parallel universes. They have zero clue as to where the message came from, but they received it none the less. Or perhaps the universes have a way of keeping things tidy, so too speak. So when the FTL message is sent, how do I say this, the entire universe is sent and is no longer where it was in time. Thinking in terms of infinite universes perhaps there are as many, call them anti universes (empty spaces) in the big empty. So the universe itself where the FTL message originated instantly fills the space where the message is received thus avoiding some weird entanglement of timelines. Sure there might be some side effects such as the Mandela effect, but that is price we pay in order to have FTL."

@W0NK042

Жыл бұрын

This is why I only travel on Bad News. 😉

@RoyalPomegranate

11 ай бұрын

I have proven that even if you ignore all paradoxes with time travel it still violates the 1st law if thermodynamics.

@raymondturner6784

10 ай бұрын

This is what I was thinking. I'm glad to see somebody else thought the same. I even hypothesized that that causing a paradox, that section of time is broken off and takes that space with it, like ALL of that universe at that exact time, essentially causing what would be parallel universe. Sting Theory mathematically checked out, and postulates that a multiverse exists, along with at least 11 dimensions. I think something like this videos scenario paradox happened in the Mark Wahlberg Planet of the Apes. I remember there being a video transmission they received in the beginning of the movie that was actually sent years later...

@gatekeeping8528

10 ай бұрын

But I don’t understand, the problem seems to be STL not FTL but STL are totally possible

If FTL is impossible, the upside is that the possibility of aliens attacking would be quite low.

@ProfShibe

9 ай бұрын

That also includes the possibility of meeting them :( The world could be littered with civilizations, just they might be far apart, or some might even be next to each other, and we’d never know.

@paulshlasko3608

8 ай бұрын

If hostile aliens became aware of us through telescopes much more advanced than ours and wished, for instance, to take over this wonderful piece of "real estate", they could possibly, with their advanced technology, attack us with a virus. The virus is so small that it could be accelerated to near the speed of light without breaking any rules. Said virus could be designed to make us really smart, smart enough to change our ecosystem in their favor, and so aggressive as to cause our own downfall through constant conflict. They could then send their STL vessels with colonizers to eventually clean up the mess and take over the place. Its not really far-fetched, in my opinion!

@200fpsASH

8 ай бұрын

Alien 👽 of some types can bring souls witches % for the record player ✨!? Lol it's not of today because Mars&darWtfts planet a moon to Mars!

@tobencoombs5750

8 ай бұрын

if aliens existed the first thing i would show them is a baja blast from taco bell

@pierreo33

8 ай бұрын

@@200fpsASH Take your meds

What if for the reply signal that gets sent back (for the Supernova FTL Warning example), could we potentially just calculate the point in time/space where Earth would be, and send a signal with a specified frequency to travel the exact speed needed to meet that calculated point?

so my question here is at around 18:10 you're demonstrating what happens if the STL ship intercepts the FTL transmission, then sends a transmission back saying to "turn off FTL Transmission", what rule applying says that the returned transmission must move backwards in time? Why would it not move to upper position of the diagram of which case Earth would receive that transmission before Vega see's the Supernova keeping the order of causalities in line? Why must the returned transmission from the STL ship back to Earth be moving backwards in time?

@puernatura8998

4 күн бұрын

Because the message has to obey Minkowski transformations. The scenario where the FTL message travels instantly is easiest to explain: That FTL message **must** be parallel to the space axis of the sender. Why? Because that’s what instantaneous means in a spacetime diagram. Because of that, the message travels back in time if it is sent towards Earth, but forward in time if sent to Vega.

respect to all the cameramen who time travelled into the past to bring us footage of all their FTL ships for use in this video

@daytradersanonymous9955

Жыл бұрын

Disrespect to spam ty comments👎

@AashishK1993

Жыл бұрын

i love you

@MetalFan10101

Жыл бұрын

Oh look an original joke...

@durcheinanderme

Жыл бұрын

@@daytradersanonymous9955 Phd

@durcheinanderme

Жыл бұрын

@@MetalFan10101 phd

15:18 If we are looking at things from the ship's crews' perspective, how can you say that the first thing the crew perceives is Vega receiving the message from Earth? How did that information get from Vega to the ship? Was it instantaneous? Doesn't this information take time to travel to the ship from Vega? Yes, the time line has reached Vega, but it hasn't reached the ship yet. In fact, it appears that the ship learns about the message from Earth to Vega when the ship arrives at Vega (this might be an artifact of the speed of the ship, and might not be true for a different speed). More importantly, according to your timeline, the STL ship thinks Vega has received the message from Earth BEFORE THE SHIP HAS LAUNCHED. 18:11 Justify the world line for the return message from the ship. No matter how I look at it, the message from the ship back to Earth arrives later, not earlier. I don't see any way to get your reply world line from any of the other lines you've drawn.

@jackie.p6891

Жыл бұрын

I was feeling stupid for not understanding that part of the video, but my reasoning is the same as yours. I went back and forth in the video trying to understand why the STL ship would see that vega was warned before earth even sent the message. wouldn't that require that ship to see faster than light? on the other hand, I find it far more likely that I just don't understand the use case and I'm missing something that smarter people than me have thought of xD

@salbrismind

Жыл бұрын

@@jackie.p6891 The time slice isn't about seeing events it's about them "happening" on that world line. The video is missing some crucial explanation of the STL ship and how it travels. The close to speed of light you are travelling (without FTL) time for you actually slows down and your observations of the world outside are also slowed down. Which seems paradoxical but it's what relativity tells us. So when we talk about what the ship experiences it's really just a question of it's perspective of the outside world. A transformation into the perspective of the ship would produce a diagram where the events happening on Eartth are slowed down.

@danielross7983

Жыл бұрын

@@salbrismind The STL ship's space line should be an S shaped curve to account for acceleration to relativistic speeds and deceleration. That would change it's position on the overall chart.

@sirdeadlock

Жыл бұрын

If time is a constant in the equation, then no amount of space warping, special relativity, can make anything go back in time, or can make something happen before it starts. It can slow down subjective perception or slow down objective perception, but time proceeding forward, cannot go backward.

@ozasco

Жыл бұрын

I am with you guys I am either too dumb or a message can never travel back in time

at 17:00, the video illustrates how the "STL ship's time axis" should be vertical (plus, then FTL works again, according to this model)

Thank you Professor, very interesting. I myself think that the only reason we even discuss FTL travel is because SF writers had to 'invent' it in order to write space travel stories. One thing: I believe you pronounced the word *albeit* as 'al-bite'. Actually albeit is simply a contraction of 'although be it' or 'although it be', and so is correctly pronounced *all-be-it*.

Hiya, aerospace engineering grad student here! This seems really well-researched, and yes, this _is_ an effect that happens exactly as you say - and it's also not time travel. Not in the way we conventionally think of it, anyway. This model is actually referring to _information_ travel, which is surprisingly pretty different! And no, even if you switched the FTL signal to, say, a person traveling FTL to tell the Vegans (lol vegans XD), everything still holds up to how we understand relativity. This is because this thought experiment doesn't factor in the *quantum effects of information.* Take a pair of electrons, for example - let's make these two electrons quantum-entangled (something that can actually happen!), which is a fancy way of saying that their properties are connected and shared - when one electron does something, so does the other. We have experimentally proven that, when one electron's spin flips, so does the other - _instantaneously._ Which shouldn't be possible, so long as we assume everything is capped at the speed of light. AND this happens regardless of the electron pair's distance from one another. So in theory, if we separated these two entangled electrons across the entire Milky Way, then flipped one, the other would also flip at the exact same moment as the first. This is because with _information_ travel, there's no light-speed limit to be found - no speed limit at all, really. So when one electron flips, the information of that flip _instantly_ travels to the other electron, and so it flips at the exact same time. Crazy, right? All this just to say that, according to quantum physics, information is not bound to the rules of relativity, in regards to both space AND time. This is exactly what happens in this thought experiment - due to the nature of the different axes of space, the information onboard the STL ship comes in all jumbled and in the wrong order, but because information doesn't actually have a given speed limit (the entangled electrons are proof of this), nothing in relativity is broken! The rest of the universe follows the horizontal axis (mostly), and causality remains unbroken - since the space axis is relative to the observer, the *perspective of the order of events can change* because _information has no given speed limit,_ it's only limited by how it's perceived - so the events themselves still happen exactly in the order they happen. The line parallel with the space axis, traveling up and down, is really an _information perception line._ Think about it this way - forget the signal. What if you had a ship that traveled at exactly the speed of light? Both its time and space axis would be at 45 degrees, and thus its perception line would also be at 45 degrees. In that frame of reference, all three events - supernova X, Earth observation of X, and Vega observation of X - would happen at the exact same time. And what if we add back in the signal, and the ship was an FTL ship? Flip the STL ship line and the STL space axis line at 14:47, and we're FTL! The perceived (note: _perceived_ ) order gets _really_ janky with this example - first, the Vegans receive the warning from Earth; then the Vegans see X; then Earth sees X; then X happens. It's almost backwards! But that's okay, because *information - and thus our perception of that information - can arrive in whatever order it wants, or rather, in the order that the frame of reference allows.* No time travel, just information travel. Just thought I should mention that, to alleviate the confusion! Physics, sadly, just _really_ doesn't like actual, real time travel. (My inner Doctor Who fan is crying) Edit: Whoopsie, so I brought this post by my thesis advisor, aaand turns out I may be just a _wee_ bit absolutely incorrect about how transmission of information via quantum entanglement works. Say you have a pair of entangled electrons that you've measured to have a net spin of 0. If you measure one electron's spin to be some value x, due to quantum entanglement, the other electron's spin must be -x. Simple enough, right? All entanglement says is that mutually shared info is conserved. _Technically_ it means you also instantly know that the other electron's spin is some value -x once you measure the first electron to be spin x, but the pitfall for many people (including myself, sadly) is extending this logic to the _transmission_ of information. Just because an electron is entangled with another doesn't mean flipping that electron will have an instant effect on the other. Transmission of information is, much like everything else in the universe, bound to the speed of light. Physically flip an electron, and the other electron will flip after an appropriate amount of time, NOT instantly. (Note that this also is in an ideal setting, where spin only happens along a single axis - normal electrons can have spin along any axis they want, which has all sorts of brain-breaking issues that I will NOT try and summarize for both your and my sanity.) Having said that, though, the logic of the information perception line still holds true to a degree. Proper FTL travel doesn't yet exist, so we can't properly test the effects that FTL might have on causality. The thought experiment proposed in this video calls into question some of the issues FTL might have, but this post is more calling into question the claim that what's happening is time travel. An error I made was assuming the information in this setting was quantum information, which makes no sense since this isn't really a quantum system! You find quantum info in a quantum system, which this isn't, so the information perception line is really just the perception of normal, tangible information. (And again, quantum info like everything else is bound to the speed of light. Just pointing out another error I made.) And yes, it still looks like causality is being broken, but still only from an information standpoint. Events still carry on as they do, it's just the order of _detection_ of events that's getting weird. Which is totally fine! Harking back to the entangled electrons, if we separate the pair far enough and make enough observations in a second, communication via the speed of light would take longer than the interval between observations, meaning you can find out the other entangled electron's spin faster than the other side could tell you what that spin is. So in a bit of a backwards way to what I said earlier, information _still_ finds cheeky ways of "beating" the speed of light without actually beating the speed of light. If information can do that, then there's no reason why this doesn't extend further ie. to this thought experiment. Information gets wonky, but we already know that's okay. No time paradoxes here! To be fully honest here, I ain't an expert in this field - I'm a hands-on build stuff kinda guy, the stuff discussed in both what I've said as well as in this video are only tangentially related to what I study. Thanks so much to all the people who've (politely) criticized my errors - y'all were the reason why I brought this to my thesis advisor in the first place. Science is all about correcting incorrect assumptions, so thanks to all of y'all for setting me straight! And feel free to point out any other errors I've made in this edit - there's only so far proofreading will get you lol

@Bullshitvol2

2 жыл бұрын

I wanted to write something similar, but you explained it much better than I ever could. TLDR: Paradoxons are always a human brain child. If they actually happen they are resolved on their own.

@jadenwalker6713

2 жыл бұрын

This implies a device can be constructed to determine absolute speed of an object. The idea of an information order can be used to distinguish the angle of a given objects space axis and the information axis. Take two ships in space, they start off docked, moving through space at some unknown fraction of the speed of light. they exchange entangled electrons and set timers for an hour. both ships then accelerate away from one another so their separation speed is .5c after an hour of observed time on one ship they flip their electron, but the on the other ship they see the electron has already flipped. they can conclude that because the electron flipped on their ship, they must have been moving at a higher lower angle to the information plane. Assuming they can observe and be alerted to the flip as you suggest, they could even calculate their angle to the information plane. Now lets say after each ship observed an hour pass they turned around and reunited. After their rendezvous they will be on the same course and speed as before but now know what that speed is compared to the information plane. They can then decelerate together to be at zero absolute universal speed. At this point our duo can do all kinds of naughty things like shine around the emittance spectrum of helium at any other observers in the universe while transmitting a signal declaring their speed as zero absolute. Of course this would allow any observer to determine their absolute speed by comparing red shift of the helium spectrum. Or our stationary ships could observe the redshift of equidistant galaxies billions of light years away and determine were the center of the universe is. The ability to take such actions is highly cursed and Einstein would not approve. The fundamental problem here is the information axis. The universe does not actually suffer this problem or we would have declared Einstein's theory of relativity dead the moment QE electrons were observed. With accurate enough clocks we could have already determined the absolute speed of earth by using earth's rotation to generate the velocity difference. The flawed assumption here is that QE can relocate information. QE cannot do this. Yes, the changes in a particles are instant BUT you could not differentiate the change from random chance without observing BOTH particles and comparing the results. So far as we know this observation must happen at luminal speeds. Example: some process, call it radioactive decay, simultaneously generates two entangled electrons. these electrons have an a spin sum of zero but each one has an unknown spin. you then separate these electrons from each other. you take one electron and put it threw some spin flipping machine. Now you pass your electron through a filter that sends an electron with an up spin into detector A and a down spin electron into detector B. The moment the electron hits a detector it breaks its entanglement due to the act of observation. if your electron hits the up spin detector you can know with certainty the other electron would have hit the down spin detector but the observer of the other electron would have no clue your electron was passed through the flipping machine unless you told them. Fundamentally the information of the spin the electron does not exist until observed, changing the spin state before hand changes nothing and observing the electron breaks the connection. No FTL information. Its actually comical how far entangled pairs go to generally troll anyone trying to do FTL communication with them.

@adamhsu8247

2 жыл бұрын

@@jadenwalker6713 Neat - didn't know that! And now I do, thanks friend! I guess there's still plenty of gaps in my knowledge for now lol

@JROD082384

2 жыл бұрын

You literally wasted a mile of comment space being wrong.

@jdove6883

2 жыл бұрын

Physicist here, well done engineer. However, again, there is no "flow" of time as if it is a river. Einstein postulated that all matter has it's own time clock and that it can, and does, tick at different rates for different velocities.

Always a GREAT day when KZread dings you because there is a new Cool Worlds!! 🛎 👍

@MrJuxone

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely 💯

@stevenclark7453

2 жыл бұрын

Yesss

Revisting this. Professor, I just saw an article featuring your terrascope idea, featuring you, of course 😊. I was so excited for you

Maybe I'm vastly misunderstanding things, but I feel like no matter what you do you'd be unable to break causality. Time is moving forward for everyone, just at different speeds, right? So no matter what you do(even sending a signal FTL) you'd be just unable to break causality. Maybe this answers that "does light travel faster in one direction" question(there was a Veritasium episode on this idea), so in this case trying to break causality would actually "slow" the speed of light to preserve causality. So your message, to you(the STL ship in the diagram), is still going FTL, but to Earth your message would be STL and they'd get your "turn off FTL communications message" *after* sending their first message. I guarantee my logic here would make Stephen Hawking froth in rage, but my college dropout brain refuses to accept causality could ever be broken.

@PsychoC4rnivore

3 ай бұрын

Maybe instead of breaking space time like the Warp drive from Star Trek, we could discover a way to slip into another dimension for FTL travel like Hyperspace from Star Wars

@Fromatic

3 ай бұрын

Yeah exactly, I still dont see how it leads to time travel, like if you were on a ship the same distance away as the sun where a light speed signal takes 8 minutes and so 16 minutes round trip, if its FTL then it might still take 10 minutes, even down to near instant and only takes 30 seconds, 30 seconds has still passed for both parties when the first signal is received, and another 30 seconds for the response to be received, dont see how it results in the reponse arriving before the original message was sent

@IwatchFilm

3 ай бұрын

@@Fromatic Yes, exactly my thoughts. There cannot be a break in causality - the reason largely is what you've explained. Our problem (humanity) is "our" concept and definition of "time" itself. Everything we define and measure, all of our physics that we know are based on some measure of time that "we" devised. The short answer is that we don't know what we don't know. My thought is that FTL is honestly arbitrary because we are limited by our understanding of space-time and the universe.

@Fromatic

3 ай бұрын

@@IwatchFilm yes arbitrary at least as far as speed is concerned and will still take a positive amount of time to travel a distance. Even with time dilation as I "understand" it meaning time slows down as you approach light speed, this just means for the person travelling at or faster than light speed, even less time has passed, but time has still passed, and even if time has passed at different rates for the sender and receiver, time has still passed for both and causality remains

@DavidSmith-mt7tb

3 ай бұрын

​@@PsychoC4rnivore Potentially, the hack here is that when you enter "hyperspace," some realm of the universe with laws that allow you to travel faster between the 2 points within hyperspace than you can between their 2 corresponding points in real space, you essentially exit into another spacetime, a separate graph entirely. In hyperspace, you cannot interact with any mass or energy in real space. Thus you cannot intercept any signal until you are back in real space, where you cannot go FTL. If any FTL comms also have to travel through hyperspace to their destination, then there's a barrier to interaction that safeguards causality. This is all supposing such a hyperspace exists tho.

I'm having a lot of difficulty wrapping my head around some things here. For example, why is the space axis a mirror-flip across the null line of the world line? For the "stationary" earth I get that it would look like a mirror-flip, but why is it? Also, when the transmission is sent from the STL ship after receiving the earth transmission, why is the slope negative? I feel like having this side-by-side with a similar diagram for the STL ship's perspective (with its world line being vertical, and the others being angled) would help clear things up... Like, I get that there's some consideration here for time dilatation, but wouldn't that be bypassed too, as using something like the Alcubierre drive, the object is not actually moving FTL, just the space it resides in is, so it wouldn't suffer time dilatation... I'm just getting confused.

@jdshi6693

2 жыл бұрын

This is where I'm stuck as well. I feel like the mirror line is the most critical aspect of the problem, but is also the least explained. He says, "Now, adding the null line back on we can note the relationship that the space axis is really just a flip of the time axis around the null." This statement is just kinda thrown out there like it might as well just be a coincidence rather than a requirement. But he's a smart guy, so I'm sure there is more to it that gets lost in the explanation. Here is what I really don't understand. FTL travel is obviously impossible if what he's saying is true. So then why are people spending years of their lives working on possible FTL ship designs? Is it not a complete waste of time?

@rhorho2

2 жыл бұрын

yep, the 'obvious' mirror flip across the null line was just thrown in there without any real explanation. I'm confused.

@theOrionsarms

2 жыл бұрын

Whole this explanation is a little bit wrong, straight lines are from special relativity theory, but relativistic slower than light ship need to have curved lines from general relativity, so space lines of the ship is only local oriented, and not apply to the whole universe, but(to be fair) the general relativity theory allows close temporal lines that breaks causality.

@CoolWorldsLab

2 жыл бұрын

If you want to a deeper explanation, check out Section 3.3 of williamsgj.people.cofc.edu/Minkowski%20Spacetime.pdf. It really comes down to Lorentz transforms. That the FTL ship is isolated during its trip doesn’t really matter, it departs and arrives in regular space time and is able to reach its destination faster than a beam of light (a beam of “causality”) can.

@miaokuancha2447

2 жыл бұрын

@@CoolWorldsLab Beam of causality ... Those are words to conjure with.

Congratulations, you had my complete attention to the entire 25 minutes. Very well done video and explanation. Super interesting

@daMillenialTrucker

11 ай бұрын

He's an interesting man, I'm the same way. I can get deep into my own thoughts while listening to a video but like you, listened to it in its fullness.

@KhaiGK

10 ай бұрын

I use this video to sleep

Isn't the STL line off? The slower it goes the more vertical it will be, right? But then, the mirroring at the speed of light would be more extreme, to a point where the angle becomes zero, if the STL ship does not move at all, hence the time slice would be horizontal too. The message back, seems to travel backward in time in any reference system. Why? Just because it is drawn this way? Shouldn't it be angled up, and everything is restored? Looks to me, that in addition like the space/time coordinates of the STL ship are confused with that of Earth and Vega. Or vice versa and this causes the paradox. Confused.

You're such a great human! Thank you for all your content!

Cosmological and chronological paradoxes are so interesting, rather enjoyed listening to this more than I'd expected.

@fullercrane1795

8 ай бұрын

the hack is to listen to it like your life depends on it.

Yet again you combine scientific explanation with a thoughtful and beautiful message. Thanks for one day deciding to start doing these videos, they mean a lot to me.

@miaokuancha2447

2 жыл бұрын

Same。

@duran9664

2 жыл бұрын

Why not also mix it with spiritual & religious thoughts?! ⚡️⚡️⚡️In multi-dimensions existence, causality wouldn’t be violated. Abrahamic secret texts of Jews, Christians & Muslims have hinted that “instantaneous” travel is indeed possible if we live within multiple dimensions. Each dimension has its own speed limit. When u reach certain speed, u jump into a deferent dimension & u loose direct connection to ur initial one until u slow down to within its speed limit. 🤔

@the-guy-on-your-moms-couch

2 жыл бұрын

I see what you did there. Or maybe what you will do there

@miaokuancha2447

2 жыл бұрын

@@the-guy-on-your-moms-couch Well played!

@onlyonewhyphy

2 жыл бұрын

I like Carl Sagans son too

It's amazing how slow you plan to go faster than light. I have other things to do. If I have time, when I'm finished goofing off, I might check in to see if you made it to light speed.

18:09 why would the STL ship's message answer go back that way on the diagram? I don't get it at all. It's very confusing because there were no example of someone answering back without FTL shenanigans.

What is most beautiful about this video - is actually what it has done to the comments section. Look at all the wonder, the questions, the curiosity, the debate. All these wonderful human beings trying to discover - this is what I love most about humanity, we're all in this thing together :)

@pansepot1490

2 жыл бұрын

Have a look at the comments on some conspiracy videos. The moon landing deniers, or the flat earthers for instance.

@gamingcreatesworlddd2425

Жыл бұрын

@@pansepot1490 no don't your brain will hurt badly

I'm 30+ sitting here at 3:28am and have just learned through that graph, how their theories come about. I could listen you talk all day and will definitely sub to your channel ❤

I think as soon as something like FTL is achieved, we'll soon learn that there is some other, infinitely stranger arbitrary limitation way beyond our grasp that we could never have even conceived of before. I have dreams about it all the time, since I was a child in fact.

@griseld

Жыл бұрын

Same! I think it's just a question of science. As much as i believe in science, we make a lot of hypothesis and assumptions, we are also able to calculate stuff precisely(think gravity) without actually understanding how it works exactly or at the quantum scale. We can measure stuff and make accurately predictions on things because they follow rules, even if we don't understand them at their core. With our understanding advancing we will eventually find out that there's much more hidden stuff in the universe, much more detail to the laws of physics as we know them. I'm pretty sure with time everything we deem impossible will eventually unravel itself with technology. Think about our understanding of gravity or molecules or whatever has evolved, from thinking that something doesn't allow you to leave the ground, to thinking there might be a force, to formulating an explanation to that force, to finding actual data on it and doing research. We will eventually end up finding that gravity is an illusion and happens for other reasons than we think 🤣

@stefanschleps8758

Жыл бұрын

I like the way you think!

@optimuseprime7887

Жыл бұрын

@@griseld As much as I like your enthusiasm, and would love for FTL and other fancy tech to happen, wanting it to happen won't make it so. The reason science is so scientific is because of intrinsic scientific value; skepticism. Being skeptical is probably a key to being a scientist. So it isn't really healthy as a scientist to start thinking that everything you know now is completely wrong because something else that people thought was right turned out to be wrong. That kind of thinking can lead you to certain biases that can have a lot of effect on your research. Of course, pretty much all scientists and people want FTL to be possible and would love for it to be so, but also most of them know that as it stands right now, FTL is likely impossible, and, assuming they aren't researching something that could change that, they are probably working according to that. Scientific/technological progress could hit a wall tomorrow, and any advancement could freeze. Of course, that's unlikely to happen, but it is possible. It's good to be optimistic, and enthusiastic, but knowing where the potential limits are is good. I would love for FTL to be possible as I already said, but as far as we know it's either impossible or requires incredibly advanced technology that we won't have for hundreds, or maybe even thousands of years. And our current best theories suggest it's the former, but who knows? Maybe someone will create a theory of quantum gravity that will be proven, and that will allow for FTL.

@procrastinathor4594

Жыл бұрын

What would that be like?

@JeffTheHippo

Жыл бұрын

I wonder how much faster you would have to go to reach that barrier

Great video. Speed of “thought” as form of FTL travel? Perhaps currently the only way. Also, love Hawkings ideas that time paradox’s are impossible.

Even if FTL is impossible things like Alcubierre drive and wormholes could , hypothetically, still be used for slower-than-light or light-speed travel. STL or light-speed wormholes might also be useful as makeshift pocket dimensions, since the throat would have to be longer or the same length as the distance between the two mouths in normal space. They could also be used for uninterceptable communication

@CaritasGothKaraoke

Ай бұрын

All wormhole travel would be limited to light speed. The difference is that the shape of space itself is bent.

Let's start perhaps with a more modest goal: Alcubierre-style drive that targets STL flight instead of FTL. Even that would be a tremendous step forward for our civilization.

@galaxya40s95

2 жыл бұрын

.

@robertharvilla4881

2 жыл бұрын

That seems like it would be more difficult than actually achieving FTL. I would think that simply creating the warp bubble is going to be hard enough, and generating the energy levels and creating the exotic matter required is a monumental achievement in and of itself.

@rarebeeph1783

2 жыл бұрын

I disagree. What we should actually focus on is achieving relativistic STL flight directly. By my understanding, the closer the ship gets to c, the less time they experience throughout their trip (as the length between their origin and destination contracts, or as time dilation, depending on reference frame). Assuming STL travel close enough to c, one could get to almost any location within the cosmic event horizon, while only experiencing the amount of time it takes the ship to speed up and slow down from its own perspective. The only problem this results in is that all those who aren't also travelling relativistically will be left in the past by the crew of this ship by a number of years equal to the number of light years travelled (this is the effect that would be solved by FTL travel, for what it's worth). It seems to me that an STL Alcubierre drive would remove the length contraction / time dilation effects from the crew, since they aren't actually moving, which would paradoxically possibly make the trip longer for them than if they had travelled traditionally at the same rate as their warp bubble travelled.

@robertharvilla4881

2 жыл бұрын

@@rarebeeph1783 I don't think that relativistic speeds are going to be possible for humans due to the often overlooked relativistic effect of mass dilation, not time dilation. The faster you go, the heavier you become, and there's no telling what that is going to do to the ship itself, much less its crew.

@robertharvilla4881

2 жыл бұрын

But the possible negative effects of relativistic travel might only be dealt with by warping space itself rather than accelerating to higher and higher speeds. That makes warping the most likely of ways forward, or at least the least problematic. But then there's the question of what that's going to do to the universe itself when such a warp bubble is created. Seems to me it would result in a singularity or something even worse. ;)

The speed of light should really be taught as the speed of causality. The speed of light is an incidental stenographer of the speed of causality.

@CoolWorldsLab

2 жыл бұрын

Yes! It’s not the right name but sadly we’re sort of stuck with it

@alecdacyczyn

2 жыл бұрын

Let's adopt Asimov's interpretation and say that light, gravity, and causality all travel at "Celeritas", a special speed that is an innate property of the universe.

@apainting4537

2 жыл бұрын

Tay wtf you got some varied interests. Taught me economics and now you're prepping a physics song?

@w0tch

2 жыл бұрын

And the speed of light is a top limit in the Lorentz transformation of spacetime diagrams that cannot be exceeded ! Using FTL info transmission breaks the maths of the spacetime diagrams (square roots of negative numbers), so the conclusions of this videos do not stand :)

@stewiesaidthat

2 жыл бұрын

@@CoolWorldsLab light travels faster than sound and doesn't break casuality for a blind man. Light travelling faster than light doesn't break casuality either. The universe operates on universal time, not local time. If you want to do a video about casuality, do one on the two different speeds of sound on Mars.

14:54 Dont you have to start at the space line of the STL space axis like you did in your world time example? Vega wouldnt receive the warning from the ships perspective at this moment. It would know about the event, once the ship lands on vega. Wich makes sense since more time has passed in both systems. And why would the message travel backwards in time but forward in space once the STL ship responds?

If you’ve ever listened to people’s near death experiences they’ll often times describe going to the light and then time no longer being a concept, as if everything is happening all at once.

@SkullyYouTube

4 ай бұрын

it explains why some "religions" say that our soul/consciousness is not "time-bound" or "space-bound", that it actually is a 4D thing actually trapped in a 3D body

@davsaltego

3 ай бұрын

Being high sometimes feels the same way. Maybe what both have in common is the properties of our mind that create the passage of time-creates the arrow. Because without our minds, is there an arrow?

Attempting the impossible almost always brings great discoveries even if it's not the one that is being sought

@MyKharli

2 жыл бұрын

Also leads you to fall off a cliff

@allenhonaker4107

2 жыл бұрын

@@MyKharli As a former rock climber I can tell you that as long as you are properly belayed go for it

@brokedolph

2 жыл бұрын

what even is an "impossibility?"

@TechExpanse

2 жыл бұрын

well in this case there is nothing to attempt, speed of light is fundamental part of spacetime .. going faster follows same logic as lifting chair up while sitting on it

@greenpumpkin172

2 жыл бұрын

18:44 This paradox will never happen. Thats the point, it will always be a closed loop. Similar to Delayed Choise Quantum Eraser experiment. It is the same thing... I know it is hard to understand, but yeah, FTL is possible, time travel as well and it does not lead to paradoxes ! U can imagine it as those events are linked in time and they always happen (forming a closed loop), no matter what you will do between those events. Also on quantum level in very short times, the causality breaks down... You can apply this to whole universe. And yes, time paradoxes are not possible :-) as Steven Hawking said. Also, what do you think about the UAPs ? I would say they use FTL travel without a problem and some nonsence about causality does not bother them :D.

It would've been useful to see that diagram from the STL ship's perspective, since it's not very clear why their reply travels at that angle

@isavedtheuniverse

Жыл бұрын

I also agree, although after a few times of piecing it together, I think this is what I came to. Under relativity, the speed of light is constant, therefore is that 45º line between the vertical of time and horizontal of space. Any observer is always going to have their own time line vertical and their own space line horizontal and the null line or speed of light line halfway between them at a 45º angle. So as someone else speeds up on your graph, their line will tip towards the right. This is their time line but their space line is also tipping up, both getting closer and closer to the null or speed of light line. I think it gets easier to comprehend once he switches over to instantaneous messages because those are parallel to the space line. So its easy to see why a line leaving the STL ship leaves parallel to what its space line is. I think the part that I don't understand is why one instantaneous or FTL message gets placed parallel to the earth's space line and yet the return message from the STL ship is parallel to its own space line. So I get the math of why the line is that angle, but I don't understand why 2 instantaneous messages don't have lines that are themselves parallel.

@danielebowman

Жыл бұрын

Indeed. Given the diagram, isn't their reply being sent backwards? Surely their message to earth would be in a diagonal going up and left. This is because time is going forward so the path of any action should always point upwards except the instantaneous lines which are flat ? (In an angle that mirrors the light speed line).

@MagicScorpio

Жыл бұрын

@@danielebowman this is exactly what I’m having trouble with. Their time line is going upward, so sending or receiving should be higher from where they started. I wish I understood this better, but the paradox didn’t make sense on that graph, or could have been drawn better. I don’t know why it’s angled down.

@danielebowman

Жыл бұрын

@@MagicScorpio Time should always go up on the context of the graph. The author made a bad mistake.

@dansmith4132

Жыл бұрын

@@MagicScorpio I think it's easiest to see it when you actually tip the graph to the angle of the STL ship's space angle. The time access for the ship was shown moving up and to the left through the graph. The STL ship using FTL communication back to Earth sends on it's space angle, which intersects with Earth in the past.

Phenomenal job of explanation & presenting in a minimalistic way 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

15:38 Okay but how does that sequence of events actually manifest itself from the crew's perspective? They won't "know" that Vega received the warning before X even happens, and by the time they arrive at Vega it will be _after_ the warning was received, just as it is for Veg's timeline. And they are now _on_ Vega's timeline at that point so it shouldn't matter..?

@Enthai21

Ай бұрын

I think it's because in that scenario at 15:38 the crew inside the STL ship is not interfering yet like he illustrates later on, so yeah if the crew doesn't interfere then nothing of consequence will happen, however in their reality the chronological timeline of events is already messed up even though they don't know it. Like if they continue their journey normally then nothing will seem out of order, however during their journey some things happened that they don't know of that broke causality

The direction of the return ftl message from the stl ship is unexplained here. I would love to know the reason for that, seems like the most important part. Wonderful vid, very informative and easy to follow!

@ApostleO

8 ай бұрын

It had something to do with the local reference time line being tilted, which also felt unexplained. If the diagram is drawn based on Earth's perspective, or even some sort of objective third perspective, why would the timeline tilt at all?

@tbunreall

7 ай бұрын

It's because for the message to be ftl, it has to be under the yellow line, if the message went up, it would go over the yellow line and thus not be ftl

@dennis-o

6 ай бұрын

@tbunreall is correct. To elaborate, we’ve measured the speed of light to be the same no matter what your velocity is, i.e., the yellow line stays put for both Earth and the ship. The only way that can happen is by time slowing down as your velocity increases. So from Earth’s perspective, time has slowed down for the ship and vice versa. That is equivalent to saying that if two objects are traveling at different velocities, their time axes will be different. Now to get the space axis, you have to flip the time axis around the yellow line. So their space axes will also be different. An instantaneous message has to be parallel to the space axis of the sender. The instantaneous message from Earth to the ship is parallel to Earth’s space axis while the *_RETURN_* message is parallel to the _ship’s_ space axis. Anything slower that’s still FTL has to have an angle between the yellow line and the space axis of the sender. Please let me know if anything is unclear, it helps me learn too!

@badrkhan

6 ай бұрын

This video is incorrect and gives wrong conclusion. Draw a 45 degree from STL towards earth. You can still do FTL lower than 45 degrees but it will be above the moment when original transmission was made. Logic in this video is false

@TonyVallad

6 ай бұрын

I agree it's the most important part of the video and yet it doesn't seem correct to me either. It really does need an explaination because the whole video depends on it ! xD And no offence but the replies you got don't convince me. Hoping for a better representation ;)

you can't turn ftl message wordline to stl ship frame refference(because ftl message is still absolute to the universe time-space frame) so when stl ship receive message its reply is inverse to receiving line so reply is receive at earth after. And that dashed line of stl is only time reference for in-ship time so it is moveable(alongside time axis) and that way, where it cross ship's full line is when something happens in crew perspective time. So when they arrive on vega and get the information from ftl ship it appears on dashed line on crossing with vega's full line. So no paradox occure!!

@stanjohns348

3 ай бұрын

Am always amazed at how confidently people are wrong. Especially in science and medicine. But hey, I’m the same way.

you didn't explain why the STL ships signal would go back in time.

I like how he predicted every point where I got confused or skeptical and delivered a good answer without me ever asking anything lol About the talk in the end about exploration without FTL, it was quite poetic, but individuals can actually experience it one day and travel to many stars, considering there is no barrier in the laws of physics that say living things can't last for billions of years. More than that, the way in which time is perceived can be drastically modified, where a million years travel can feel like a mere hour. Just imagining human-like consciousness in a digital substrate is enough to see how this things are possible

@cassandravonpohl942

2 жыл бұрын

Same. I'd have a question pop into my head, and two sentences later, he was explaining it!

@toromontana8290

2 жыл бұрын

One problem. The Universe really doesn't like computers either.

@youtubeforcinghandlessucks

2 жыл бұрын

Even if we stay our squishy selves, we can cross our galaxy in under 25 years (traveler's time, because of time dilation) going at a comfortable 1g halfway and decelerating at the same rate the other half. Even going to the edge of the universe will take under 50 years in these conditions. Maintaining that acceleration that long will require insane amounts of fuel of course (i.e. the annihilation of 600 million tons of matter and antimatter as fuel for crossing the galaxy for a 100kg payload), but it's nice to think it's "possible" in some ways.

@pinnacleexpress420

2 жыл бұрын

you must not have even tried to look at the "graphs"

@valkyriefrost5301

2 жыл бұрын

Looking at my cat, I cannot really fathom what she is truly thinking as she stares back at me. With this in mind, I truly have no way to imagine what a "human-like consciousness in a digital substrate" would ever feel like. I suppose it would be as alien as comparing my consciousness to that of an ant...

Have you done the math with the actual Lorentz Transform equations? In the case of instantaneous travel, there are 3 events that occur at different locations and different times according to the two different reference frames. A message is sent from Earth the the STL ship and then back to earth both via FTL. It is absolutely vital in this situation to define the first two controls: The Earth time + location the message was sent, and the STL time + location the message was received. Once these controls are put in place, the diagram as shown no longer works (FTL breaks the rules of this diagram). However, the underlying Lorentz Transform equations are still valid. You will find an observer at a distance can witness events that are out of place, but NO message can be sent by any means before the origin, even with instantaneous travel! I have done the math several times with the correct controls, and Sabine Hossenfelder released a video that agrees with this finding.

@mzrmozar

8 ай бұрын

can you send the video..... i think the dashed line of the STL space ship is wrong

@Atomicsuplex

8 ай бұрын

​@@mzrmozarah, I thought so too. . . But assumed I was missing some important information.

@johnks6733

7 ай бұрын

If the message to earth was instantaneous, then wouldn’t the space line for that message be horizontal & arrive in earths future This makes me think that the space line of a FTL massage to earth would take longer than an instantaneous message, which makes me believe that the space line would be upwards rather than downwards as shown in the diagram and arrive in the future.

@andrewguitarnoob8440

7 ай бұрын

I’m not a physicist to check the math, but had the same conceptual concerns. I don’t see why it would point back in Earth’s relative time.

@okaythisisfuckingrid

7 ай бұрын

exactly@@mzrmozar , @user-wl2px9on8l

By far best explanation compared to all others. Great job. Could be perfect if at 14:30 (most frequently played viewer likely replying because it was a bit confusing) if you just explained more why the 45 degree flip dotted line for STL rather than mention to refer to a previous video for that understanding. Still good job.

Great vid bud, very much enjoyed it! 👍

Your written script and voice work is top class, man. Documentary level for me, especially for a subject matter that I find intriguing.

I would posit that it is possible it's just all about frames of reference. You would not be able to affect anything in your personal referential past. You could observe it, but not change it. I think the diagram is off in using the frame of reference for the STL ship as the "speed" of their FTL message would be significantly "faster" than the message from Earth. The correction for this means that their message would NOT arrive prior to that of the sent message. (On the graph their message would appear to them (could they see the graph) to curve upward past the message point. Using star trek terms if you fired off a message at warp 1 its not going to travel at (warp 1 + full impulse) simply because you were going at full impulse. Basically this graph "forgets" that for all of the pink FTL lines, the straight "space" line is not straight. For them it is a curve, so if you factor that in and the flatten it back out it shouldn't violate causality. I am probably wrong somewhere, it's 2 in the morning...

@GAURAV_RANA_

Жыл бұрын

Ah thank you. I was thinking that this seems very off but couldn't put it in words.

@Johninatorful

Жыл бұрын

It doesn't make sense to me that the stl ship exists on a line based on the space axis...

@Snow_Fire_Flame

Жыл бұрын

Saying that "the line is not straight" and implying it should be straight is basically equivalent to saying "relativity is incorrect." Now, you can have FTL travel AND causality if you scrap relativity, but unfortunately, relativity looks highly likely to be true based on our current assumptions. And relativity means those strange angled paths through spacetime, where by going really fast in a frame of reference time will pass differently (seems to be experimentally true for satellites with clocks in orbit!). (And yes, I know that the video seems to claim that relativity isn't the problem, but... it totally is, I disagree with the video on that.)

@cptblood1981

Жыл бұрын

@Peter Ingraham no, what I am implying is that this graph is uses a straight line (thus treating it linearly) vis a vis space whereas the whole concept discussed involves bending or folding space. I do not think relativity presents a problem as I have discussed as I believe it sorts itself put if you discount momentum and the standard rules that apply to speed and motion as you would have to when folding space itself. Similarly to how the rules change when you approach a black hole they would change when you folded space. As such, this graph assumes that if they are traveling at (using star trek references just for ease of discussion) warp 1 and fire of a beacon at warp 1 it will be traveling at warp 2. It will not. I posit that folded space travel is a definite limiter such that you cannot increase the speed simply by initiating a launch from something going at speed. As such it would APPEAR to curve away from the perspective of the FTL ships view on the graph IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELATIVITY. Whereas it's not actually making a curve on the graph because the graph treats space as linear and FTL travel does not.

@garconek712

Жыл бұрын

It may be right or wrong but the fact that it is showing 4 dimensional space-time on a 2 dimensional graph, it's like trying to show a 3D cube in 1D, it's simply not doable or at least it seems to me. From what I learned we are able to show a cube on a 2d sheet just because we are able to visualize the depth of the image and draw a "line behind the lines" that how we create 3d in short we are able to circumvent one dimension by imagining it so 4d can be shown in 3d, 3D in 2D, 2D in 1D, jumping from 4D to 2D doesn't make much sense and many things may not match like they should. That I think is the main problem here that there is just no way that he could show what he wants on 2D sheet. Rather than FTL I am more convinced by Einstein-Rosen bridges theory beacuse from what I know they go through additional 4th dimension of space there for not creating this paradox if its true. (sorry for mistakes if any english isn't my first language)

What if the acceleration after light speed rather than adds more speed causes a bigger time dilation that preserves causality by from your prespective making everyone elses time pass faster?

I have a few questions: 1. Why is the instantaneous message from the STL ship parallel to the ship's space axis and not perpendicular to its time axis? Because in this frame those two are not the same. A line perpendicular to the ship's time axis would arrive at the Earth after it sent the first message, thus not breaking causality. 2. Furthermore, why doesn't the message travel perpendicular/parallel based on the "global" space/time axes? I get this might cause some issues as relativity shows that it is essentially impossible to define a true inertial reference frame, but the choice of which axes we draw the line based on seems a bit arbitrary to me. Why do we use the sender's frame and not the receiver's? In the Earth reference frame, wouldn't the reply arrive immediately after the first message was sent? 3. Light-speed will always correspond to a line with 45 degree slope yes? Because if so, drawing a line at 45 degrees from a point on the ship's worldline back to the Earth worldline shows that the light arrives after an instantaneous message sent by Earth. Therefore, there is a region in-between when Earth sent the message and when light from the ship returns back to Earth. Can't a message from the ship follow a trajectory such that it arrives in between those two events? Then the message would travel FTL, but it still would not break causality. 4. What if we consider the FTL ship is communicating with Vega instead? Let's say Vega sends an instantaneous message to the ship as it is on its way there. If we assume that the instantaneous message does travel parallel to the ship's space axis as described in the video (and not perpendicular to the time axis as I asked about above), then a message traveling instantaneously from the ship would arrive after the initial message from Vega, thus not breaking causality. In fact this would also be true for any ship traveling toward the observer it's communicating with. What's up with this? Does space/time behave differently in different directions? Is it not possible then that the ship could then send an FTL message in the forward spatial direction but not the backward? (However, interestingly we now have the opposite problem wrt my first question. A message traveling perpendicular to the ship's time axis would go back in time!)

@kudr66

2 жыл бұрын

BINGO! IMO your point 2. is the solution. He draws the message sent back in ship's frame and shows us that message arrives too early, but in Earth's frame. The line of the Message sent back has to be: a) either drawn in the Earth's frame b) or transformed back to the earth's frame Both a) and b) are in fact identical and don't show any paradox.

@johannageisel5390

2 жыл бұрын

Huh, yes, that's weird. One would assume that observed from Earth, the FTL message arrives at the ship instantaneously (perpendicular to Earth's time axis), goes with the ship's time axis for a short little bit (the time that's passing while they prepare the answer) and then the instantaneous return message ALSO moves perpendicular to Earth's time axis. It would then arrive at Earth after a different timespan has passed than has passed for observers on the ship, but still AFTER the sending of the original message. Very confused.

@thekrymax

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks you summarised my questions, i see some issues in this video. I dont think that relativity works that way. Why should the message frome the stl ship move backwards, because of ftl? It could and would just going forward on the time line in a smaller angle. You can't just draw the vector in the opposite direction against universal time direction, because of the law of entropy.

@AverageAlien

2 жыл бұрын

1. Because it's not travelling through time alone. The message is travelling through space, which means it has to sacrifice speed through time

@ZacharyBurr

2 жыл бұрын

@@AverageAlien but the message from earth travels perpendicular to the Earth's time axis. Which means it doesn't move through time at all, which is the definition of instantaneous. It just happens that for the Earth the space and time axes are perpendicular, so perpendicular to the time axis is parallel to the space axis.

Well this is the best explanation I've seen that explains why FTL will break causality. Every other show or channel just mentions that a violation will happen; you actually break it down and explain it clearly step-by-step. Amazing. You deserve a much wider audience. I will start referring others to your channel.

@CoolWorldsLab

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks! This is a really challenging topic to explain in understandable terms

@vferrei2

2 жыл бұрын

Do you have any of those other shows or channels? I’ve been looking for anything that explains well why FTL would break causality, and I didn’t find this video to be any better than any other one I’ve seen. This video still doesn’t make any sense to me. But I’m hoping I can find one that does.

@Twister_with_your_sister

2 жыл бұрын

Blames "every other show or channel" for "paying lip service" Makes whole comment that "pays lip service" to this channel Speaks in hyperboles and hypocrisies. Well done 👏...👏...👏...

@Ketchup.Bottle.Fart.Noise.

2 жыл бұрын

@@vferrei2 Destiny Astrum Hybrid Librarian Sabine Hossenfelder SciShow Space Scott Manley SEA Strange Mysteries The above listed channels all have at least 1 episode on this very same topic. Also, you could look up lectures by Prof. Brian Cox , or Prof. Brian Greene. Brian Greene has very good lectures with power point, and models that will break this down much more thoroughly, and with visuals for you. In fact, some parts of this video, are taken directly from Brian Greene's lecture and power point. This channel even used his explanation word for word in some parts. You could start there TBH (If you don't mind lectures) @gtd is really just paying "lip service" himself to this channel, by devaluing "every other channel" . Especially since, as I said, some parts of this specific video are taken directly from Brian Greene's power point. Hope that gives you a good start.

@angrymokyuu9475

2 жыл бұрын

@@vferrei2 The simplest possible explanation I can give is that relativity mandates superluminal things go back in time(just as it demands you experience "less" and "less" time the closer you get to light speed and that anything at light speed experiences no time at all). This might not seem like a problem at first, but if you were to then travel back to where you started, you would arrive before you left(thus violating causality).

If a system like an FTL communication system did exist, you could probably avoid the paradoxes by having unique communication "channels" where only certain references frames could interact with it, or just not have FTL communication between STL ships and main communication systems. You could also probably analyse what ships are travelling based on missions you're running and you could analyse possible paradox creating courses of events and avoid them. What would happen if you ran the same thought experiment but with an FTL ship?

Great video and it really got me thinking! There is one thing I don't understand though, and would love to hear an explanation from a physics student or a professor. Which is this: how can the STL ship send an FTL message to Earth's past? This is how my non-physics brain perceives the situation and what I (think I) understand: 1) Time is relative for both the Earth and the STL ship 2) Time on STL ship ticks slower since they're moving closer to the speed of light. They are moving towards Vega and away from Earth and the supernova. Hence it makes sense why the first thing they see is "Vega receives message" in the previous diagram. 3) While time has slowed down for the FTL ship, time ticks forward for those on Earth. 4) Now let's assume that 1000 years have passed since STL ship has left Earth and that's when the supernova explosion was detected by Earthlings. This means when Earth sends the FTL message and STL ship receives it instantly, 1000 years might have passed on earth while only 1 year might have passed for the STL ship's crew, depending on their speed. So far so good. (5) And this is the bit that messes with my head. When STL crew responds to that message with another instantaneous FTL message to Earth - how is that going in the past exactly? 1000+ years have already passed on Earth when the STL ship responds instantaneously, meaning Earthlings should've received the response AFTER they sent the message in the first place. While Earth might looks like it's stuck in the past to the STL ship, in reality time has progressed a lot further than it did on the ship. The Earth itself is not in the past. Thanks in advance for your help. I hope someone can clearly explain how STL's FTL message ends up in Earth's past (with examples if possible). Thanks for your patience with my limited knowledge of physics!

@haydenscholze7452

5 ай бұрын

Based on the way you described it I don't think causality is broken, because you didn't send the message through time into the past. I think of it like this, data/matter could be transferred faster than the speed of light, but the moment it arrives at its destination it is subject to that space's flow of time. So in your example when the message is received and then the crew processes it and sends their reply, far more time has passed on earth than in the ship. This would mean that the message couldn't travel back in time, because even if it arrives instantly, it is not processed instantly. Essentially FTL travel and communication would affect time and space differently. So you can send messages to points in space faster than light but not time. If you could communicate faster than light through space-time then you would break causality. Essentially the FTL ship is more accurately isolating your flow of time to increase your moment through space. So you move through time slowly but through space faster. By the time you arrive at your location the time warping breaks and you enter the normal flow of time at a different point in space. In essence, you don't move through time and space equally. This would prevent time travel to the past but allow for FTL communication and Travel. I think, Damm this is taxing on the brain.

@stanjohns348

3 ай бұрын

That’s a nice try. I applaud your brain work. But the physics you grapple with are well known and understood, mostly in Einsteins Theory of Special Relativity. If you have a basic, non mathematical, grasp of that it is much more clear.

@utubedarko

3 ай бұрын

Thank you. I know it's well established, I just don't understand it. If you do understand it, I'd appreciate an explanation.

@utubedarko

3 ай бұрын

@@stanjohns348 ☝️

@stanjohns348

2 ай бұрын

Hi darko, if a message beam were to travel faster than the speed of light, time would reverse due to Time Dilation (Google or GPT Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity)

Best explanation of time travel paradoxes I've seen in a long time, thank you for this! I feel so amazed that on one hand we can theorize and explain stuff like this yet a lot of people will still doubt that we ever went to the moon.

@kritizismmusics9737

Жыл бұрын

For sure. It's like a hideo Kojima metal gear story lmao he'd right a story about some shit like this. Make a good one crew falls out time

@joehopkins6724

Жыл бұрын

I don't think we went to the Moon, too many variables and orbit and where it's going to be and how do we get there if you look at Apollo 13 movie with Tom Hanks they talk about the 8-ball bubble how do you get orientation when you're not on Earth

@mowvu5380

Жыл бұрын

@@joehopkins6724 dude, there's a decent shout for never breaching LEO. but your argument is instantly null and void when you're bringing up hollywood movies lol.

@ayaankhan-vt5jy

Жыл бұрын

Yeah man. I love this guy

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

There are still people who think the earth is flat. Even though the first circumnavigation of the earth was completed 500 years ago. The problem with time travel is if it were conventionally possible we should already have had evidence of time travelers and it would be very easy for anyone from the future to prove it. From a theoretical standpoint, M-theory is the only possible solution to the paradox I can imagine but still seems impossible to prove regardless.

It’s actually really easy to go faster than light, just make a big ball of light and attach a couple rockets to it

@lukesgoldies

Жыл бұрын

Genius

@bhedgepig9653

Жыл бұрын

I try to do it by hitting the light switch while simultaneously jumping under the ceiling light bulb fitting. after 9 years practice it feels like I'm about there. also I got those 9 years back just because its kind of magnets

@nicholusshadursky9512

Жыл бұрын

I actually just imagined myself as light going around the world in an instant and turns out I succeeded. It felt instantaneous and there were no measurable details of the event, but it was still awesome because it happened.

@mmheti

Жыл бұрын

I have an even cheaper option. Get a mirror, then walk towards it. You are trevelling in the opposite direction the fotons reflected from the mirror, so you are travelling FTL from that light's point of view.

@bhedgepig9653

Жыл бұрын

​@@mmhetikzread.info/dash/bejne/jKit2qyMd7CZqJM.html

At 13:37 you started the STL line/journey before the Earth sees the Supernova X event, This means that it is absolutely normal for them to learn that Vega received the warning becasue they started from Earth before seeing the event. They will learn about Vega receiving warning only after they reach Vega and it is an event of the past for the ones on STL line when they reach Vega. For example: 1. I started from my home to office. 2. Burglars break into my home. 3. My neighbor makes a phone call to me about the event 4. I learn that this happened This doesn't mean I learnt about it before happening. It means that I started from home before it happened.

I'm confused. Why did the STL ship start at the bottom of the Earth's time axis instead of starting at the point when Earth saw X?

@riichobamin7612

4 ай бұрын

Same.

@iLikeMelk

Ай бұрын

Because it left the planet before Earth observed the supernova. And probably to keep the visualization/graph relatively condensed for the sake of the video lol

Surely the ‘paradox’ stems from the problem that your graphical representation ‘calculated’ the outgoing ‘instantaneous transmission’ from the Earth’s frame-of-reference, but the incoming ‘instantaneous transmission’ from the STL ship’s frame-of-reference. I would have thought that two instantaneous transmissions from A to B and from B to A (both sent at exactly the same time) have to follow the same path through space-time when modelled in a single frame-of-reference. Which would mean that both transmissions lines should either be parallel to the Earth’s time axis or to the STL ship’s time axis, depending upon which observer is measuring the path through space-time.

@SagarThorat

Жыл бұрын

This makes sense. It’s feels like just that the STL observers may “think” that there message to earth has been received by earth before it was sent. But from earths perspective, in Earths frame of reference, Earth to STL and STL to Earth will be instantaneous. So probably like as earth receives response as soon as it sends!! Which now that I think of it, is actually close to breaking casualty.

@davemoore5222

Жыл бұрын

@@SagarThorat Breaking causality? Assuming that it were possible to travel at twice the speed of light (2c, and without relativistic effects) to a star that was 100 light years away. You arrive there 50 years after you left Earth. You make an instantaneous transmission back to Earth. That transmission is received 50 years after you left. Causality remains. As the travel time tends to zero, the required multiplier of c tends to infinity. Causality cannot be broken that way…

@rhapsody4025

Жыл бұрын

exactly you are right ! ihad the exact same doubt ! thanks for your comment ! so no casualityy is broken. right?

@cavemanraveman1

Жыл бұрын

I'm pretty mixed up here but doesn't the idea of instantaneous transmission inherently violate relativity? The paradox is in trying to reconcile these two concepts.

@davemoore5222

Жыл бұрын

@@cavemanraveman1 Yes. Trying to explain that nothing can move faster than the speed of light by using a ‘sub-light’ spacecraft and a transmission travelling at ‘c times infinity’ (an instantaneous transmission) is, I believe, where the problem lies (Too many uncontrollable variables). As far as I was aware, none of the ‘Warp-drive’ hypotheses allow a spaceship inside a ‘Warp Bubble’ to send any transmission (information) to the space time outside of the Bubble, and no one outside would be able to transmit in. If the Bubble was collapsed, the spacecraft would then be exactly as it was inside the Bubble and not moving relative to it’s starting point (remember that with all of the current Warp-drive hypotheses it is the Bubble of ‘Space Time’ that is moving, and not the ship). If the ship is not moving relative to the Earth, they are both in the same frame-of-reference and hypothetical instantaneous transmissions would not destroy causality anymore than saying “good morning” to a co-worker standing next to you would. Also: Imagine three galaxies in a straight line, A, M (our Milky Way) and B. A is to the left of M and B is to the right, such that A & B are receding at 0.75c in opposite directions, due to the universe’s expansion of Space-Time. How fast are they receding from each other? Remember, General Relativity puts a speed limit on moving things, but not on the expansion of Space-Time itself. These two galaxies are not actually ‘moving’ with respect to each other (even though they might move relative to their local group by gravitational attraction) - it is Space-Time that is expanding that is causing the increasing separation. Also, as A will never be able to view (and hence know of the existence of) B and vice-versa, there can be no causality problems (people rarely send messages to others that they are unaware of).

doesn’t this assume the FTL system functions within and is warped by spacetime? if it were to be outside it, like a wormhole, would it not be a line that moves up at 45 degrees for some time, jumps over, and then 45 degrees again until hitting the other stationary observer? it seems to me it would create a light cone that has multiple center points, but with some shift up to account for some non-zero distance to travel to get there. this seems like it would be much better behaved, but i’m not a theoretical physicist.

At 18:09, why is it that the ftl message from Earth still goes up at an angle on the diagram (seeming to go forward in time), while the ftl message from the ship goes down (seeming to go backward in time)? Does it change from one ref frame to another, whether a ftl path goes forward or backward in time?

tbf, being able to just go the speed of light or near it would be pretty good too, it might not make us able to travel to other galaxies, but the nearest stars get as low as 4 light years away, being able to get to another solar system in a lifetime would still be game changing

I have an affinity for how this gentleman explain science jargon in elucidating terms to the lay person and makes it also both profoundly educational and entertaining. He's never ever boring.

If you moved instantaneously from earth to vega, and then told someone - to instantaneously go to earth, and tell them to shut off the instantaneous transporter, they'd arrive essentially the moment you left. That's significantly faster than light speed and there's no causal issue. The whole reason the space line is the time line reflected by the null line is Because we assume the fastest speed is the speed of light, that's an emergent property of the assumption, and any relativistic effects assumed to also be reflected are affected by that original assumption. If you bend or break space itself to accomplish moving subluminally from point A to point B in a shorter time than light could travel that's fine - if difficult, but it wouldn't allow for paradoxes to arise, you're moving slower than light in your own reference frame, from the reference frame of your starting and ending locations - it's as if they are closer not as if you are faster. If you traveled through space more traditionally as you got close to the speed of light your physical and nuclear properties slow until you reach light speed and they halt, you couldn't perceive a message arriving at your location at this speed and even if you kept a record it wouldn't be reacted to until you reached your destination, upon which even sending the message back at the same absurd speed wouldn't arrive back to earth before it was sent. There's also the issue of spreading out if you behave like a wave at that speed, becoming red shifted as space expands with you moving through it, and if fermions and bosons behave the same way through space at those speeds - you might arrive out of sync in a catastrophic way, unless your beginning and ending points are specific distances away - regardless of how long it took you'd eventually find such a place, and even then they'd need some marvel of engineering to slow you down or put you back together once you arrived. Your mechanical interactions would stop entirely as two objects moving in the same direction at the same speed never collide, no nuclear interaction beyond perhaps making you more or less energetic in difficult to predict ways, the magnetic components would just cycle as you travel hopefully arriving in the right orientation and not becoming a tangled mess. If Everything lined up Just right, you'd arrive after experiencing no time pass yourself, it feels instantaneous to the traveler, and that's only moving At the speed of light. If you moved somehow faster - which is as absurd as constructing a machine Out of photons to propel photons faster - you can't experience less than nothing happening.

@zerepmoto4402

Жыл бұрын

Very well written, thank you.

@joannefitzpatrick992

Жыл бұрын

Maybe maybe travel at the speed of thought or smell?

@possum4403

Жыл бұрын

You did not need the other two large paragraphs. Your first paragraph is correct in all respects, well done Human.

@insertnamehere2746

15 күн бұрын

I agree with this comment far more than I do with the dude making the non-sensica graphs in the video

What a fantastic misunderstanding of the subject. Glorious video, classic KZread.

19:19 What you conclude here is that there is a paradox at the earth, so then you must draw all lines in the reference frame of the earth. Then there is no paradox. You can also draw all lines from the reference frame of the STL ship, then there is no paradox too. The fault is the mixing of reference frames.

@Delibro

7 ай бұрын

It is right that the pink arrows can be drawn horizontally and diagonal, both is valid, but observed from earth both arrows must be horizontally, whereas observed from STL both must be diagonal.

@LineOfThy

5 ай бұрын

All reference frames are equally important meaning if one frame receives a paradox, you’ve broken the universe.

@Delibro

5 ай бұрын

@@LineOfThy Yea that's right, but as I wrote no frame receives a paradox, its consistent from either way.

The problem with this is that the perceived time, perspective of the relative time, for the STL ship does not change the physical location of the ship. The STLs reception of the message isn't at a time, it is at a location. In the STLs location, there is a perception of time, but that does not change its absolute location. There is no paradox. Additionally, STLs space and time axis are reversed in this diagram, which is from the earth's perspective. Time relative to the STL will pass slower than time relative to the earth as it is moving incredibly fast through space relative to earth. No expert here but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the proposed diagram is incorrect. Even if perspective changes and time passes relatively differently for the STL, the location doesn't. There is always an absolute location for a given object affected by time.

@jasonhicks7564

Жыл бұрын

What you're failing to acknowledge is FYL... the message that gets sent back returns horizontally and very frustrated. Fusion crust and burnt moon pies are heavily encoded in this message. At perfect instantaneous FTL messaging actually looses the T and quickly adopts Y instead , which altered all "C"/ Light Speed lines 75degrees. FYL "fuck your life"

@jasonhicks7564

Жыл бұрын

true story i have proof FYL

@jimm9776

Жыл бұрын

That seems correct to me, as their response would originate at the mark but necessarily be traveling \ rather than /... I feel like I just wasted 25 minutes.

@J3loodT4lon

Жыл бұрын

Not to mention everything else on the diagram moves bottom to top along the time axis, yet he drew the response from the ship top to bottom? Lmao he broke his own diagram and is apparently too clueless to even notice it.

@RiskyComment

Жыл бұрын

@@J3loodT4lon I think it's just very poorly explained why the line is drawn like that. I'm not an expert, but what I understand is that as you move very quickly in your space ship, time moves very slowly in relationship to earth. Say every 1 day you experience, 3 days on earth pass: time is essentially out of sync between the two places. Now Earth is in the future and knows about events (like the supernova) which to you have not happened yet. But with information going less than the speed of light, you could never be informed of the supernova by earth before it happens because by the time the information reached you, it would have happened. However, with FTL travel (let's say instant) 3-days-later Earth can now inform you about events which have not yet happened. If you then returned an instant FTP message, the information is now synced to your timeframe where only 1 day has past and the supernova has not occurred, and it would reach an earth where also the super nova has not occurred, informing them of future events. I think this idea is where the wrong looking line is coming from: information is essentially jumping from one timeframe to another. It's going from a place where 3 days have past to a place where 1 day has past.

From the messages point of view, even if it was travelling instantly it still has to travel "through" all the light emitted from the destination. If its destination is 1 light year away, while travelling towards it it will see the destination experiencing a full year. If it then turns around and looks at the source it will be a year in the past from when it left but if it immediately heads back it will not arrive a year in the past it will see the source experiencing a year in an instant and arrive at or after the time it originally left.

@norbertlauret8119

2 жыл бұрын

Well, you're describing what would happen to a message travelling at the speed of light. The whole point of the video is to look what would happen IF the message was travelling FTL, or intantaneously in the part you're refering to... Imagine a message that would be sent right into a wormhole and directly to the ship. It wouldn't have to travel "through" anything.

@Vort_tm

2 жыл бұрын

@@norbertlauret8119 The message doesn't move at all, it just moves the universe around it.

@Jacxel

2 жыл бұрын

@@norbertlauret8119 no, I was describing instantaneous travel. If the message was moving at the speed of light it would have taken a year to get to the destination. During that year it would see the destination experience 2 years worth of time, I.e its time moving at double speed, and then it arrived and turned around and looked at its source it would see it still at the same time when it left. If a wormhole goes to the past then it breaks causality naturally but that's a completely different thing and makes the graphs in the video irrelevant anyway.

@norbertlauret8119

2 жыл бұрын

@@Jacxel Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't understand what you actually meant by "travelling through" and "see the destination experiencing x year(s)". My bad.

Don’t take this wrong but the style of this video’s cover is really like 3b1b which is one of my favorite channel, and also thank you to make contribution to spread the knowledge and explaining everything to us😂

I’m struggling to understand why you placed the space axis for the STL ship, if we created a new chart with just them line it would be well below the null line no? It was at a very acute angle

That was awesome,, answered a question I've had a difficulty conceiving for so long.. it now makes sense and as always opens the door to more questions. Great video and thankyou very much..

Edit: Cleaned it up. As others have mentioned, the only constraint necessary for a vector to have a >= T (Time) value. The problem is that T and S axis are different for different frames of reference. The one frame can have a vector with positive T (maintaining a dot product == C), but be a negative T vector (or dot product C) when translated to a different frame of reference. I think then the problem, all vectors having a positive T (and vector dot product == C), would be solved if there was an absolute frame of reference. A possibility frame would be the expansion of the universe. If all vectors are then constrained to having a positive T (and dot product of C) on the universal frame, regardless if a vector from one frame translates into a negative T vector in another. The universal constraints would then not be violated. That also means that "time travel" would really only be within a local frame, not the universal frame. Local paradoxes resolve on the Universal Frame. I think that makes sense. And hopefully I used the correct terms; my math is old and shaky. IANAP (I am not a physicist)

@amorencinteroph3428

Жыл бұрын

A universal frame by it's nature would disproof relativity, however. But many scifi shows do use it as as explanation for why FTL is possible but doesn't break causality (hyperspace, subspace, etc). There's an adage in scifi circles, "Relativity, Causality, FTL, pick any two".

@PukitisLaunitis

Жыл бұрын

Hyperspace does not break causality, it just abolishes relativity. Even Hawking once admitted that in sci fi interstellar travel can be made fast if the author so wishes, as FTL travel would allow an astronaut to travel many times in his career instead of max. 1 expedition. And even if that cancels relativity, so be it. By the way, even Herbert Wells' Time Machine does not break causality. A 19th century man goes to the future, sees it and comes back to tell the story, no causality broken. Some sci fi authors do break causality to create intellectual puzzles (Harry Harrison's Time Machine Saga or William Tenn's Discovery of Morniel Mathaway) but that is a different theme altogether.

@PukitisLaunitis

Жыл бұрын

FTL does not break causality, at least in sci fi. In fact, hardly any sci fi writer breaks causality, except for a couple of authors breaking causality as intellectual puzzle (Harry Harrison's Time Machine Saga or William Tenn's Discovery of Morniel Mathaway - by the way, none of them has anything to do with space travel). FTL just abolishes relativity. Edmond Hamilton, Isaaac Asimov, you name it.

why is the STL ship's reply world line travels backwards in time?

@insertnamehere2746

15 күн бұрын

Because this guy likes to break his own rules

Does anyone have a link/article/something to further explain why the space axis is the reflection of the time axis over 45 degree (c-line)?

I think a possible sollution to the time travel paradox is a system like we have seen it in the show Dark. The reason why you cannot change anything by traveling through time is because the events always included you traveling in the past. Meaning that the ship sending back the order to turn out ftl communication happened in the original time line as well, and was there ignored. So, the idea that time paradoxes are impossible is that actions of time travel always happened and this cannot change the outcome.

@timdefauconval8182

9 ай бұрын

I'm not sure to understand everything but would this mean that the future already happened ?

@Mysterios1989

9 ай бұрын

@@timdefauconval8182 Haven't thought too deeply about it, but I think so. If a time travel exist, and he has always made the impact in the past, it means he will have to always travel back into the past in the future, making it a deterministic universe where everything is set in stone, from every decision of intelligent life down to each quantum state that defines the future.

@jaceygaither2581

9 ай бұрын

Yes, this is Nietzsche's ideo of eternal recurrence. Everything that has happened will happen again, and what will happen has already happened an infinite number of times. A-la, "time is a flat circle."

@Mysterios1989

9 ай бұрын

@jaceygaither2581 well, yes and no. As far as I understand Nietzsche here, the cycle of time is the entire history, while the time travel here only limits that cyclic idea to actual time travel, which is the exeption. So, while for the time travel causality, it will be a repeating ring, the rest of the universe would still follow a linear time line of causality.

@ihsahnakerfeldt9280

9 ай бұрын

​@@Mysterios1989What you're describing is referred to as eternalism or "block time" theory.

I always love the very grounding and philosophical thoughts proposed in these videos along with the theory. Really helps to place the science and the importance of these studies in a broader sense and why or why not humanity should pursue them.

@johnnynitetrain32379

Жыл бұрын

Well said.

I'm probably just not understanding this properly, but: Shouldn't the reply from the STL ship _always_ travel *up* every possible Worldline, no matter how quickly it gets back to Earth? Drawing the reply the way you're drawing it, means that _all_ replies back to Earth (even STL ones) will break causality, because you're sending them backwards through time rather than forwards. While Earth, the ship and Vega are all moving through time at different rates, time is still passing for all three; In your example, you're drawing the reply line back to Earth as though Earth were stationary in time from the moment it sent it's message.

I don't understand why would the FTL message from the ship goes back in time? Why was the purple line drawn below and not above? Shouldnt it be pointing upwards since that's course of time? I'm very confused and it's very late.

I may be missing something entirely here, and this may be an incredibly stupid question, but... Wouldn't traveling FTL away from Earth simply go back in the Earth's light cone, so that looking back at Earth, you'll see it in the past, much the same as we are looking into the past when we look at stars? Conversely, wouldn't moving FTL _towards_ Earth go forwards in its light cone? Wouldn't it just be like rewinding or fast-forwarding a movie - but interacting with it is another matter? Let's say you travel FTL to 80 or so light years from Earth. It takes you 30 minutes to get there. You look back, and you see the rise of Hitler - but according to your clock, it's 80 years + 30 minutes later. Wanting to stop WWII, you immediately send a message using an FTL messaging device back towards earth, so it gets there in 30 minutes. But why would that message not go back the other way through the light cone? When it arrived on Earth, wouldn't it be 80+ light years + 1 hour in the Future? Basically, sending a message FTL will change nothing, because it's only observational; you can't actually interact with the past. What am I missing?

@DeadpanPear

Жыл бұрын

I am a mathematician and this is my understanding. There needs to be a transformation of the null line back in the direction of Earth when you change directions back toward Earth. All these pop sci people seem to have latched on to this theory based on dubious mathematics or something. They literally are trying to send the message in a direction rotated pi minus the original angle from straight up of how it should actually be sent, again, because of the transformation.

@senmetwo42

Жыл бұрын

I work at a movie theater. So I can't answer your question entirely. But here's what I get from this... let's say you travel FTL(faster than the speed of light) to 80 or so *light* years from earth. According to OP's earth clock, it hasn't been 80 earth years, its been 80 FTL years. Earth ages at the speed of light, as all things do since its the speed of the universe(kinda) as is the norm or so we assume. To move faster than the speed of light is to move faster than time as we know it(the law of relativity, where the "time" or "age" of something is relative to the "time" or "age" of other things) A second of time on earth would be a negative second(or something like that, depends on how fast youre going.. if you go 2x speed of light) you see? If you theoretically outrun time long enough and fast enough then you end up in the past according to the theory of relativity. It's mind breaking and requires quite a bit of imagination to see it through. If time = x as the basis for aging in the speed of light. Then to go beyond the speed of light is less than x of earth time lets say x-y, y being the negative time passed on earth while you jettison through the galaxy... I'm too uneducated to define x, and nobody i know seems to define y. Y is just less than x because y is relatively faster than x. You keep going faster than x and you end up in time travel land. It's all theoretical and I can't defend it but I understand it sorta. Quantum mechanics hasn't yet broken the speed of light, leading to further skepticism about FTL machines. This is simply a thought experiment thus far. If breaking the speed of light wall were possible, it would undermine much of what we know to be true. Stephen Hawking even hosted a time traveler party once, and encouraged all time travelers to join his party. Nobody showed up. If we end up breaking the current laws of physics and can travel backwards in time, nobody went to see Hawking, and all of events went as they are because we live in this timeline. Hitler existed. Khan existed. Was it worth the structural integrity of the timeline to let those atrocities live? Who is to say? I sell popcorn for a living. My understanding of theoretical physics is partially informed, and my understanding of math and physics is grossly uninformed. I hope this helped understand. I hope I wasn't entirely uninformed

@jerryalbus1492

Жыл бұрын

My only understanding is that time is same to everywhere and everything, it's just that observation would require time as our eyes use light at reference, in other words; we use light to generate images, which in turn would require the light to travel into our position from the position of what we are observersing; in other words, FTL should only be able to slow down time to a degree (even if you travel 100x the speed of light it should only be X ÷ 100 or 1 ÷ 100 =0.01, instead of a negative). In other words, if you travel from earth 80 light years and it took you 8 years (10x speed of light FTL), both your position and the Earth should have only aged 8 years, but if you were to try observing at earth with optical observation devices, you would see 80 years (or perhaps 72 years) into the past since the light your eyes are receiving is from those times.

@jerryalbus1492

Жыл бұрын

To make it less confusing, let's say instantaneous travel of just 1 light year; you and earth would still have the same timeframe, but due to our vision using light as a reference we should only be able to see earth as it was a year ago; since most signals and waves everything travels in speed of light, if you use non-instant mode of communication, observation, etc, it should have a time lag of 1 light year. In my opinion, if the crew of the FTL ship travels 80 light years in an instant, makes an instantaneous communication to an STL ship, the STL ship should still be living in the same time frame as the FTL ship, just with different locations. Now if an impending disaster is just 2 light years away from, let's say Earth, and the STL ship needs to relay information to Earth using non-instant comms, and it took the message more than 2 light years to reach, then Earth would be gone before they even reach the message. I don't know quantum physics but my uneducated brain can only come up with this. I hope someone with good knowledge on Quantum Physics would fill me up on the things I missed.

@drdrums1

Жыл бұрын

@@jerryalbus1492 It sounds like your conception is the same as mine - namely, clocks run the same regardless of where you are in the universe, and FTL speeds just get you there in advance of light. I guess I think of it similar to sound - a supersonic bullet will hit its target before the gun's report reaches it. Considering sound, sound waves travel through a given medium at a constant speed, similar to light (which itself is a wave through a quantum field). The speed of the source of the sound doesn't matter, and doesn't make sound wave travel faster. Rather, they doppler shift higher or lower in pitch depending on which direction the source is traveling relative to the hearer. I understand that light acts in the same fashion, which is why blue shifting or red shifting of light lets astronomers determine which direction relative to the Earth a celestial body is moving. And yet, high gravitational fields such as a black hole cause acceleration of matter and frame dragging such that local clocks run at different speeds. Maybe that's what I'm missing - I haven't yet fully grasped how time isn't a constant but rather changes relative to speed.

I’m in favor of the conclusion that if we encounter “paradoxes” in a scientific thought process we should consider that the concept is flawed. However, I would point out that the chart has problems when using the STL craft and it’s time slice. Even if one buys that the STL time slice is the correct angle here, it still matters where the craft is on that slice. The crew doesn’t get to instantly “know” when Vega sees things. You’d have to allow time for Vega to send the signal to the craft and by then the light from the super nova might have already reached the ship. In addition, the ship’s movement through space over the course of the events it does perceive would affect the value of this visual.

@swimmerboy172

Жыл бұрын

Don’t think it matters that the STL crew doesn’t know about the vega point knowing. The point of view we have is omniscient seeing how all three points interact, not just the STL craft. The problem the example is showing is if FTL Messages gets to a point prior to sending it.

@devverma144

Жыл бұрын

Just because they didn't see something happening doesn't mean it didn't happen. They can easily calculate the time of all the incidents. Let us say that Vega sent an FTL signal to the ship after receiving the FTL signal from Earth. On receiving the signal, the crew(of the ship) can calculate the time of origin of the Vega signal. Then they could also calculate the time of origin of the Earth signal. Using that information they can find the time of the supernova. Now, they have the whole timeline which they can use to see the discrepancies. Also that is not the only causality being broken. Pause the video and then look at 14:55. You can see that if the crew intercepted the warning signal, they themselves would see the warning even before the supernova happened and even before earth sent it.

@davidmccoy1378

Жыл бұрын

@@swimmerboy172 The narrator was asking "what does the crew of the STL ship think."

@davidmccoy1378

Жыл бұрын

@@devverma144 in regards to 14:55...the STL time slice intercepts the signal...but what are the changes that the ship/crew are at that moment in their time slice.

@devverma144

Жыл бұрын

​@@davidmccoy1378 Why would we talk about instances where nothing happens? Let me try to explain: We are talking about a hypothetical concept(faster than light travel). If that hypothetical concept is possible then it would never break causality. So we are deliberately trying to look at those (possible)scenarios that would violate causality to disapprove the concept. Here is an example that has nothing to do with causality but maybe it will make things clearer: If you are trying to disapprove a business that states that their armour is indestructible, you would try out scenarios where the armour is subjected to gun shots or other weapons and not the scenarios that involve the showering the armour with rose petals.

I wish every video was so capturing and beautifully made - just epic

To try to explain what I mean by warp speed, it is depicted well in Star Wars when they jump to warp speed and light streaks past them. Moving so fast that all light from starts becomes a streak where you see the light at every point instead of just the point of origin. You see light from point a at point b and c and d and so on. The difference in reality and star wars is it doesn't just flip to all black. You see light everywhere all at once streaking in all directions.

I legitimately wish you could see my face the moment i notice there is a new Cool Worlds video in my subscriptions sitting there waiting for me, i love this channel so much, the work and effort that goes into every video does NOT go unnoticed, thank you for giving us such high quality brain food. oh, btw, I NEED MORE lol.

Could someone explain to me why the message went back in time from the ship? It was kind of glossed over on the WHY and we went straight to the What it did.

While I agree with this explanation for macroscopic entities, we still find that in particle physics many of the particle interactions are only explained by having some particles move "backward" in time or, similarly, faster than c. Then there is the fact that antiparticles appear to be exactly like their particle counterparts, but moving "backwards" in time which is equivalent to FTL. And while treating them as such in their calculations, physicists are loathe to admit that these particles may actually be moving "backward" in time or FTL. The reason for that is that doing so would cause, in their minds, the same kind of causality issues as described here. Perhaps our struggles with FTL could be resolved with a better understanding of time as a dimension and time as an observation. It is also possible that the actual topography of spacetime can accommodate some forms of FTL without paradox.

How would the stl ship receive/perceive info about Vega receiving a ftl message? Are they just receiving earths ftl message to Vega? because on the diagram the ftl message axis intersects with the stl ships axis after Vega receiving the message.

Outstanding! FTL was always a dream since watching Star Trek as a kid. The fact that we can glimpse these wonders of the universe as water filled meat sacks is truly amazing. Even if it isn’t possible, I appreciate that logic as to why is isn’t possible. Space is big. We’re living in an age of high definition discovery.

@k.lisaswensen9877

Жыл бұрын

Water filled meat sacks, lol 😂

@mateonikolic6984

Жыл бұрын

Wouldn't call humans just water filled meat sacks. We are an outstanding species that just appeared shortly on earth. Our intelligence and consciousness is a God's given gift truly. In the future I believe we'll be able to change universe to our fit

@charleslong7815

Жыл бұрын

@micaiah middleton kzread.info/dash/bejne/Z6WT3Jp7msy_nso.html - Starship Congress 2017: Miguel Alcubierre, "Faster Than The Speed Of Light"

these videos are some of the best on here. Keep it up

@MasterBlaster3545

2 жыл бұрын

Have you seen the site Melody Sheep? If not check their life beyond 1,2 and 3 videos. Absolutely you will love them.

@mrt1957

2 жыл бұрын

Best at hurting your brain? hehe, brilliant presentation as always.

@ericb2017

2 жыл бұрын

best on here as in on KZread? for sure

@CoolWorldsLab

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks so much, these little messages are appreciated!

@The___Explorer

7 ай бұрын

​@@MasterBlaster3545you know more channels like melody sheep