Something is rotten with the state of time travel/lightspeed physics.
To “c” (the symbolic designation for the speed of light), or not to “c”?
-That is the question plaguing physicists in a number of recent studies with apparently conflicting results.
Traditionally, the speed of light is viewed as a barrier to physical movement. According to conventional interpretations of Special Relativity, due to the time-slowing effect physical matter experiences as the speed of light is approached, movement through time is believed to stop at the very moment something hits “c.”
As a result, lightspeed appears to be a barrier to movement, (see: lightspeed barrier,) and many have come to speculate based on certain geometric and philosophical arguments that moving faster than light might equate to backwards travel through time.
So, here’s where things get interesting.
This summer, scientists at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology announced that in a meticulous data transfer experiment, they verified that photons don’t break the lightspeed barrier, and their effects don’t appear to even slightly precede their cause. Hence, lightspeed is a barrier and causality is confirmed, thus ruling out backwards time travel. (On a side note, Stephen Hawking has also endorsed this view.)
However, research published just last month by researchers from the Gran Sasso National Laboratory in Italy appears to demonstrate that neutrinos do travel faster than light, throwing everything else into question. In the study, scientists analyzed the speed of neutrinos being emitted from the particle accelerators at CERN and discovered them arriving faster than “c” by 60 nonoseconds(!)
While fractionally small, this is a definitely measurable quantity of time with today’s instruments.
So, it appears that lightspeed might be traversable after all. What is currently most unclear is whether or not these findings mean that backwards time travel is possible or simply that objects may continue to move faster through space than speed c.
(Note: I fall on the latter side of the fence, predicting allowable faster-than-light movement in my 2006 Kronoscope article. This is due to what I believe is a Newtonian conceptual parasite infecting modern Relativity interpretations.)
In any case, it’s a very exciting time for time physics – the discovery of conflicting results at the margins often heralds the imminence of a new discovery!