Kelly: “We read about astronomer Frank Tipler’s idea of a cylinder to time travel. Are you familiar with his idea and do you think it could work?”
James Hedberg: “I was not familiar with a Tipler cylinder before this. Would it work? I doubt it.”
Meg: “We’ve seen in some movies and TV shows that black holes or cosmic strings can be used to time travel. What is the scientific basis behind these theories?”
James Hedberg: “The ‘scientific’ origin of all of these time travel sci-fi setups seems largely based on the observable fact that in the vicinity of very large (i.e., massive) objects like black holes, time does behave differently than our normal experience would suggest. Even near a rather small object like the Earth, engineers must account for relativity effects when programming the satellites in orbit. Near something much heavier, like a black hole, these effects will be more noticeable, and can easily serve as conceptual launching pads for more exotic (and much less verifiable) ideas like time travel. Though, as far as actually exploiting these mechanisms, I don’t think there is much scientific basis.”
Kelly: “What is your favorite theory of time travel, either based in science or science fiction, and why?”
James Hedberg: “I usually liked Star Trek’s TNG time travel scenarios the best. They seemed to usually take care in dealing with the sticky issues of causality. In general, I love to imagine controlling our positions in time like we can our positions in space, but my science training doesn’t make me think we’ll ever have much luck making such things a reality. Most time travel scenarios in fiction seem to ignore the most obvious problem: that not only is Earth turning, but it is also moving around the sun, and the sun is moving around the galaxy, and the galaxy is moving through the universe, so were I to just blink back in time five minutes, the Earth would be somewhere completely different. But, yes, I do enjoy a good sci-fi time travel story.”
Meg: “Me too! Do you have a favorite Stephen King book or movie adaptation? What stuck with you about it?”
James Hedberg: “I read a few as a kid, and they certainly did leave an impression. Cujo probably spent the most time bouncing around in my head growing up. I spent a lot of time in cars waiting for grown-ups to do something (back when it was okay to leave your kid alone in a car in a parking lot for hours …) and couldn’t help but relate.”
Kelly: “That would be much rarer to see nowadays! Thank you for explaining these complicated topics to us!”
There’s a theory called the butterfly effect that could explain why things change each time Jake travels back in time. When Isaac Newton came up with the law of motion and universal gravitation in the 1600s, everything seemed predictable within science and the universe. This led to the belief that the future is set and we need to just wait for it to reveal itself. Determinism is the idea that the future is fixed while chaos theory purports that a small deviance could drastically change the outcome. The science of the butterfly effect is that tiny changes in big systems can have complex results.
For instance, in meteorology it’s common practice to create several weather forecasts for predicting a hurricane’s path because slight variables can create different results. A quote from Fichte in the 1800’s The Vocation of Man explains the butterfly effect simply. “You could not remove a single grain of sand from its place without thereby … changing something throughout all parts of the immeasurable whole.”
The Butterfly Effect theory purports that a very small change in initial conditions can create a significantly different outcome in weather or other occurrences.
There are numerous examples of the butterfly effect in action throughout history. The bombing of Nagasaki was originally supposed to take place in the city of Kuroko but was changed at the last minute due to cloudy weather conditions. An entirely different history would have played out if the initial plan had gone through. Adolf Hitler’s future was also shaped by a seemingly small moment in time. He was an aspiring artist and applied to The Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna, Austria. He was rejected, twice, and it is said to be the catalyst for a shift in his worldview. The inciting incident that began World War I was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. This event almost didn’t happen, but, because of a botched first attempt, and a failure of communication with his driver, he was shot dead that day. The Chernobyl disaster is an example of how a small act saved millions. “After the initial explosion, three plant workers volunteered to turn off the underwater valves to prevent a second explosion. Had they failed to turn off the valve, half of Europe would have been destroyed and rendered uninhabitable for half a million years. Russia, Ukraine, and Kiev also would have become unfit for human habitation.”3
Twenty-eight workers and firefighters succumbed to acute radiation poisoning during the first few months of the cleanup of Chernobyl, and dozens of others were badly sickened.4
What practical considerations would we need to think about if we were to time travel? In 11/22/63, Al gives Jake the advice of picking up a pair of slacks instead of jeans and advises him to learn the lingo of the day. Both of these, era-accurate clothing and decade-specific language, would be imperative in order to not stick out in a crowd. Other considerations would be hairstyles, knowledge of the culture of the day, popular movies and books to reference, and overall manners for the specific year. Jake, traveling from 2011 back to 1958, would run into a host of variables that he would need to get used to. For example, a gallon of gasoline would have cost thirty cents in the late 1950s whereas a gallon in 2011 went for an average of $3.52. Fashion was vastly different in the 1950s and the culture of everyday conversation may have been challenging to adjust to. Through reading the book, we know Jake picks up on enough and doesn’t out himself as a time traveler from the future.
Theorists haven’t definitively agreed on what happened that fateful day in 1963, but that hasn’t stopped everyday people from speculating. Stephen King traveled to Dallas, Texas, when conducting research for the book and came to some of his own conclusions. He believes Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. When I (Kelly) was in high school I did my own research. I read the Warren Commission report, compared the notes of several experts, and pored over every piece of information I could get my hands on. My conclusion? I believed Lee Harvey Oswald may have been involved but didn’t act alone. What science and evidence made me believe this? A few things.