Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 6, 2015 - Art Bell

02:22:19

Art Bell MITD - Professor Ronald Mallett Time Travel

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	the from the heart
	desert and the great american southwest i think you all good evening good
	morning good afternoon wherever you may be in the world's time zones
	each and every single one of them covered like a blanket by this program
	Midnight in the Desert Worldwide.
	Great to be here with you.
	Two rules on our program.
	That's all we have.
	Two rules.
	No bad language.
	And only one call per show.
	That said, let's look at a little news.
	We're going to talk about time travel tonight with Professor Ronald Mallet.
	It is my favorite topic, as you know.
	I love time travel.
	I really love time travel.
	The whole concept of it.
	I would love to travel in time myself.
	God, I would love that.
	I've followed it.
	I think I've read everything and seen every movie that one could see about time travel.
	And it is intense.
	Let me first give you something you can go and see at Artbell.com because it's just breaking news from Peru.
	A Peru teen has been rushed to the hospital screaming for the devil After Becoming Possessed.
	A Peruvian teenager has claimed that she became possessed by the devil after playing with a Ouija board using a mobile phone app.
	Patricia Cuspi from Chusica That's in the Lima province of Peru.
	Ended up possessed by the devil spirits after using a mobile phone version of the board game.
	Now I'm inviting you to Artbel.com not just to read this with me, but to see the video of this young lady.
	Possessed.
	Shocking footage filmed at the local hospital shows this young lady thrashing and convulsing while screaming for her mother and shouting out at the devil let her go.
	Friends of the teenager say they have downloaded the app over the weekend for, you know, a bit of fun and had joked around about trying to communicate with the spirit world.
	Upon returning home, her parents noticed that she seemed unwell and eventually called an ambulance when she began convulsing and foaming at the mouth.
	Thinking that their daughter may have eaten something or taken a drug that would cause an allergic reaction, they of course contacted her friends who told them about the Ouija Board.
	In the video from the hospital that you can see at Artbell.com, medical staff can be seen trying to restrain the young lady who is convulsing violently and struggling as she shouts 666 followed by let me go, let me go.
	In another segment, she can be heard shouting, please give me my phone!
	And mom, these doctors don't know what they're doing.
	Take me home.
	Ouija boards.
	Told you about Ouija boards, didn't I?
	Alright, um, looking at the news briefly, the mother of a gunman who killed nine people and then himself at an Oregon community college Allowed her troubled son to have guns.
	Acknowledged in online posts that he struggled with autism.
	But she didn't know he was potentially violent.
	Well, you don't always know that somebody is potentially violent.
	Right?
	The top U.S.
	commander in Afghanistan is saying that he's recommending that President Obama change his mind and keep more than a thousand U.S.
	troops in the country beyond 2016, just now, days after a deadly U.S.
	airstrike mistakenly struck a hospital, Doctors Without Borders Hospital, in fact, during fierce fighting in the north.
	The Doctors Without Borders people are calling it a war crime.
	I think the Pentagon is choosing other wording.
	And this from theanomalist.com that has got to be listening to the show.
	Hello, guys.
	Nick Redfern discusses Dr. Jacob's new book, Walking Among Us, The Alien Plan to Control Humanity, a tale not of abductions, but about how abductees are allegedly being used to assist alien-human hybrids Whose role it is to infiltrate human society.
	So, we read stories about abductees assisting the hybrids in the real world.
	Driving.
	Driving them about, feeding them, teaching them how to dress and blend in.
	You know, at baseball games, Kmart, and the pizza parlor.
	It's a scenario that Jacobs himself admits leads to a ridiculous conclusion.
	But in part two of his overview of the book, Redfern points out the similarities between these hybrids and Men in Black, which Redfern has studied extensively.
	Both, says Redfern, have a fascination for pens, are awkward around food, and often look sickly.
	Redfern has a good point.
	So, obviously, other people are putting together the very interesting Coincidences?
	Between Dr. Jacobs and what he's saying and Nick Redfern?
	I sure did.
	Ding, ding, ding, all the way, right?
	One more thing.
	The Russians are helping us to death in Syria.
	What the Russians are actually hitting with their airstrikes are our CIA-trained anti-Assad rebels.
	So, the fireworks fall all over Syria, and as I mentioned, they're helping us to death.
	They were supposed to go in there and kill some ISIS characters for us, and they didn't do that.
	Well, as I mentioned, it is my favorite topic of all time, so coming up, Professor Ronald L. Mallet received his B.S., M.S., and P.H.D.
	in physics from Penn State University.
	He worked for United Technologies from 1973 to 1975, and in 1975 joined the physics faculty at the University of Connecticut in Storrs, where he is currently a research professor of physics.
	Professor Mallet has published numerous papers on black holes and cosmology in professional journals.
	His breakthrough research on time travel has been featured extensively in media around the world, and his published memoir, Time Traveler, has been translated into several languages.
	Award-winning filmmaker Spike Lee has written a script for a feature film of the memoir.
	So, coming up in a moment, Professor Ronald Malitz and time travel.
	From the high desert, I'm Art Bell and this is Midnight in the Desert.
	From the Kingdom of Nigh, this is Midnight in the Desert with Art Bell.
	Please call the show at 1952-225-5278.
	That's 1952.
	Call Art.
	You know, everybody in their lifetime should take a moment out from the United States, if that's where you are or Canada, and actually go to a country where they turn back time.
	Now, you know, they don't really turn back time, but when you get there, you feel as though it has been turned back.
	And so if you get the opportunity to go to a third world country, you know, somewhere friendly.
	For me, it was the Philippines.
	When you get there, it clearly feels like time has been turned back.
	Now, of course, that is beginning to change.
	And Asia, the entire Asian continent, is beginning to catch up with the rest of the world.
	It's not quite as it was, but you still get that feeling that you're back in time.
	And time is what we're going to talk about tonight with Professor Ronald Mellott.
	Welcome to Midnight in the Desert, Professor.
	Thank you very much, Art.
	Great to have you, and I understand you're back in Connecticut.
	That's correct.
	And three hours ahead in time.
	That's exactly right.
	It's 12.
	Fifteen for me right now.
	Actually, 12, 13, and 13 seconds, Professor.
	You said you had a lot of clocks around you.
	Yes, that is correct.
	All right.
	So, it has been so long.
	When did we talk last?
	It was quite a while ago.
	You were still like a teenager, right?
	Not quite.
	I had done my research, but it was quite a while ago.
	I mean, my breakthrough happened at the turn of the century, and I think that it was just not long after that that you had interviewed me.
	Right.
	All right.
	So, let us begin at the beginning, because so many who are listening now will not have heard you.
	It's obviously important to ask you why you decided to get even involved with, I mean, here you are, a theoretical physicist.
	Beginning to actually toy with the mechanics of time travel, why did you decide to become involved in time travel research?
	Well, it has to do with my father.
	He was the center of my life, and he was bigger than life.
	He was a television repairman in the Bronx.
	I was the oldest of four children, and my father had served in the Second World War.
	He was a battlefield medic.
	He used the GI Bill to go to a two-year technical school after he got out of the service.
	He was very good at his job.
	In fact, he was so good that he actually repaired television sets of people who were celebrities in New York at the time, like Walter Matthau.
	I actually have an autographed picture of Walter Matthau.
	Thank you, my father, for fixing his television set.
	The thing is that even though he worked very hard, sometimes two jobs.
	He had a lot of time for his family and that was something that made him endearing to all of us.
	He paid a lot of attention to me.
	He gave me scientific toys like gyroscopes and crystal radio sets.
	He loved to read, so of course I loved to read.
	The thing is that he looked like he was very robust and healthy.
	We didn't really know, at least the children, my mother might have known, but he had a weak And he died of a massive heart attack.
	And he was only 33 years old.
	Oh my, 33.
	And at that point, how old were you?
	I was 10 years old.
	Oh, God.
	Yeah.
	And the thing is, is that prior to that, I had been a rather happy kid and pretty, you know, gregarious.
	After that, it was like the world was destroyed for me.
	I mean, for me, it was like the death of Superman.
	And I went from being a happy kid to actually a very I don't know.
	and lonely kid and I was just in a fog.
	I really didn't care whether I lived or died.
	This went on for about a year.
	I buried myself in my books and science fiction books in particular.
	And then I came across, when I was 11, I came across the book that changed my life.
	It was actually a classic illustrated version of H.G. Wells' classic, The Time Machine.
	about just the cover of the Classics Illustrated spoke to me.
	And when I read the first page of it, it said, scientific people know very well that time is just a kind of space and we can move forward and backward in time just as we can in space.
	When I said that, I thought, oh, this is unbelievable.
	This means that it might be possible to have a machine, a time machine, that could go back into the past.
	And my imagination immediately took flight.
	I said, this means that if I had this kind of a machine, I could go back and see my father again and tell him what was going to happen and maybe change things.
	And then that was the beginning of an obsession for me.
	I mean, I even went to the point of my mother had kept the old radio and television parts that my father had had.
	And I looked at the, there was a picture on this Classics Illustrated.
	or their idea of what a time machine might look like.
	It had hoops and everything like that, so I put old bicycle tires and everything together with this stuff.
	When I plugged it in, nothing happened, of course.
	But the thing is that I really was disappointed, but I wasn't discouraged
	because I remembered that it said that scientific people know very well.
	So I thought maybe that meant that I had to know something about science.
	Although at that point, I didn't know exactly what I would need to know.
	But that would come just a little bit later on because... All right.
	Let me ask you a quick question, particularly with your reference to your father.
	As I mentioned, I have read just about everything on time travel, as I guess you have.
	And I've seen all the movies.
	And the movie that had to have affected you would have been Frequency.
	I'm sure you saw Frequency, right?
	Yeah, as an adult, yes.
	Yes, of course.
	And it's one of my favorite movies.
	Mine too.
	Because it actually speaks to the theme that's the core of my life.
	And so, yeah, that is one of my favorite movies.
	You're right.
	You know, I knew it had to be.
	And even for me, you know, the ham radio part of it was a big connection.
	But that that brought my wife to tears.
	That that was a very, very, very touching movie.
	Oh, it was.
	It really was.
	And the thing is, is that in that case, he had didn't have really control of it.
	I mean, except for the fact that it was communication through, you know, the ham radio set.
	But the phenomenon that was causing it was, you know, sun distortion.
	I mean, that was... That was the premise, yeah.
	In fact, the opening scene, the northern lights were blazing.
	Right, right.
	And the thing is, is that for me, one of the things is that, and I think that this is what differentiates a lot of science fiction movies and also science fiction books, that made H.G.
	Wells' Worked so different was the fact that he posited a device, a machine.
	You know, there actually is other early time travel books.
	One of them is, in fact, part of it was a Connecticut person.
	It was called Connecticut Yankee King August Court by Mark Twain.
	But there, once again, it was an accidental thing that caused it.
	And for me, it was the notion of control.
	And for me, I think that had two different levels involved with it, because death is something that seems like it's out of your control.
	And the fact that it might be some sort of a technical way of controlling nature, and in this particular case of controlling time, that spoke to me.
	And I knew that I was going to try to find a way of actually finding a mechanism that might allow me to manipulate time.
	Boy, it sure speaks to me too.
	And I wonder why so many people are so intrigued by the entire concept of time travel.
	If I were to answer that, I would say, we are locked in this linear, non-stop progression of time.
	And there seems no relief from it, no escape from it.
	It marches forward, we march with it, and that's that.
	But people keep imagining being able to go forward, or especially go back in time.
	So, what's all the intrigue?
	Exactly that?
	That we're locked up?
	No, I think all the intrigue has to do with the fact that We long to be able to go back to... I mean, who of us has not had something that has happened in our lives, either personally or otherwise, that we would say is a regret?
	If I could have done this, how would this have turned out for me in my life?
	If I could have prevented this?
	Let me give you an example of something that when I had my breakthrough, I started getting letters and communiques from people literally all over the
	world.
	One of them that was one of the most moving to me, which I'll share with you, it came
	from Germany.
	I learned German when I was in college, but I forgot most of it.
	The thing is that when I got the package and the letter in it, there were graduate students
	in the department who were from Germany and I asked one of them if they would translate
	it for me.
	But in the meantime, there were four pictures that accompanied the letter.
	And the thing is that the pictures told a story.
	In the first picture, it showed a middle-aged couple with a very attractive young woman in the picture.
	And then in the second picture, the young woman is in sort of a cute modeling type of poses.
	And then in the third picture, there's a mangled car.
	And in the fourth picture, she's in the coffin.
	I bought tears to my eyes immediately.
	I had never seen anything like that.
	The thing is that even before I got the letter, I knew what the story was going on here.
	Then when I got the letter back from the student, sure enough the letter was from the father of this young woman.
	He was asking me if he had heard about my work and if it was possible to send a message
	back to his daughter to warn her or to warn them to warn her about what was going to happen
	to try to save her life.
	I was heartbreaking and I had to tell them that my research is just ongoing and that
	wasn't possible.
	But nevertheless it shows the core of one of the things in a very graphic way.
	I've gotten emails from people who have had a loved one murdered and they would like to
	go back and prevent that.
	Or they themselves have been in prison and they would like to go back and warn themselves
	about that.
	I think it has to do with this very, very primal thing of wanting to try to...
	I love classical music.
	And we do speculate that.
	What if I had met this person rather than that person?
	Just idle, things like that.
	Or, on a more global level, people would have liked to see Lincoln give the Gettysburg Address.
	That's one thing I would like to.
	Or, I love classical music.
	I would love to hear and see Chopin actually performing.
	So, I think that this is...it's that, I think.
	It's not, I mean, we, you might say that the longing is there first, and then we realize we're imprisoned, rather than the other way around.
	So, I think that that's, that's the thing.
	And also, even when it comes to the future.
	I mean, who of us hasn't wondered, you know, we think of all the marvels that we have now, wondering about the future when we might even have things like a cure for cancer, a cure for, you know, AIDS, a cure, Now, what's going to happen?
	And to see also the possibility of changing things if we could know the future and sending information back to us.
	Sometimes people have asked me, well, you know, what would you have a time machine for?
	I mean, obviously, one of the things is my father, but I said, just in a more general sense, suppose we had an early warning device.
	A time machine is an early warning device.
	Imagine if we could send information back to us to warn ourselves.
	Let's discuss a couple of other aspects of it, and those are all really positive.
	And by the way, if I had my druthers, I've always said this, I would go back and observe the life of Christ.
	I think that that's the intriguing thing about time travel.
	Alright, let's discuss a couple of other aspects of it.
	And those are all really positive.
	And by the way, if I had my druthers, I've always said this, I would go back and observe the life of Christ.
	I would observe the miracles that are said to have been done by Christ,
	so I could really know, because as you pointed out, death is not under our control.
	What comes after might well be determined about the truth of what happened then.
	Absolutely.
	Seeing Christ is one of the things that I would love to do.
	We'll come to that later about this notion of what The things that would be so exciting to see and whether it's going to be possible, but yes, seeing Christ in that time would be absolutely a wonderful thing to be able to do.
	Have you contemplated this, Professor, and that is, you mentioned going to the future, it would be wonderful, yes, you might bring back a cure for cancer, and you might bring back information about what stocks are going to be hot And in that regard, you would disrupt the entire economic everything?
	That's potential.
	I mean, the thing is, is that time travel is a much more complex thing than we think about.
	I mean, in other words, the thing that you're talking about actually has a parallel in what's called the so-called grandfather paradox, which is that we travel back in time and do something That could dramatically alter the future and alter our own lives.
	You've thought about this, right?
	Oh, I've thought about this a lot.
	Right.
	What I gave you was sort of an opposite paradox, but it would still be disruptive, incredibly, to society and to economics.
	But maybe there'd be rules.
	Maybe there'd be time travel rules, Professor.
	Well, I don't know about rules, but the thing is that the reason why I said Potentially it's because travel to the past leads to possible paradoxes and it may not be so simple as just simply bringing back information.
	There might be all sorts of things that happen to the time stream that, in fact, even though you bring it back, you're not bringing it back into this dimension.
	That's a whole different thing.
	Let's take an example.
	Let's say you did have the ability to travel in time and you went back and you had your dad go and see a heart specialist and the heart attack he was going to have would be prevented.
	Then you would be changing something in this time stream without a doubt.
	Your dad would be living on.
	It would be a very Very different situation indeed.
	Professor, we're at a break point, so relax.
	We'll come back.
	We've got so much territory to cover.
	Professor Ronald Mallet, a professor of theoretical physics.
	How about that, is my guest.
	God, I love this topic.
	I really do.
	We'll be back.
	Because you know me.
	I'm in you.
	You're in me.
	I want to take your baby.
	And if you get hurt by the little things I say, I can put that smile back on your face.
	Midnight in the Desert doesn't scream cause.
	We trust you, but remember the NSA.
	Well, you know.
	To call the show, please dial 1-952-225-5278.
	That's 1-952-CALL-ART.
	Professor Ronald Mallet is my guest.
	He is indeed a professor, and that's an interesting question in itself.
	I mean, Here he is teaching physics to college students and talking about time travel.
	And I wonder, Professor, how that works out for you from a, I don't know, a professional point of view.
	In other words, I take it you're tenured, so probably that part's okay, but I would think there would be some Well, yeah.
	I mean, the thing is that when I had decided way back when I was 11 that I wanted to build a time machine, even at that early age, I knew people were already concerned about me.
	And so I already was astute enough to realize that I probably shouldn't share the fact that I wanted to build a time machine because That might not lead to consequences that I wanted to have.
	So I kept it to myself.
	I pretty much did that throughout my whole career because it was my secret project.
	The thing is that what I realized is that even in college that I was going to have to do something that was going to relate to it but not be obvious.
	That's where Einstein's work in the theory of black holes came in.
	And if you look at all of my publications, after I started as a faculty member at the University of Connecticut, they're on cosmology and black holes and topics like that.
	None of them has to do with time travel.
	However, Einstein's work, which we'll go into more detail later, but the thing is that it was key to understanding time.
	So I could understand things like black holes and write papers about it.
	And that would still allow me to study time.
	So that's what I built my career on.
	During my interview at UConn, if I had said, well, I'm interested in building a time machine, we wouldn't be having this conversation here right now.
	So that's something that I just didn't do.
	And it wasn't until actually at the turn of the century that I had my breakthrough.
	And by that time, I was a tenured full professor.
	I like to use a really terrible analogy, but being a tenured full professor is very roughly equivalent to being like a made man in the mafia.
	They're probably not going to be wild about you using that analogy, but yes, okay.
	You're practically bulletproof, and the thing is that by that time, when I made my breakthrough, I didn't have to fear anymore, so I was able to come out of the time travel closet without fear.
	But once again, since my work was rooted in Einstein's theories of relativity, that provided a sound foundation.
	So when I publish my papers, and I should mention that the papers for physicists, when people don't realize sometimes how the publication process goes in the sciences, but when you submit a paper for publication, it doesn't just automatically get published.
	An anonymous referee.
	And they're anonymous for a reason.
	Because they can be critical without any comeback.
	And the thing is that the referee judges whether or not it's scientifically sound, mathematically sound.
	And it can be accepted or rejected.
	And the thing is that I've had, fortunately for me, many more papers accepted than rejected.
	But I have had, you know, both things.
	And that keeps the That keeps the science at a high level, as a matter of fact.
	So I knew that when I was writing these papers, the later papers, that they were going to have to be scientifically and mathematically sound.
	So the critics that I have within the community, they're not critical of the physics and mathematics of my work.
	What they're critical about, and I actually agree with them on many of those points, is the technological feasibility of You know, achieving what I want, which is a different statement from whether or not it's mathematically sound as far as the physics.
	May I for one second divert your attention?
	We'll come right back here.
	But since you're a theoretical physicist, and we haven't talked in all this time, we now have this spooky action at a distance, as Liebenstein called it, quantum entanglement, which is fascinating, impossible stuff.
	And presumably throughout any distance you would care to name, these things flip and flop together once they've become entangled.
	There is kind of a new twist in the entanglement world, if you've done the reading, and I'm certain you have.
	It's called a quantum twisting, in which they find that instead of a full flip or a flop, there can be a kind of a partial one with a twist, and the twist in this is that they think that it might be the key to communication, at faster than light.
	In fact, instantaneous communication.
	So, I wonder if you have any comment on all of that, or maybe you can help me understand quantum entanglement's abilities in the first place.
	I ask everybody, so if you can't, you can't.
	Oh, no.
	I mean, the thing is that it was actually known at the beginning of quantum mechanics.
	I mean, it's just within the public imagination fairly recently, but it was actually known Way back, I mean, when one of the founders of quantum mechanics was a man named Erwin Schrödinger, who came up with a formulation of it back in 1926.
	Yes.
	And he realized that was an aspect of it.
	And it's really not so strange as it sounds.
	I mean, the thing is, is that in quantum mechanics, systems, if they are created together, they are one, they're a unit.
	And as far as the mathematics of quantum mechanics is concerned, Even when you separate them at a spatial distance, they're still entangled because they were a unit.
	Okay, that's the important point.
	It's just not arbitrary, but they had to have been a single unit to begin with.
	So that's actually, and that's used in some small ways in a lot of electronic devices.
	But the thing is, is that this it's become much more well known because of the fact that it seems to imply One has to be careful.
	We haven't had communication with it yet, but it is not the same thing.
	When it comes to relativity, relativity never said that things can't be faster than the speed of light.
	What it said is that you can't send information faster than the speed of light, which is a different thing.
	Because the universe itself actually can expand faster than the speed of light.
	That's something that people aren't aware.
	But once again, that hasn't been done in a controlled way.
	It'll be fascinating if it is, but as I said, it's part of quantum mechanics.
	Well, entanglement up until now, and what we knew about it, wouldn't allow communication, but with this new quantum twisting they're talking about, They have hopes that that might allow communication, which would be really, really, really intriguing.
	I don't know if any of this has and or bears on your work in any way, and perhaps not.
	I just wanted to ask you about it, that's all, and get your comments.
	Sure.
	No, not directly.
	It doesn't affect my work.
	My work is actually based on manipulating space and time in a different way.
	In fact, the thing that you're talking about actually is not a part of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, it's just part of what is the basis of my work.
	It seemed to just sort of annoy Einstein, and so he called it Spooky Action Resistance.
	Anyway, back to... I should mention the reason why is because the very foundation of the Special Theory of Relativity was to, in a sense, deal with signals that could seem to be going faster than the speed of light.
	I mean, you have to realize that the foundation of Einstein's general theory of relativity, it was to solve a problem that was in Newton's theory of gravity.
	In Newton's theory of gravity, it had predicted, and this was, you know, over 300 years ago, that gravity could travel faster than the speed of light.
	And Einstein developed a general theory of relativity In order to take care of that particular problem, in other words, to make sure that gravity was consistent with the theory of relativity.
	So this notion of instantaneous action at a distance was actually in physics many, many, many years ago.
	It's just that quantum mechanics brings it up in a different form, but it actually has been part of Let's go back to what you're doing, and you're working with light, and I think you're working with lasers, and I believe that you are building a time machine.
	Now that's getting way ahead, but I want to let people know that you're not just toying around with ideas, you're building hardware, right?
	Well, I should say that we would like to build hardware.
	I mean, as you pointed out, I'm a theoretical physicist.
	It's really important to distinguish between theoretical and experimental.
	Of all the various sciences, there is a precise division of labor in physics.
	Chemists and biologists pretty much go back and forth, but in physics, there is that precise division.
	Einstein, for example, was a theoretical physicist, and he came up with the notion of equals mc-squared.
	What people don't realize is that when Einstein developed that equation, neither he nor anyone else knew.
	It implied that if you have a small bit of matter, you could create an enormous amount of energy.
	The question was, technologically, is this possible?
	And even Einstein wasn't sure.
	Whether it would be, you know, technologically possible to do that, even though the equation says that this is a possibility.
	Once he figured that out, Professor, do you think that he's sorry that he didn't bury it?
	No, not really.
	I mean, it's much more complex than that.
	It wasn't that... You have to remember that when he wrote the letter, the famous letter to Roosevelt, he very much felt that the German scientists were on the verge of developing an atomic weapon.
	And for him, he would have had no problem whatsoever with it having been dropped on, you know, the Nazis, you know, in Germany at the time, he just wouldn't have.
	That's important to keep in mind.
	When he found out that their project wasn't working, And that when the bomb was dropped on Japan, that's when he felt that he felt a bitterness about it.
	Yes.
	It wasn't about the use of the bomb per se.
	It was just the target of it.
	And that is something that caused him a considerable amount of, you know, angst.
	All right.
	Professor, just straight out question.
	Do you believe that time travel is truly possible?
	Not at this instant, perhaps, but ultimately?
	Well, not only do I believe it, but time travel to the future has already been done.
	I mean, you have to realize that Einstein developed two theories.
	One was the special theory of relativity, which he developed in 1905.
	And that theory says that time for a moving clock slows down.
	The faster you have a clock move, the more time slows down.
	Now, when I'm talking about a clock, I'm not just talking about mechanical mechanism.
	Your heart is a clock.
	Yes.
	And that would mean that if you were traveling fast enough, your heart rate would slow down.
	Now, it's important to realize that this doesn't mean that you would feel it.
	You would not notice it, no matter how fast you were traveling.
	It's just like when you're in your car.
	No matter how fast you're going, you don't feel like you're traveling at high speed.
	But someone who's watching you sees you zip by.
	And it's the same thing here.
	If you're traveling close to the speed of light, they would actually see your heart rate slow down so noticeably that you would not be aging as much as others.
	And that would mean that if you were traveling fast enough that you could arrive in the future maybe only being a few hours older, whereas decades could have been passed for everyone else.
	Now that actually is a precise prediction of Einstein's theory.
	The technical name for it is time violation.
	Now what is important to realize is that This has been verified, not only on the subatomic level, but even on the large-scale level.
	There's this device in Switzerland, it's called the Large Hadron Collider.
	I think it's at work right now, isn't it?
	Well, right now they're staging, they're, you know, renovating it to go to, you know, turning it back on.
	But it's actually, they actually found the particle that they had built the machine for in the first place.
	A couple of physicists won a Nobel Prize for it.
	It's the so-called God particle, which its real name is the Higgs particle.
	That's what the device was built for.
	I think now they're actually theorizing something smaller than Higgs, right?
	Well, there has been a long time that people have been talking about other particles.
	Well, actually, there's been this notion of There's two different types of theories.
	One of them is called supersymmetric theories, in which they say that there are other groups of subatomic particles that are sort of counterparts of the particles that we already know.
	And then there's superstring theories, which say that they're trying to explore and say that all of our particles are actually vibrations of these strings.
	Professor, may I ask you something, and it concerns CERN, so just to put everybody's mind at rest, or perhaps not, there are people who theorize that at CERN they may create a black hole.
	Now, I've heard it said that that black hole would be very minor and would blink out very quickly Are they?
	Would you say that you're 100% certain that if that black hole is created, there would be no adverse worldwide possible effect?
	Yeah, what one of the things that's important to realize is that when that sort of thing came out, it was part of the hype to get people interested in the Large Hadron Collider.
	Yes, variously.
	Because the thing is, is that people were wondering, what is this thing for?
	And how long it's taking, you know, 10 years to build this thing.
	And it's costing, you know, billions of dollars to do it.
	And to try to keep people's interest in it.
	They were talking about the finite possibility, probability, I should say, of black holes being created.
	Now, you have to realize that this is another aspect of quantum mechanics.
	And the probability of that was so low, Let me give you an example of a probability that it's similar to.
	When the atomic scientists of the Manhattan Project were getting ready to set the bomb off, they actually did some calculations and there was a finite probability that our atmosphere has hydrogen in it, that the fission bomb would cause a fusion of the hydrogen in the atmosphere and turn our entire planet into one gigantic hydrogen bomb.
	Yes.
	That was actually a serious calculation.
	But the probability, when people talk about probabilities, that is a really, really tricky thing.
	It's like the probability, and there is a probability, that the room that you're in right now, all of the molecules in the air will end up on the other side of that room, and you will find yourself in a vacuum.
	And it is a finite probability, but it's so low that it's greater than the age of the universe.
	So when people talk about probabilities, one has to be careful.
	And that's so in the case of these black holes that might have formed, the probability of them was just, you know, it's a there.
	All right, let me rephrase it.
	Is there a A bigger chance that CERN will do something that could affect the whole world, then a bigger chance of that than there is of the air leaving half my room.
	Pretty much the same.
	Really?
	Well, okay.
	Yeah, I mean, you know, really, I mean, the thing is, is that, that there's a probability that when you calculate, and it depends on what it is that you're talking about the probability of, Yeah, something strange could happen, but the probability of it is so low that they're not even thinking about it, really.
	I mean, what they're coping is that when they get the experiments, you know, seriously going again, that they might see evidence for these strings or these, you know, counterpart particles, these supersymmetric particles.
	I mean, that's what they're really You know, interested in and they're hoping that they'll be able to get the money and continue to have the money.
	It costs about a billion dollars a year to keep running that thing.
	Oh, yeah.
	Well, you know, when scientists have a choice to either push a button or not push a button.
	Right.
	I tell you what, we've got a real quick break to do so.
	Hold on, Professor.
	I'm getting so wrapped up in what I'm doing.
	We'll be right back.
	Please ring Art's bell at 1952-225-5278.
	That's 1952.
	Call Art.
	Interrupting my own announcement.
	You know, I'm not saying my music is loud, but I just recently noticed that the water in the bathroom adjacent to me is sending out rings from the center in the sink that are perfectly timed to the bass of the music that I'm running in this room.
	That tells you how I handle my music here.
	Now, the other thing is I just about blew a break and I get so wrapped up in this topic that You know, that's another effective time.
	I mean, so totally wrapped up that everything else goes away.
	I'm listening to the professor and didn't even think about a break coming up.
	Fortunately, a little whisper in my ear corrected that.
	Yet another effective time.
	What I was saying, Professor, was Scientists create, they think about things, they suppose things, which is what a theoretical physicist does, and then other people build things.
	And then once built, even though there is a possibility of perhaps something going wrong, I don't know, the atmosphere igniting, whatever, they do end up pushing the button.
	And while that generally works out well, there may come a day Uh, when it may not work out as well, you would concede that?
	Well, yes, but that's what can happen when you get in your car.
	Oh, sure.
	I mean, the thing that you have to realize is that, you know, anytime we're dealing with, you know, the mechanics of nature, something can potentially go wrong.
	I mean, we've seen that with spaceflight at NASA.
	Oh, yes.
	So, the question is, is that What is the likelihood?
	And, you know, when you get in your car, you think that it's pretty much going to go, but it's actually, it's more, it's much more likely that something's going to go wrong with your car than something's going to go wrong in the Large Hadron Collider.
	That's the real science of it because the precautions that they take as far as safety precautions are concerned.
	But now you're talking about, you know, phenomena.
	That unexpected phenomena that can occur.
	That's right.
	That's something else again because we're being bombarded by cosmic rays.
	And these cosmic rays, some of them have energies that are absolutely incredible.
	And they could be raining down things that we don't even see in particle accelerators yet.
	So they could be causing strange phenomena that we don't even quite understand yet.
	Listen, I'm on your side.
	I'm a button pusher.
	So it's what we, what the, these machines allow us to have some much more control of
	what it is that we're dealing with.
	And but what's happening out in nature is something else again.
	And that's one of the things that makes science the exciting thing that it is.
	Listen, I'm on your side.
	I'm a button pusher.
	I'm just sort of thinking ahead here that one day as we push limits, we could get an
	unintended consequences.
	That's all.
	Oh, that's very, very possible.
	But that's always so.
	I mean, you have to remember there was a time before radio and television.
	No, not before radio.
	I said, no, not before radio.
	Oh, right.
	And the thing is, is that It already has unintended consequences.
	I mean, you know, this is part of the way in which we try to control nature, that this is part of what, you know, happens.
	But it doesn't mean that we stop exploring.
	That's right.
	I consider many things on television to be unintended consequences.
	Reality TV.
	I have to agree with you about that.
	Alright, look, I would like to get to your breakthrough.
	You had a breakthrough.
	What exactly was it?
	Well, the thing is that in order to talk about the breakthrough, I have to back up and go into what is the foundation of the breakthrough.
	Otherwise, the breakthrough itself won't make a lot of sense.
	Once again, going back to, because you asked me earlier about the possibility of time travel itself, and I was mentioning the special theory of relativity, which says time slows down for a moving clock, and I was mentioning the Large Hadron Collider, and the fact that what we know is that this effect really does happen because subatomic particles, there are some of them that disintegrate after just a fraction of a second, a millionth of a second, And you might say that they have an internal clock that says, well, after so much time, boom, they're going to just simply disappear.
	And what happens is that when we accelerate them in something like the Large Hadron Collider, we can make these particles go close to the speed of light.
	And what we've been able to find is that we can make them live 20, 30, 40 times longer than they normally would.
	In effect, what we've done is send these particles into the future.
	And we've actually been able to do this on a human scale, but at a much smaller rate.
	There was an experiment that was done in 1971 at the Naval Observatory, U.S.
	Naval Observatory, which they took two atomic clocks.
	One was kept at rest at the Naval Observatory.
	The other was put on an ordinary passenger jet and flown around the world.
	When they brought it back, they found that the atomic clock on the passenger jet had actually slowed down.
	And I lost time in exactly the way Einstein predicted in his special theory of relativity.
	This means that this plane actually flew into the future, but by just fractions of a second, because even though it was traveling at the speed of sound, that's very, very slow compared to the speed of light.
	And when we have planes and rockets, or when we have rockets, rather, that can go close to the speed of light, And NASA does work on some of these rockets.
	They have exotic names like Ion Engines.
	Then we will eventually have the effect that when astronauts go out into space, if they're traveling close to the speed of light and come back, only a few years may have passed for those astronauts, but they could have arrived, you know, decades into the far future, that travel.
	And in fact, there was a movie, one of the science fiction movies, that's one of my favorites that got it right.
	It was the original Planet of the Apes with Charlton Heston.
	They thought they had landed on another planet that was ruled by apes.
	What had happened is that what they realized later is that they had been traveling so close to the speed of light that they had actually landed back on the Earth in the distant future.
	But they didn't realize that because they thought they were on this weird planet.
	That effect is travel to the future, and we actually have already been able to do that.
	As I said, on a human scale, it's going to be a while until we can do it, but we can do it.
	It's time travel to the past that I was interested in, and you can't do that from the special theory of relativity.
	So once again, the special theory of relativity says that time for a moving clock slows down, and that allows for time travel into the future, which we already have achieved, just not on a dramatic scale.
	Now, time travel into the past, how does that happen?
	Well, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity does not have to do with speed.
	What Einstein's General Theory of Relativity says is that time is affected by gravity.
	And that's part of the key of my work, because what Einstein meant by that was that the stronger gravity is, the more time slows down.
	That means a clock here at the surface of the Earth, where gravity is stronger, is actually ticking slower than a clock at high altitudes.
	And that is important to realize that.
	And we actually know that that effect is real.
	As a matter of fact, our GPS system works because of Einstein's theory of gravity.
	If I'm following what you're saying, would that suggest that with enough gravity
	you could slow time dramatically and essentially go into the past?
	No, into the future.
	In the future?
	Because you're still just slowing time down, okay?
	The effect of slowing time down is what allows you to go into the future.
	Okay, well that then does not get you into the past.
	No, but the point is that what it says is that you can actually, in this, I don't have enough time to go into it, but what this is associated with is the fact that in Einstein's Gravity, the force that we call gravity, is actually not a force at all.
	It's actually a bending of empty space.
	The sun, for example, bends the empty space around it.
	The analogy I like to use is that if you think of space as being like a rubber sheet, like a small trampoline, and if you put a bowling ball on it, you can get the rubber sheet to bend.
	And you know, you can actually put the marble and it will go, you know, towards the bowling ball.
	But if you make the rubber sheet transparent, it would appear to you as though somehow the bowling ball is pulling directly on the marble, but it's not.
	It's a rubber sheet.
	That's what Einstein said that gravity is.
	The sun is actually bending the empty space around it, and the earth is just moving in that.
	In fact, you could actually do that with the Rubber sheet with the marble.
	If you take a marble and sort of give it a sideways motion, it'll actually orbit around the bowling ball, like a skater on a roller derby ring.
	And what the Earth, fortunately for us, when the solar system was formed, the Earth had sort of a sideways motion.
	And so it's moving around and around the warped space.
	Now, in Einstein's theory, space and time are connected to each other.
	Whatever you do to space happens to time.
	So this bending of space actually leads to a bending of time.
	You might say, well, what does that mean?
	The bending of time shows up to us as clocks ticking slower.
	So gravity is a bending of space and time.
	But if you can bend space, then you can actually maybe finally twist it.
	In fact, if you have a rotating star, a rotating star will not just simply bend space.
	It will actually twist space, and it turns out that if you have an object like a rotating black hole, not only will it bend space and twist space, but it will also twist time, and it's that twisting of time that gives you the possibility of going back into the past, because if you think of time normally as a straight line going from the past, present, to the future, which we all are moving along that line, that invisible Are you referring to something like a pulsar?
	A pulsar is not a rotating black hole.
	A pulsar would cause some twisting of space and time, but not dramatic enough.
	A rotating black hole is a much, much more dense object, and it would actually cause a twisting of space and time.
	Pulsar is actually a neutron star.
	That's a little bit before you get to a black hole state.
	So, but we do know that they're rotating black holes out there in space.
	We just haven't got, you know, we can't get to them.
	But the thing is, is that if we could, since you have this twisting of time into a loop, and as I said, along this loop, you could go from the past, present to the future.
	But you've made time into a loop so you could go from the future back into the past.
	So Einstein's general theory of relativity allows for the possibility of bending time and twisting time.
	And it's this twisting of time that's part of the core of my work.
	And so once again, what I realized in Einstein's theory, Newton's theory, the only thing that can create gravity is matter.
	Okay?
	And that's it.
	In Einstein's theory, Not only can matter create gravity, but light can create gravity as well.
	Even though light does not have mass or matter, light has energy, and the energy of light can actually create gravity.
	And that was the core of my breakthrough, because I realized that in Einstein's theory, since gravity can affect time, and light can create gravity, then light can affect time.
	That was the core of my breakthrough.
	And what I realized was that I could do something similar to what one has with a rotating black hole by using a device called a ring laser.
	A ring laser is just simply a device that creates a circulating beam of light.
	One way of thinking about it is that if you have a series of mirrors that form like a square and you bounce light off of one mirror and it hits the other mirror and it creates a circulating beam of light.
	That circulating beam of light can cause a twisting of space.
	The analogy that I like to give people to think about that is the fact that, think of
	if you had a cup of coffee in front of you right now.
	Think of the coffee as being like empty space.
	Think of the spoon as being like the circulating light beam.
	So what happens when you take the spoon and stir the coffee?
	The coffee starts swirling around, sort of creates a vortex in the coffee.
	What will happen in empty space is the circulating light beam will actually cause empty space to get swirled around.
	You'll actually be able to create a sort of vortex in empty space.
	Now, you might say, well, if it's empty space, how do I see it?
	Well, let's come back to the coffee.
	If I throw a coffee bean in there, then what will happen is that As I'm stirring the coffee, the coffee will drag the coffee bean around.
	So I could see the effect of the spoon stirring the coffee by seeing the coffee dragging the coffee bean around.
	The thing that plays the role of the coffee bean in the experiment that we're talking about would be a particle called the neutron, which is part of every atom.
	If you put a neutron into the empty space and then turn on the circulating light beam, as the circulating light beam is twisting, The space, the space will drag the neutron around just like the coffee dragged the coffee bean around.
	So even though you can't see the space itself being dragged around, what you'll be able to see all of a sudden is the neutron will start getting twisted around when you turn on the circulating light beam.
	So that would tell you that space is actually being twisted.
	And now we go to the next step because remember I said that space and time are connected in Einstein's theory.
	Yes.
	So if you cause this twisting in space to become strong enough then the straight line of time going from the past, present to the future will actually get twisted into a loop so that you'll be able to travel from the past, present to the future.
	But once again you've twisted time into a loop so you can go from the future back into the past.
	And that's my idea of my work.
	Now, of course, everything that I've described to you has been in words.
	I should mention that for physicists, that is not even remotely enough.
	What you have to do whenever you have these things, when physicists say that they have a theoretical model, people sometimes think that that means, you know, something that they're talking about verbally.
	It's not that at all.
	What I had to do was to solve Einstein's gravitational field equations for circulating beam of light.
	Then what I found was I found mathematical results that showed that space and time could be twisted.
	That is what I actually had to submit as far as a paper was a mathematical model.
	I have to emphasize that because, once again, I have people saying,
	oh gee, that is something that you could have thought of.
	Once it is out there, then yes, it seems clear.
	But you have to actually develop a mathematical model to actually show this
	in order for it to mean something to physicists.
	I understand.
	Have you worked on any practical application that would demonstrate the theory?
	Well, the practical application would be showing that you could twist space.
	That's a possibility.
	That could be a new type of space propulsion, for example.
	Imagine if you could use light to manipulate space.
	Then you can manipulate objects in space.
	And that might lead to a whole new type of space travel.
	So that's one of the things that we've been thinking about.
	But the main thing is to actually do the experiment itself.
	And once again, this is where the public gets a lot of their ideas about these things from science fiction movies.
	One of my favorite movies is Back to the Future.
	In real science, and once again, we were talking about the Large Hadron Collider, The prediction of that, the Higgs particle, was over 40 years ago, and it took 10 years to build this Large Hadron Collider at a cost of $10 billion, and all of that was just to smash particles together to see if they would give you this Higgs particle.
	I mean, it sounds simple, you know, that you smash particles together, and if they get enough energy, then it might create this Higgs particle.
	Actually, Professor, I'd heard that even though the Claim to have found the Higgs particle, they haven't actually seen it.
	In other words, it had to be identified by its absence in a littered group of particles.
	I mean, that's not a good explanation, but that's what I read.
	Oh, no, no, no.
	The thing is, is that many, many experiments, you're not seeing the particle directly.
	What you're seeing is the decay products.
	Where it was.
	Right.
	I mean, you're seeing things.
	What's done?
	The prediction is that this particle will actually disintegrate and give you other things.
	And so you don't have to see the particle directly.
	You have to see those other things.
	And that's just the same thing as seeing it.
	So that's just part of the normal process of it.
	But in any case, this thing costs $10 billion.
	And just for the funding that we're looking at, for just the feasibility study, And the feasibility study wouldn't be the show time travel.
	What it would be is the first show that you could use circulating light to twist space, which is a whole new effect in itself, which, as I said, could lead to a possibility of a new type of space propulsion.
	But just the feasibility study for that, and by that means computer modeling, looking at laser arrays.
	And I should mention that I have an experimental partner.
	He's a laser physicist.
	He's not a specialist.
	But he's a part, he's a laser physicist.
	His name is Chandra Roy Chowdhury.
	Yes.
	And he's a research professor at UConn.
	And he became interested in my work, in experimentally verifying my work.
	But just to do the feasibility study is going to cost a quarter of a million dollars.
	And that may sound like a lot, but it's actually minor when it comes to scientific experiments.
	And what we're looking at is trying to get the funding just to do that.
	And what happens is that people are dismayed because they think that, well, this is going to lead immediately to a time machine.
	It's not.
	That's not the way real science happens.
	Well, that would not dismay me.
	I would be very excited about that.
	I would love to see that happen.
	And I should add that since we're talking dollars here, yes, a billion dollars is a lot of money.
	But I just read an article indicating the United States plans to spend a trillion dollars on updating our nuclear arms.
	So it's all relative, if you'll excuse.
	That's that's right.
	I mean, so the thing is, is that, but that's the stage that we're in right now is trying to get the funding for showing that the feasibility study for showing that circulating light will cause a twisting of space.
	If we see that, then this will allow us to go and do the experiment itself.
	And that experiment will probably cost many millions of dollars more, but we won't know how much more until we do the feasibility study.
	Then if the experiments show that we can twist space by using light, then the input from that we would use to see what would be necessary to cause the twisting of time.
	And that is going to be causing even more millions of dollars, and that's down the line.
	So we're talking about something that's going to happen over a long period of time, and this is the way in which science progresses.
	And that's okay.
	I mean, the thing is that even with planes, with flight, one of the things that I've always been surprised about is that most of the documentaries that I've seen about the Wright Brothers They do a good job of talking about their background and
	everything is bicycle mechanics.
	They talk about flying the plane a Kitty Hawk.
	I've only seen one documentary that mentions in detail the fact that these two brothers
	actually did science and engineering things prior to that.
	What they did was build a small wind tunnel to look at wing configurations.
	That's very practical engineering.
	That's what they did in order to get the correct flight characteristics.
	And what I'm doing is sort of like the wind tunnel stage.
	What I'm trying to get the funding for is showing the twisting of space.
	It's like doing that.
	And then from that, that will allow us to see what it is that we need for the twisting of time.
	So the theory is there, and as I said, I actually have an experimental partner that's interested in it.
	And I'm trying to get people who are experts in neutrons to become interested in that part of it.
	Because that, as I said, has applications that are independent of time travel.
	Just simply a new prediction about how circulating light can cause a twisting of space.
	Yes, Professor, if you were able to do that, would it be easier to attempt to send information through
	before anything else?
	Oh yeah, I mean that's the only thing we were interested in.
	I'm not interested at all in sending people through time.
	Why not?
	Well, number one, it doesn't serve any purpose.
	We call ourselves the information age.
	Sending a person back, that sounds romantic, but sending information back is vastly more important than sending a person back.
	I mean, sending a person back is, as I said, that's fun for us,
	but being able to send information back, and we were talking about that earlier,
	is about warning or sending information back about cures and things like that.
	I mean, this is actually much more important.
	Eventually it would be nice to send people back, but the amount of energy that would be required for that
	would require the total capability and collaboration.
	I mean, CERN is an international collaboration.
	It would require something like a super CERN type of thing.
	It would require the financial cooperation of all the major world governments.
	That's because of the fact of the energies that we're talking about.
	If you're sending information, that's not much energy.
	I was just contemplating the cooperation of all the world's governments.
	But still, all you have to do is think about the CERN.
	CERN is the cooperation between Switzerland, Germany, France, and the United States.
	So it is possible.
	If they feel like they want to do it.
	Okay, Professor, just for fun, let us imagine that you get the twisting you want, that you can pass information into the past, and that you decide to pass, just as an example, information on how to cure a disease that we now know how to cure, thereby Saving the lives of millions of people in the past.
	Right.
	Now, that one act could have paradox implications that are staggering to even think about.
	Well, that's the reason why I said that time travel to the past is a much more complicated and subtle thing than time travel to the future.
	There are no paradoxes with time travel to the future.
	But when you're talking about time travel to the past, It brings up the specter of what we call the grandfather paradox, which has very, very many forms.
	But the most basic of it is if you go back to prevent your grandparents from meeting each other, then they don't have your parents.
	And if they don't have your parents, then your parents don't have you.
	So how do you go back and change the past?
	But all of these other things you're talking about have that aspect to it.
	And you have to realize that, once again, quantum mechanics has led to a possible resolution of this notion of the paradox.
	What we've been talking about mainly, except when we were talking about entanglement, has been relativity.
	There's two pillars of modern physics.
	One is relativity, the other is quantum mechanics.
	And when you bring quantum mechanics into the mix, you actually have a whole different thing happening.
	And let me clarify that.
	Back in 1957, There was a physicist at Princeton named Hugh Everett III.
	And he was looking at what happens if you apply quantum mechanics to the universe as a whole, rather than just to simple systems.
	And when he developed the mathematical theory behind that, he found that it led to a rather startling conclusion.
	And that is to say that whatever outcome can happen I'm sorry, Professor, before you get into that, we're right up against a break, so hold that thought.
	We'll come back to it following the break.
	Let's grab some coffee.
	I know in Connecticut, it's getting really late.
	Professor Donald Mallet is my guest.
	Time travel is the subject.
	Midnight in the Desert is the show.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Coming to you at the speed of light in the darkness, this is Midnight in the Desert with Art Bell.
	Now, here's Art.
	Here I am, and Professor Ronald Mallet is my guest.
	And I'm going to make a leap here and give it a try.
	Let us assume for a moment that what this theoretical physicist that we have on the line says is going to come to pass.
	In other words, You're correct, Professor Mallett, and is it irrational to then sit here and think, well, okay, if what the man is saying is correct, and he did agree that sending information back might be the first and most logical practical application of something like that,
	That we, as you pointed out, live very much in a information age now, professors, so shouldn't we be on the lookout?
	Because, I mean, if time travel becomes possible in reverse, and we're inundated with so much information now, that isn't it possible that on somebody's, oh, I don't know, iPhone, there could suddenly pop what would seem to be a Well, yes, but not quite the way in which you think, and not possibly, you know, we have to be concerned.
	in other words what I'm saying is if this is going to be eventually made into a practical application
	shouldn't we be looking for messages from the future?
	Well, yes, but not quite the way in which you think and not possibly, you know, we have to be concerned
	because...
	I'm not concerned, I'm just wondering.
	Oh no, but the reason why I'm saying concerned is, and you'll see what I mean by that,
	remember what I was saying about the grandfather paradox?
	Yes, I do.
	Okay, and what I was mentioning was this physicist, Hugh Everett III, who was applying quantum mechanics to the universe as a whole, and what he found was that essentially different decisions, possible outcomes, are all played out, and I was giving a specific example that I actually like to use, which is to say that suppose that today you were trying to make a decision between having a fish sandwich or a cheeseburger.
	At the instant that you decided to, let's say, have the cheeseburger, there would be an art bell in a parallel universe that has chosen the fish sandwich.
	They're both real and they're in separate universes, and they both don't know anything about the other.
	And this this notion doesn't have to do with just human beings.
	In other words, if an electron has a possibility of going to path A or path B, at the moment that it has that, it can actually go to both.
	It goes into path A in one universe and path B in the other universe.
	So this notion of it was originally called mini world theory.
	Now it's more popularly called parallel universe theory.
	But it's a very important and possible process that quantum mechanics opens up.
	Now, when Everett was looking at this, he was just looking at this as a possibility that was consistent with quantum mechanics.
	It turned out that many years later was a physicist in Oxford, his name was David Deutsch.
	And David Deutsch decided to apply this to mathematically to see what would happen when it's applied to time travel.
	And what he found was that what it predicted is that suppose you went back into time and the moment that you arrived in the past it would be a split of the universe into separate universes.
	It would be a universe that you would arrive in and in that universe that you arrive in, that parallel universe, you could do something like preventing your grandparents from meeting each other and they don't have your parents and so on.
	You would just find yourself in a strange universe that you were never born into.
	However, remember I said there was a split.
	The other universe you don't arrive in and that universe leads to the outcome that we know has happened.
	So the upshot of this is the fact that you can travel back to the past.
	But the past that you travel back to is not the past that you came from.
	So if you change it, it will have no effect on the current one.
	Right.
	So that means that if you went back into the past to send information, or you went back there with information about the stock market, for example, yes, in that parallel universe, you could become a millionaire.
	But in the original universe that you came from, they wouldn't even know.
	They would just simply say, oh, hey, you know, art disappeared.
	We've never seen them again.
	So in this way you avoid the paradox problem.
	That's exactly right.
	And that's one of the things that physicists believe is a real possibility is this notion of parallel universe and that quantum mechanics has to be taken into account.
	That's one aspect of it.
	The other aspect that Stephen Hawking has considered is what he calls the chronology protection hypothesis.
	And I emphasize that word hypothesis because it's not a proof, it's not a theorem, it's just his conjecture.
	And what he feels is that when you try to travel back into the past, nature itself will conspire in ways to prevent you from changing the past.
	In fact, this conjecture of his, he's actually said it makes the world safe for historians.
	And that's actually another possibility.
	Yes.
	But once again, that's just a conjecture.
	So you have that out there.
	So that's why I said it's not as simple as it sounds.
	Now, and then getting back to this notion of information, getting that information, number one, you have to realize that when you're sending information back to the past, you have to send it back in a certain form in which you have a device that will translate that.
	To give you a simple example, people have asked me, well, how would you send information back?
	Well, one of the ways that I have, and this is based on solid physics, is the neutron spins like a little top, like the Earth.
	It spins about an axis, okay?
	But in the world of quantum mechanics, the neutron can only have two directions of spin.
	In our world, you can have any orientation of a spin axis, but the neutron can only spin up, or it can spin down.
	It only has those two possibilities.
	Now, the thing is, is that suppose That I assign a one to the neutron spin up and I assign a zero to the neutron spin down.
	Suppose I send a stream of neutrons in which I have spin up, spin up, spin down, spin up.
	That's a binary code number.
	And the thing is, is that so by using the spins of neutrons, one can actually send information.
	However, that means you have to have a device associated with your machine that can actually translate these So, the neutrons coming back won't be able to be picked up by an iPhone or anything else.
	They'll have something that decodes the neutron spins.
	If that's so, then if the scientists, Professor at CERN, one day, while looking for Higgs or something smaller, find some of these rapidly vanishing particles, actually spell out Hey, you better quit this now.
	They should pay close attention to that message.
	Well, they won't because they won't know that that's happening.
	You know, they would actually have to have a neutron receiver.
	You know, it just can't be some random subatomic particle.
	I was just trying to have fun.
	Oh, I see.
	Okay.
	I can be very literal.
	So can I. So they would not likely receive a message in that manner.
	They wouldn't know what they were getting.
	Yeah.
	You actually have to have a controlled experience.
	I mean, all you have to do is think about telephone.
	I mean, Alexander Graham Bell had to have a telephone receiver in order to send his telephone message.
	And we have to have a radio receiver In order to get a radio signal, you can't just get it with anything.
	In other words, you have to know.
	You have to have a device.
	Excuse me.
	Now, that's kind of right.
	Let me try a question very quickly.
	Just throw it in.
	Is it possible that parallel universes may be detected by gravity waves?
	Not necessarily, because the thing is, you have to remember that parallel universes Well, you wouldn't know except for the possibility of some gravity waves that would seem to make it when nothing else would.
	parallel universe out there and in fact that creates a problem.
	Well you wouldn't know except for the possibility of some gravity waves that would seem to make
	it when nothing else would.
	Well I think that it might explain things, it might explain things that we were wondering
	Why would this happen?
	In fact, that's what we think that parallel universes do.
	I mean, that's the theory.
	When it was originally developed, as I said, it wasn't developed for time travel.
	It was developed to try to see what happens whenever you apply quantum mechanics to the universe.
	And what it implies, then, is that things that we see right now that are strange could be the result of a parallel universe.
	But the problem is that it's hard to control that as an experiment.
	That's why I said one has to be careful with the messages one does get.
	So let's just suppose for the moment that we now have things set up that we can receive information from the future.
	Here is the paradox and the problem.
	Now it's not a paradox, but it's a problem.
	We get a message, okay, from the future.
	How do we know that that message is from our universe or a parallel universe?
	Because we don't necessarily know, because the information that we could be getting, since it's from the future, it could be coming from a parallel universe.
	That means that we may or may not, we might have a new level of uncertainty about whether or not to act on that information.
	Because if we act on it and it's from our universe, that's fine.
	But if we act on it and it's from a parallel universe, that might not be fine.
	Why not?
	Well, because it could actually be counterproductive.
	It might be from a parallel universe giving us information that, you know, this is going to happen.
	And it's happening in their universe, but it's not happening in our universe.
	And so we're taking precautions, or we're making decisions based on information coming from another universe that isn't going to be helpful, in fact, could be catastrophic if we act on it in our universe.
	Well, it'd probably be something like, do something about global warming now.
	Well, it might be something a little bit more subtle, I'd say, and more dangerous.
	We're going to be attacked by such-and-such a country, and that may be so in their universe, but not in our universe, and so we prepare to counter-attack that country in this universe, because we think that they're going to attack us in the next universe, but they're not.
	Well, alright, here's a question for you.
	Assuming that time travel, or time travel for information, would become possible, Then you would have to imagine it might even be weaponized.
	Oh, I mean, in fact, that's one of the things that governments would have to deal with.
	That's why this notion of, you know, control of this.
	Every new technology has to have control.
	And when we talk about technology, sometimes people don't even think about how simple that is.
	For example, Let's suppose that I have a butter knife.
	I have a butter knife and I use it to spread butter.
	But that butter knife can also be used to stab someone.
	The knife itself is technology, and it's technology that's neutral.
	It has to do with the intent of the person that has the technology that one has to worry about, and that has to be controlled.
	That's why we have laws and everything else.
	In fact, one of my favorite movies, and it should get much more press and I recommend
	it to people, is called Time Cops with Claude Van Damme.
	The thing is that it's a good representation of what will have to happen when time travel
	comes online because you actually have this international organization.
	It was to protect the time stream, essentially.
	and had time enforcement officers uh... and all of that sort of thing
	And that's going to be the sort of thing that has to happen.
	Now, the other aspect is, is that the technology is going to be so expensive and so, uh, you know, it's, it's going to be, you know, let's think of nuclear power.
	We, none of us have our own individual nuclear reactors and we never will.
	Uh, I know I've always wanted one.
	Right.
	And the thing is, is that when time travel comes online, it's going to be technology of that level.
	So people aren't going to have their own individual time machines that they're going to be able to scoot around in.
	And it's going to be something that has to be controlled on a government level.
	So it's going to be a much, much more dramatic and much more controlled issue when it does happen.
	And it will happen.
	I mean, it's potentially going to happen.
	Whether I'll see it in my lifetime, I'm not sure.
	But I know that it is possible within the framework of Einstein's theories of relativity.
	I've always wanted to actually have what looks like an ICBM in my front yard.
	It would, you know, sort of keep everything in order.
	Every now and then I could have a little smoke venting from it.
	Alright, so it's certainly possible, is it not?
	That either ourselves in the future or extraterrestrials have long since invented some form of time travel or information transfer.
	That's very possible.
	The thing is that this is actually an important aspect of time travel.
	In the movies you can go back to any time that you want but with a real time machine You actually have a limitation.
	The limitation is that you can only go back to the point where the machine was turned on.
	For example, I turn the device on today and I leave it on for ten years.
	I could travel back seven years, five years, all the way back up to the point the machine was turned on.
	But I can't travel earlier than that because you have to realize that it's the machine that's creating.
	Right.
	And you're absolutely right, Art.
	I mean, with respect to an extraterrestrial civilization, it's highly likely.
	In fact, one of the things that we know now, scientifically, is that since the 90s, scientists have found what are called extrasolar planets.
	These are planets that are orbiting other stars.
	Now, as strange as it might seem, we didn't know that until the 90s.
	I mean, it was conjectured, but we saw observationally that there were other solar systems out there.
	Before, we weren't sure that other stars had their own set of solar systems.
	And what this means is that, in fact, scientists like to use, you know, catchy phrases, and recently, They've actually found a class.
	What happened is that when they were looking at these extrasolar planets, most of them seemed like they were too close to their sun.
	So they were too hot.
	Some of them seemed like they were too far away.
	So they were too cold.
	What they have found now is a class of extrasolar planets that they call Goldilocks planets.
	So as you might guess from the name, it means that these planets are just right.
	And they're just at the possibility of that light.
	They could support life.
	Now, we haven't been able to see that yet.
	And what the current research that's going on in astrophysics is to determine how one determines the type of atmospheres that are possible on these planets.
	But the general feeling now is among the scientific community is that they're very, and this is just in the neighborhood of our galaxy that we have found, You know, hundreds of these various planets.
	And so, you know, there are billions of galaxies.
	So the notion, it's highly likely that the universe is teeming with life.
	And now that's part of the serious scientific thinking.
	And so that means that if we encounter, I mean, there's probably some of these civilizations that are more, that are much more primitive than us.
	But it's highly likely that there are civilizations out there that are more advanced than us.
	And they could have developed time travel technology, let's say 10,000 years ago.
	If we encounter them, or they encounter us, they could visit our distant past.
	Or once we encounter them, we could use their time travel technology to visit our distant past.
	Norah, how about this argument?
	They have done it, and they have tampered with us.
	Well, the thing is, is that that's a conjecture.
	Yes, it is.
	But it's not beyond the realm of possibility.
	No, it's not.
	So, yeah, it's a possibility.
	The thing is that, once again, as a scientist, I have to see verifiable proof, but it is not beyond the realm of possibility.
	All right.
	Hold tight, Professor.
	When we come back, I'll give you the open lines instructions.
	And if you have a question for the professor, you're welcome to ask it.
	If you've been listening carefully to all this and you don't have a question, then you have not been listening carefully.
	This is Midnight in the Desert.
	I'm Art Bell.
	No call screening.
	No waiting on hold.
	No requirement to kiss Art's ring.
	Just good talk.
	Join Art by calling 1952-225-5278.
	That's 1952.
	Call Art.
	to two two five fifty two seventy eight that's one nine five two call parts
	alright as we talk about time travel with professor Ronald Mallet a very
	serious man I involved in a very serious topic If you would like to join in the conversation, or if you formed a question as a result of all this, uh, here's the way you hit to us.
	Our national number, which, uh, you know, these modern days, we used to have 800 numbers.
	Not really necessary.
	Most people have plans that cover U.S.-Canada calling free.
	So our national number is area code 952, 225-5278.
	952-225-5278.
	Beyond that, if you would like to call us from North America on Skype, that's doable.
	It is doable.
	Just put us in your phone or tablet or whatever, computer, in Skype as MITD51.
	That's MITD51.
	If you're calling from outside North America, we are MITD55.
	Once again, MITD55.
	And once again, here is the professor.
	So, professor, you've got a book, right, called Time Traveler?
	That's right.
	It's Time Traveler, and its subtitle is The Scientist's Personal Mission to Make Time Travel a Reality.
	And the book is both a memoir And a popular science book.
	I mean, it talks about black holes, wormholes, cosmic strings, lasers, quantum mechanics, and relativity, as well as the personal story, my motivation, which I just talked a little bit about.
	But I also go in the book, I go into much more detail about the ups and downs, because after my father died, I mean, we plunged into poverty and it was very, very difficult.
	And I talk about that and how I finally was able to get the money that I needed to go to college, which was not immediate.
	I mean, when I got out of high school, we were just too poor for me to go to college.
	And I went to the Air Force, and I used the GI Bill eventually.
	This was during the Vietnam War period.
	Sometimes I like to give people an example in my book, not just so that they learn something about the physics, but also Learn about the possibility of achieving their own dreams.
	I really try to do that when I'm giving speeches as a motivational thing, which is to say that you can achieve your dream if you do three different things.
	Number one, you have to have a dream first, a goal.
	It should be something that really excites you, something that turns your life.
	It shouldn't be something that other people think.
	It's exciting for you, but something that really you want to do, whatever it is.
	And then you have to develop a strategy for achieving that.
	In my case, as I said, it wasn't that I was going to go to college right away, but I developed a strategy of going into the service as an enlisted man and then getting the money from the GI Bill and since following my father's footsteps that allowed me to go to college.
	And then the third thing is what I call the self-sweat equity, that is to say the investment of the
	effort in yourself to achieve that.
	In other words, the hard work that's necessary to do that.
	And if you do those three things, then there's really nothing that you can't achieve for
	yourself.
	All right, Professor, here's a question for you.
	If we received a message from the future, whether it would be our future directly or
	You know, to give you a simple example in another domain is SETI, for example.
	Yes.
	an extraterrestrial message. In what way would you imagine that that message would manifest?
	Well, once again, we would have to know what we're trying to receive. You know,
	to give you a simple example in another domain is SETI, for example. Yes. Oh, they actually
	are monitoring and they're using, you know, radio telescopes and things.
	In other words, they are assuming that this extraterrestrial intelligence has the same sort of type of way of communicating that we have.
	And that's a reasonable thing because electromagnetic radiation is the same here on the other side of the galaxy.
	So the way in which it would manifest itself would depend on what we think we would be receiving.
	Well, I'm just asking for a guess.
	I mean, would it be a note that would flutter to somebody's desk?
	No, it would have to be in a way like SETI.
	I mean, you know, you're not going to get extraterrestrial information in that form.
	It's going to have to be in a form that they can receive the communication.
	So, we really have to set up a way in which we would think that it's going to be received.
	Here, terrestrially, we will be controlling that.
	In other words, When this device goes online to try to receive information, we will have detectors that detect neutron spin orientations that would allow us to digitalize or to translate that into binary code.
	And we know how to read binary code.
	So we're anticipating that that's the way we're going to be sending the information because we have, in fact, we'll be doing that.
	In other words, once we have this process, That's how we're going to set it up.
	So with extraterrestrials, it's going to be a lot harder, because the only other way that we could get the information would be from SETI.
	And they might send us information in terms of a binary code or something else.
	The problem is that we have to be able to determine that we're getting information.
	All right, let's try a couple of calls here and see what kind of questions we get.
	You're on the air with Professor Ronald Mallett.
	Hi.
	Hello Art.
	Hello.
	Hi.
	I got a question that maybe the professor might be or may not be Well, the only way you'll know is to ask.
	That would be Stephen Gibbs in the HDR from times past.
	You remember him?
	No.
	Oh, okay.
	He had something that was given to him.
	HDR is Hyper Dimensional Resonator.
	Art, maybe you can fill him in a little bit more better than I can.
	Not really.
	No?
	No.
	You don't remember Stephen Gibbs?
	I remember Stephen Gibbs vaguely, yes.
	Yeah.
	But he's been so much.
	So, a hyper-dimensional resonator?
	What's that?
	It was some kind of invention that he had that had some kind of bar magnet and a set of controllers and I think it had to do with some high frequency stuff to make you Either out of body, or if it was on a correct play line, go back in time.
	Alright, well that's getting pretty far out there.
	I'm sorry I don't remember it well enough to describe it to the Professor.
	There have been a lot of people, Professor, that have come up with various sort of time travel schemes, or claimed time travel.
	You're aware of that, right?
	Oh yeah, no, I'm aware of that.
	I once again, you know, as a scientist, it has to be something that's verifiable.
	I mean, remember the experiment that I was talking about with the Naval Observatory?
	I do.
	Yes.
	Right.
	That's been repeated again and again and again.
	And not just here in the US, but in other places.
	Right.
	Well, that's science.
	So, yes, we know it's true.
	Right.
	The thing is, is that when people tell me that, you know, that a person says that they've traveled back from the future, I tell my students, number one, first, you know, be very polite to the person.
	Number one.
	Two, say, well, okay, show me the machine that you've materialized into, because, once again, they cannot have materialized into nothing.
	There has to be a receiver that they were in, because that was the thing that caused the time distortion in the first place.
	Well, now, Ed, are we so sure, since it hasn't happened yet, how it would have to manifest?
	Oh yeah.
	I mean, it doesn't matter what the process is.
	For example, when we were talking about the limitation of tide drop, let's talk about wormholes.
	You can't go back in time earlier than when the wormhole was formed.
	You just can't.
	I mean, that's physics.
	You can't go back in time earlier than when the rotating black hole was formed.
	So no matter what the process is, and it doesn't matter what it is, you can't go back in time earlier Great, it's been a pleasure listening.
	they materialize, they have to materialize in a device of some sort and it can't just
	simply be that they materialize out of, into nothing.
	Okay, alright, here's another one.
	You're on the air with Professor Mallet.
	Hello.
	Hi, Art.
	Hi, Professor Mallet.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	I hope you're all having a great night.
	Thank you, we are.
	Great, it's been a pleasure listening.
	I have a couple brief questions.
	Go ahead.
	First, Professor, have you seen the movie Primer about time travel?
	Yeah, in fact, I'm glad you bring that movie up because it's one of the few movies that actually talks about the limitation of going back into the past in a rational way.
	It's a very little-known movie and very low-tech, but they do point out that you can't go back in time earlier than the device Yeah, I thought the notion of the failsafe was pretty novel and unique.
	Yeah, and it's actually based on the way in which physics, you know, operates.
	So yeah, I'm glad you mentioned that.
	Great, and my other question would be, if you're familiar at all with simulation theory, I know you mentioned, you know, this idea that either pulsars or quasars were originally seen as, you know, possibly information.
	And I'm curious to know if you're familiar at all with, I guess, this theory that posits that, you know, we might be living in a simulation or that there's this alignment of quasars along the different filaments in the galaxy that could suggest, you know, different ways of the ordering of physics.
	Yeah.
	No, actually, I have heard about this notion that we might be living in a simulation and we might be actually living in a matrix.
	Incidentally, my One of my other favorite science fiction movies is The Matrix.
	The Matrix, of course.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	The thing is, is that, once again, it has to be, how does one verify that?
	You know, that's the limitation.
	In other words, yeah, maybe it's a possibility, but how do you actually verify it?
	So, it's one of these things that it's an interesting conjecture, but it's hard to know how one actually can, in an operational way, verify it.
	Sure, and my last question is, maybe I just wasn't following earlier, but if you're able to talk about the realistic, and I guess the large-scale implications of being able to send information back to the past.
	Maybe I wasn't following, but it sounds like you were saying that information sent back might go to a different timeline, so it's just essentially just deep sharing into different universes?
	Or am I misunderstanding?
	Yeah, that's one possibility based on quantum mechanics, is the fact that the information that we send back could end up in a parallel universe rather than ending up in our universe.
	And on the converse side of that, that means that the information that we might be getting in our universe might or might not be coming from our universe, it might be coming from a parallel universe.
	So we have to have some sort of controls to know, you know, what's happening.
	Would it still be valuable to us, or could it, you know, could some of the information that we get back, say, from a different universe, could it carry, you know, different implications?
	Say that basic rules of physics are different in a separate universe, and we receive that information that, you know, that is the foundation of its analysis.
	Is that a real possibility?
	No, but not on the physics level, but on a technological level.
	In other words, we could be Let's suppose that someone sends information back and we were thinking that it was a cure here.
	Okay.
	It could actually be a disease.
	Yes, yes, yes, yes.
	So it could be either immensely harmful or helpful.
	Who would know?
	That would be a real problem.
	But as far as the basic laws of physics, they have to be the same or we won't be able to get the information from them at all.
	All right.
	Thank you very much for the call.
	Al on Skype.
	You're on the air.
	Hi there.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	I have two quick questions.
	Alright.
	Okay, one is, if, assuming that, okay, if you go back in time, but it ends up being not your timeline, what I don't understand is, do we then, would that time traveler be creating their own universe?
	Would they actually be creating this universe?
	Or are they just slipping into... Something that was already there.
	Right.
	Right.
	That's right.
	The thing is, is that you have to remember that, once again, when you take into account the fact that they have to materialize into it, it has to be that they are coming into, it could be that they're creating a new universe, but that new universe has to have a device in it.
	That's like the device that they left, or they can't just get to that universe.
	So the question is, is that, Is it a universe that was already there, is what you're
	saying, and that they come into that universe?
	If we're talking about the parallel universe and the notion and the way in which I was talking about it,
	you actually would be creating an alternate universe, don't you?
	Wow.
	Yeah, that's amazing.
	It is, yes.
	My other quick question was, let's say we know now that there could be Earth-like planets, even super-Earths, that could be even millions of years more ahead than us in terms of advanced life.
	And if that's possible, this is really out there, but it's fun, a fun idea.
	If that's possible, and this super advanced civilization created a time machine, and they turned on that time machine at the time, say, when Earth had dinosaurs roaming on it, would it be possible for those aliens to say they had this time machine aboard a spaceship that just lasts a long time?
	Could they visit Earth, and visit Earth back when it was the time of the dinosaurs?
	Absolutely.
	No, no, absolutely.
	That's a possibility.
	But yeah, no, that's a possibility.
	I mean, the question is of them trying to find us.
	I mean, it's a big universe out there.
	But let's say that they're able to find us.
	Yeah, they could actually have visited the time of the dinosaurs if they had created their machine that long ago.
	Yes.
	Well, if they came down with the dinosaurs, they probably left quickly.
	I would say that that would be very much so.
	On the phone, you're on the air with Professor Mellet.
	Hello.
	Good evening, Art.
	Professor Ron, the given would have to be, let's assume that the physics, and I have two questions, but that the physics Here on Earth as we experience it is the same anywhere in the universe.
	So put that aside.
	That's a given.
	Could this technology that you have discovered be used for two ways?
	Could it be used to transport an object, and if so, how big, back through time into the future, as big as a city, as small as a person?
	That's the first part of the question.
	Okay, hold on, hold on.
	Let's get an answer.
	Right.
	No, I mean, at least what I'm doing would be information.
	You couldn't send, you know, because these things depend on energy.
	You know, you're sending, the larger the thing is, the more energy you're going to need.
	So, no, it would actually be, you know, something as small as a neutron.
	Nothing larger than that in the technology that I'm developing.
	Well, you could imagine, though, an extraterrestrial race capable of, let us say, controlling the energy of a sun.
	Well, if they're able to control that kind of energy, then they might be able to, you know, to do it.
	Okay.
	Caller, next question.
	Okay.
	Well, this may or may not be related to what we just stated.
	The transporting device that has been leaked out in the last couple of years, I think in Sweden, where they said they did a transporter, Star Trek type transporter thing, but only, I believe, with a molecule across a room.
	So we know that's possible.
	Would your technology be able Within the current time that we experience, be able to transport physical objects or even living things from point A to point B on Earth?
	No.
	Well, number one, what you're talking about is teleportation.
	Yes.
	From time travel.
	And my work is not teleportation.
	In a sense, you might say it's the opposite.
	In teleportation, you're sending things from one point to another in space.
	Okay, over arbitrarily short periods of time.
	In my case, you're sending things through time over, you know, a short period in space.
	In other words, you want the object to appear in the location now that you have sent it from.
	In other words, your laboratory is somewhere in the future, on the Earth in the future, but you want it to be, you want it to arrive in the past where your laboratory is in the past.
	Alright, let's go outside the country to Michelle, and I bet she's in Japan, right?
	She is!
	Hi Michelle!
	Hi, this actually deals with what you were just talking about.
	The earlier guest asked about if civilizations say millions and millions of years ago had this time machine, and then could we use it to go back to our millions and millions of years ago?
	The question that I had was, Let's say this time machine was moved.
	You just said that you'd want it in a static place like a laboratory.
	But let's say someone built it on a ship, and then it started at point A, and then two million years later it was, you know, way on the other side of the galaxy somewhere.
	If you walked into it, or sent information into it or whatever, In the future, where is it going to end up in the past?
	Is it going to end up in that spot in the past?
	Or is it going to end up in the machine's original spot in the past?
	That's a very excellent question.
	The thing is, is that the way you have to think about it, and I'm going to talk about this in terms of my work that I'm doing, is that when I was talking about these loops in time, the loops really don't close back on each other so that it's like you're going around and around.
	What's happening is that Think of two different things.
	Imagine that when these loops are being created in time, that it's like a slinky.
	So the base of the slinky is here where the Earth is now.
	As these loops are being created, they're like the helix of the slinky.
	So as the Earth moves, imagine that you take the top part of the slinky.
	You're holding the base of the slinky.
	You know, where the Earth is now, okay?
	And what you do is, the top of this, remember the laboratory is moving in space, as you pointed out.
	The thing is, is that the top of the slinky is going to adjust itself and be with the laboratory wherever it is in the universe.
	So that at some later time, the top of the slinky is way over here.
	And what you have to do is, in other words, to get back to the past, you are actually going to have to spiral back along the loops of the slinky.
	And you can go back to any point, and you'll be where the Earth was at that point, all the way back up to when you turned the device on.
	Right.
	But what if you were to actually physically move the device to another place?
	I guess is the question.
	Would it have to be stationary in one place?
	Wherever the device is, it's going to be where In other words, the loops are going to be adjusted to wherever you move the device.
	It doesn't matter.
	So if it started out in, let's say, Planet X, and later on it ended up on Earth, if you got into it and went all the way back to its beginning, you would end up on Planet X, in theory, correct?
	You have to remember that what you're doing you have to leave the device on continuously.
	That's important.
	So these loops will adjust to wherever you are.
	And you're going back in time to wherever that particular link on the slinky was to where you were.
	So if the machine was able to be able to move while turning on,
	you would end up wherever the machine was at the point that you jump off, basically.
	You got it.
	Right.
	In the future, Michelle, if you wouldn't mind, Planet Y. Okay, Planet Y and Planet X is in just X, Y, Z. Yeah, I know.
	Latest date for extinction, by the way, is October 7th.
	Thank you, Michelle.
	Thank you.
	Alright, let's go to Jeff.
	Hello, Jeff.
	You're on with Professor Mallett.
	Hey there.
	It's good to hear from you.
	I just wanted to give you a quick shout out.
	You're kind of breaking up a little there.
	I always seem to break out.
	My dad passed away and he and I used to always talk about all the good things that you've always done.
	He passed away this week.
	I'm sorry, Jeff.
	It's just not going to make it.
	That was totally broken.
	Try for better internet.
	And give us a shot.
	Let's go to the phone, I guess.
	And hello, you're on the air with Professor Mallett.
	Hello, Art and Professor Mallett.
	I have a few questions.
	My first question is, if time travel ever becomes possible, is it possible to completely miss the Earth and going back and forth?
	Because I don't know if you heard the previous call.
	Right.
	That kind of ties into the previous call.
	Right.
	But that's the answer.
	These loops would adjust to wherever you are as long as you leave the device on continuously.
	So you're not going to end up in space.
	You're going to end up where the device was.
	Because the loops, as I said, it's like, as I said, this thing with the analogy of the slinky really is an accurate analogy.
	So without going over it again, the answer is no problem.
	Right, right.
	And the second question, a lot of these books that we read, like the future worlds and these dystopias, it really seemed like the authors are You know, really experiencing this.
	Is it possible that some of these people writing these books are the people that are having those slips between alternate realities?
	Can't say absolutely no.
	Well, no, but the thing is, is that what you have to remember is that the human imagination is incredible.
	I mean, H.G.
	Wells, when he was writing this book, The Time Machine, he wrote it ten years before relativity came on.
	And what he said in it almost sounds like, how did he get this information?
	He actually calls time the fourth dimension.
	That was the first time it was stated like that.
	And it was something that's always caused me to ponder, how did he come up with this information?
	So the thing is that I think that it just has to do with the human imagination rather than the fact that they're getting some sort of outside information.
	You know, one of my favorite quotes by Einstein is that imagination is more important than knowledge.
	Knowledge is limited, but imagination encircles the world.
	And what he meant by that was not that knowledge isn't important, but what he meant is that the driving force for us to acquire knowledge is our imagination.
	So I just think that these people are extremely imaginative, and they could lead to The real possibilities.
	After all, H.G.
	Wells was the inspiration for me to try to understand scientifically how time travel was possible.
	All right.
	And the final question is, there's a popular British sci-fi show that you may have heard of.
	In that show, the main character talks about Doctor Who.
	Yes, Doctor Who.
	I'm a huge fan.
	The Doctor talks about these fixed points in time.
	Where you can go through time, but there are certain things that you cannot change or influence.
	And I'm wondering, is that probably going to be true when we get time travel?
	See, that's one of those things that we don't know until we do it.
	Because, as I mentioned, this notion of parallel universes is actually just one possible conjecture.
	I mentioned that Stephen Hawking had another, and there's also the possibility, which I didn't mention, of the fact that what we think of as being part of our life, if time travel had been invented earlier, is something that we don't even realize is different.
	What you were talking about as far as fixed things, that would play into Hawking's chronology protection hypothesis, that there would be things that you could alter.
	But once again, we don't know.
	And then there's that scary other possibility.
	Which is the fact that when we do go back in time, we really do alter our real universe and change it, and that the only person who realizes that is the person who altered it.
	Yes.
	And the house outside of the time screen doesn't realize that.
	All right, you two, I'm sorry.
	We've got to call a halt to it there.
	We'll take a break, and then more questions for Professor Mallet.
	I'm Art Bell, and this is Midnight in the Desert Stumbling Through the Night.
	Coming to you at the speed of light in the darkness.
	This is Midnight in the Desert with Art Bell.
	Now, here's Art.
	Here I am, and to that poor fellow who called earlier and said, gee, I'm broken up every time I call, it's your internet.
	So, what you need to do is upgrade your internet.
	And, uh, it's not so much a matter of speed, it's actually something called jitter in the internet.
	You could have a pretty good speed, but if you had enough jitter, the audio would always be broken up like that.
	So, you're going to want to look into that and have a discussion with your provider.
	And, uh, with that in mind, uh, Professor, once again, here we are, and lots of people want to talk to you, so Let's go to Marian all the way over in Romania in the European Union.
	Hi, Marian.
	I apologize for my voice again.
	That's all right.
	Go ahead.
	Well, one that goes back in time, for example, can send information from today, one day ago, That's right.
	to get the lottery winnings or I don't know what financial gains, I mean, for say.
	So what's going to stop them from doing that?
	Why it have been done by now?
	Okay, well if you were listening, Professor, I think you feel that the information would
	not come from this specific timeline, is that right?
	That's right, I mean, according to quantum mechanics, I mean, the person might make a
	winning in another universe, but they won't make it in this universe.
	That's one possible scenario.
	The other thing is that it can't have happened yet because time travel hasn't been invented yet.
	Not terrestrial time travel.
	Any minute though.
	The right amount of money and a great enough technology, a lot of money, perhaps.
	But the thing is, is that, as I said, according to what we understand from quantum mechanics, you might be able to alter information in another parallel world, but maybe not this.
	That's just one possibility.
	As I said, there's the other option of Stephen Hawking's chronology protection hypothesis, which simply says that when you try to send the information back, You won't be able to do it.
	But once again, we don't know what's going to really happen when it happens.
	And once again, the technology, when it does go online, is not going to be accessible to individuals any more than nuclear reactors are accessible to individuals.
	All right.
	On to Dale.
	Hello, Dale, on Skype.
	You're on.
	Hey, Art Bell.
	How you doing?
	Very well.
	Thank you.
	Great, great, great show today.
	Professor, I've got a couple of geometry questions for you.
	This is a really interesting theory.
	Are you with the light?
	that you're using to create the changes in the fabric.
	Are you moving the light like in a cylinder, like you were just so that the light beam stays parallel and moves
	around?
	Or is it moving in a cone, like you use the analogy of stirring ice?
	Or are you actually using a coherent source and rotating it along the axis of the light beam?
	OK.
	We'll answer all of your questions in one.
	Number one, it is a coherent light source.
	It's lasers.
	In other words, when I say light, it has to be specifically laser light.
	OK?
	The other is that you can create a cylinder of light that actually is light going along the surface of a cylinder.
	So that's what you're doing.
	OK?
	So it's coherent laser light, and it's in a cylinder pattern.
	OK, so you're spinning it.
	Okay, interesting.
	So many tie-ins with a lot of the other machines we've been hearing about lately.
	Now the other question was, with E equals mc2, you get a whole lot of energy out of
	matter and I'm wondering if this machine, this idea, is deforming the fabric of space-time
	in the same way that matter does, it would take a lot of light to do that.
	So how much light do you need?
	Yeah, no, that's absolutely right.
	As far as twisting space is concerned, it's not that much, but when it comes to twisting time, it could be gigantic.
	That's why we have to try to understand first how much we need, and we do actually know how much we need to twist space.
	Space.
	But what we're hoping to learn from that is novel ways of overcoming how much we would need to twist time.
	It's very much the analogy that I was mentioning earlier with equals MC squared.
	That sounds like a simple equation.
	But the question is, is how do you get that energy out of that mass?
	And it wasn't even clear at all until the 30s that that was even possible, even though theoretically it was so.
	It wasn't until we discovered the notion of chain reaction that we actually was able to see how we could get the energy out of the nucleus, okay, to create that enormous amount of energy that we have, which results in the atomic bomb, but also a nuclear reactor.
	So what we're hoping is that with these feasibility studies, and when we do the experiments with the twisting of space, that this will All right.
	Very quickly, I think to Vancouver, Washington, on the phone.
	Hello?
	Hello, Art and Professor Mallet.
	of time, but once again we haven't gotten to that stage yet.
	All right, very quickly I think to Vancouver, Washington on the phone.
	Hello.
	Hello, Art, Professor Mallet.
	Yes.
	I am by no means a scientist, but I have a personal theory about time dilation that I'd
	like to run by you and see what you might think about it.
	I picture a simple atom like a hydrogen atom with the electron orbiting around the nucleus
	describing a perfect circle.
	Now, let's say you accelerate that in a linear direction.
	It's no longer describing that circle.
	It's describing a spiral now.
	It's trading off some of its orbital velocity for the linear velocity.
	And the faster you accelerate it, the more elongated that spiral becomes until Well, the thing is that you're partially right, but you have to remember that the system has time in it.
	It's not something that's creating time.
	for us, something that is traveling at speeds close to light.
	I just wonder what you might think about that.
	Well, the thing is that you're partially right, but you have to remember that the system has time in it.
	It's not something that's creating time.
	It has time in it.
	So you're actually having a time dilation effect that's happening
	for the electron that's moving around the proton.
	And then when you're moving the system, it's the time dilation effect that's happening is happening to the system.
	It's not that the system is creating the time dilation.
	So that's that's as I said, you have to remember that the time is independent of the system.
	And what you're doing by accelerating it is you're actually causing the time of the system to become altered, not the time of the system.
	The system is creating the time violation.
	Does that make sense?
	I think it does to me.
	Let's go to Skype.
	Hello, you're on the air with Professor Mellick.
	Is this me?
	That is you.
	Awesome.
	I had a quick question for the professor.
	Yes.
	Take my answer off the air.
	Once time travel becomes possible, would it be possible to go back in time and record an event with a camcorder or an audio recorder?
	And if so, would the information on that recorder still exist when you came back to the future?
	Oh, good one.
	Yeah.
	So what you're saying is, is that suppose you go back The problem is that it may or may not, because once you've gone back, you've altered the past.
	So if you come back, then you might find that you have a different system because you've disturbed the past.
	And so what you now have on your camcorder is not what you would have if you went back again, because you've altered the past by being there.
	Boy, that's disappointing.
	All right, let's go here.
	I'm not sure where here is, but on the phone, you're on the air with Professor Mallet.
	Excellent, excellent.
	I'm calling from San Diego, California.
	I did not catch the beginning of the program, but I've heard Dr. Mallet in the past, so I'm sort of familiar with his theories.
	And the basic premise, I think, Professor, is that you're The energy density of the circulating ring laser is such that you are warping space-time, correct?
	That's correct.
	I'd like to pose some physics challenges to that.
	Now, the first question is, have you measured the warping of space-time with your current setup?
	No, because we haven't been able to do the experiment yet.
	But if you mean, as far as the equation is concerned, yes, definitely.
	We know what sort of energy densities are going to cause the twisting of space.
	Alright, practical application, not yet.
	Go ahead.
	Theoretically, right.
	So, I pose that you are going to struggle immensely with this simply because of the energy density requirements.
	So, as you know, we cannot do high energy density particle physics with a laser yet.
	We can do nuclear physics with a laser, but not particle physics.
	The highest energy density that we have on the planet will be found in a particle accelerator, something like CERN, you know, Hadron Collider.
	Even there, the energy densities are not sufficient enough to warp space-time.
	So, if this is an experiment... I mean, that may be true, but what we're talking about is actually, you can distort space with The equation actually has, if you look at the equation, it has independent factors.
	It's not just simply the energy density, but it's actually, this is a ring laser type of thing.
	Well, right.
	It's inversely proportional to the size of the ring laser.
	So... That's... What it boils down to, sir, is just energy density.
	So, for instance, if you think of... No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, The equation actually has two separate factors.
	You're saying that it only has one, and that's not true.
	The equation has the energy density divided by the size of the ring laser.
	So you have two independent parameters.
	If you have, what you have to do is maximize the energy density and minimize the size of the ring laser.
	That's just energy per volume.
	So, that's just energy per volume.
	If you think of Eddington's measurement of Einstein's theory, where the starlight was passing near the sun, and Einstein believed in his theory that he would send that light... Alright, hold on, hold on, hold on.
	You're wrong.
	Alright, let's go call her.
	Go ahead, Professor.
	Yeah, the equation says two separate things.
	It's not just simply the energy density of the ring laser.
	The energy density is a separate factor from the size of the ring laser.
	The size of the ring laser is a separate parameter.
	And what you're doing is you're actually increasing the energy and decreasing the ring laser size.
	That is not the same thing as changing the energy density.
	So in what you're measuring, in both cases, the thing that you're measuring is the precession of the neutron.
	And the precession of the neutron, for reasonable energies, for instance 1,000 joules, you can actually show that you get a precession rate that is probably measurable.
	So that's not quite true.
	What we're trying to do is to show that you can cause a precession.
	of the neutron due to the circulating ring laser.
	And that is actually something that is within present technology.
	Now, as far as twisting time, that requires not only different equations, but that requires much more energy.
	But as far as twisting space is concerned, that is definitely within the present technology and within laser powers.
	As a matter of fact, I have a colleague Who's a laser specialist and is an expert in diode lasers.
	And the NSF proposal we have actually shows that you can, you know, cause this twist.
	And is there a need how much money to begin to approve application?
	Like I said, we have to have at least a quarter of a million dollars for the feasibility study.
	And then that will determine exactly how much we need for the actual experiments.
	Well, that seems within reason.
	Hi there, you're on the air with Professor Mallet.
	Hi guys, good evening.
	Good evening.
	Hi, this is Chandler calling from Bloomington, Normal, Illinois.
	And my question for the guest is, about a month or two ago, you had interviewed a guy Who had claimed to have traveled back in time as part of a Project Pegasus by DARPA.
	That's right.
	And even viewed dinosaurs and said he attended the Gettysburg Address.
	He did.
	And I was wondering... My guess is the professor is probably familiar with Andrew.
	Yeah, I am.
	Yeah, he is.
	So, I would wonder, have you, in that case, or have you ever run across any other specific cases that have given you pause and made you wonder whether we've had visitors from the future?
	Well, I don't think Andrew gave him pause, but he can answer for himself.
	No, remember what I said about verifiability.
	My, and this is important, you know, physics And science in general has two critical things, reproducibility and verifiability.
	You have to be able to verify this.
	And when I say verify it, I mean by independent laboratories anywhere in the world.
	And you have to be able to reproduce it anytime, you know, again and again, again, under the same conditions.
	One of the things that I'm very, very proud of is my book has been translated in a number of different languages.
	Most of those languages are ones that I can't read.
	For example, it's been translated to Japanese, Chinese, and Korean.
	The thing that looks exactly the same in all of those languages is the basic equation that I have for the precession of the neutron due to the gravitational field of circulating light.
	The equation looks exactly the same.
	What that says is universality.
	Someone in any of these countries can verify my work independently of me.
	And the thing is, is that whenever, for scientists, if you can't show in a verified way that what you have done can be done and reproduced, then let's just simply say the community is skeptical.
	So Andrew's got to go back again.
	Well, thanks for your answer.
	It's slightly disappointing.
	It's very direct.
	All right.
	Thank you very much.
	You guys, good.
	Right.
	Thank you.
	Professor, we are out of time, literally.
	One thing is, I'd just like to mention, if people are interested in the book, it is available on Amazon.com.
	Of course.
	And the name of the book?
	It's Time Traveler.
	Time Traveler.
	All right, well, it has been my pleasure, as always, to interview you on one of my favorite topics.
	So, Professor, thanks a million.
	Thank you very much, Mark, for having me on your program.
	I wish it could be thanks, you know, a quarter of a million, and you could move... Anyway, have a great night, Professor, and thank you.
	Thank you very much.
	Good night.
	From all the time zones involved, which is all of them, we're here on the high desert, and we're saying good night.

▲