Remember Me?

 Straight Dope Message Board Remember Me?

#1
03-26-2003, 11:15 AM
 bryanmcc Guest Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: St. Petersberg, FL USA Posts: 428
A few questions about the Tipler Cylinder theory?

This thread was inspired by a post by slipster in another thread. I searched for Tipler Cylinders, but didn't find much that discussed them directly, so I thought I'd start a thread about them.

Quote:
 Originally posted by slipster In or around 1974 an American physicist named Frank Tipler wrote that, based on what is understood about the relationship between time and the spacial dimensions, there was a method--in theory at least--for constructing a time machine. Tipler said that if one constructed a cylinder out of the "stuff" of which black holes are constructed, and spun it very fast, the material would not collapse in on itself and form a singularity. Some physicists dispute this. Tipler also thought that one would not be crushed by entering the space in the center of the cylinder; I guess this would work on the same principal as the idea that a person at the center of the earth should be weightless as the mass--and, therefore, the gravitational pull--acting on him or her would be equal on all sides. In any case, Tipler said that if such a whirling cylinder was constructed and the device spun at sufficient speed, it would contort or "tip" the four dimensional geomerty of the space which it occupied. (I am probably not explaining this very well, but then, I'm not a physicist.) Suppose you take an ordinary cube and draw arrows along its sides, marking some as "height", others as "length", and others as "width". If you then tip the cube on its side, two of the dimensions "switch places"; for instance, the arrow which is being "height" may now be pointing in the direction in which the "length" arrow was pointing a moment before. In a somewhat analogous fashion, in Tipler's model, time would "switch places" with one of the three spacial dimensions. This would mean that if one moved forward or backward inside the cylinder, it would mean you were moving through time. Once the cylinder stopped spinning and the four dimensions were restored to their normal orientation, the person who had moved about inside the cylinder would find he or she had moved forward or backward in time. Which direction in the cylinder would be the future, and which would be the past? In H.G. Well's novel The Time Machine the anonymous inventer says that he can make the parts of his machine rotate in either of two directions, but he won't know which way pushes the machine forward in time and which pushes it backwards until he actually tries it out. It would seem to be the same for Tipler's hypothetical time machine. I have read that one limitation on the Tipler design is that it could not put a person farther into the past than when the cylinder was first built. This has to do with the idea that the cylinder itself does not travel in time except in the ordinary sense that everything and everybody "go" from their past existence to their future through the eternal present.

So that's my beginners understanding of Tipler Cylinders. And the GQ is (are), to what extent do I have my facts straight? I searched for "tipler cylinders" on google, and only got 64 hits, which seemed appallingly low. Also, a substantial proportion of them were bad sci-fi stories, pseudoscience, conspiracy theorists, and other assorted less-than-credible sources. I thought this was a well-respected and accepted theory -- where are the legitimate pages? Is Tipler a respected cosmologist? I've read a few of his books ("The Anthropic Cosmological Principle" and "The Physics of Immortality"), and he seems to be a borderline nutjob in some of his beliefs, but his science and reputation doesn't seem terrible. So what's the scoop on these babies, and what other cool info can you tell me about them? And what's the straight poop on Frank Tipler -- serious physicist or borderline nutjob?
#2
03-26-2003, 12:15 PM
 tanstaafl Guest Join Date: Mar 1999 Location: ATL Posts: 3,136
Well, I only had a little better luck on Google than you did. I tried +tipler +time +cylinder and got a few over 400 hits, but not all of them were relevent and more than a few were from "fringe" sites. Most of the more credible sites simply mentioned Tipler cylinders in passing.

I did find this article from Scientific American which discusses Tipler cylinders along with several other "time machines". I'll keep poking around and see if I can come up with anything better.
#3
03-26-2003, 12:27 PM
 tanstaafl Guest Join Date: Mar 1999 Location: ATL Posts: 3,136
Oh, as for your question about how seriously Tipler is taken... Well, he is a professor of mathematical physics at Tulane University. He has also written a book in which he claims to have used physics and mathematics to prove the existance of God and the Soul.
#4
03-26-2003, 01:48 PM
 bryanmcc Guest Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: St. Petersberg, FL USA Posts: 428
Yes, that's one of the two which I mentioned. As far as I can tell, none of the physics is too out there, but he does cut a wide swath with his assumptions, and his standards for when something has been "proved" to his satisfaction seem a little on the lenient side. For instance, citing beliefs of a few dozen religions and theologians to lend weight to your supposedly scientific theory? I don't think so, bub -- stick with equations; I don't give a crap what Thomas Aquinas thought, it doesn't make your scientific proof of a soul more plausible. Good material in the books, but you really have to weed it out from all the gibberish.
#5
03-26-2003, 05:02 PM
 mooka Registered User Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: London Posts: 213
I've read about time machines which are made of 2 rotating infinitely long cosmic strings. Sounds kind of similar to your rotating cylinder. I think the prospective time traveller has to circle around the strings, and thereby travels though time. However, you can't travel further back in time than when the time machine was created. Also, the two cosmic strings eventually collide, so your time machine doesn't exist for that long. I believe that in this situation, the possibility of time travel is predicted by the equations of general relativity. Although it is a very limited form of time travel, and depends on objects which probably don't exist, it is time travel nonetheless. I believe this is a widely accepted solution to the equations of general relativity.

The other solution i've read about is to do with wormholes. You accelerate one end of the wormhole, so that time passes more slowly for that end. The two wormhole mouths become desynchronised in time, and if you go though the wormhole you can go back in time. Again, this doesn't allow travel time travel to before the time machine was created. It also requires exotic matter with negative energy to keep the wormhole open.

 Bookmarks

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is Off HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Main     About This Message Board     Comments on Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports     General Questions     Great Debates     Elections     Cafe Society     The Game Room     Thread Games     In My Humble Opinion (IMHO)     Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS)     Marketplace     The BBQ Pit

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 PM.

 -- Straight Dope v3.7.3 -- Sultantheme's Responsive vB3-blue Contact Us - Straight Dope Homepage - Archive - Top