← Back to the topics

Time Travel & Causality

Special relativity permits it. The universe mostly forbids it.

Contents
  1. Light cones & causal structure
  2. Time dilation & proper time
  3. The twin paradox
  4. Penrose diagrams
  5. Closed timelike curves
  6. Wormholes & Tipler cylinders
  7. Why macroscopic travel is ruled out

1. Light Cones & Causal Structure

Everything in relativity rests on one distinction: which events can influence which. At any event you can separate the universe into three parts — the past light cone, the future light cone, and everything outside, causally disconnected from it. Inside the future cone are events you can reach by travelling slower than light. Outside it, you never can.

$$ds^2 = -c^2\,dt^2 + d\vec{x}^2 \quad\Longrightarrow\quad \begin{cases} ds^2 < 0 & \text{timelike\ \ (can connect)}\\ ds^2 = 0 & \text{null\ \ (light)}\\ ds^2 > 0 & \text{spacelike\ \ (no signal fits)} \end{cases}$$

Because the interval between two events is invariant, whether an interval is timelike is a fact, not a perspective. No observer anywhere will ever disagree that event A happened before event B when A is in B's past light cone. That is the foundation of causality, and it is far stronger than it looks.

Light cone with timelike, null and spacelike worldlines A point in spacetime with its future light cone opening upward at 45 degrees. Inside the cone a steep timelike worldline, on the boundary a light ray at 45 degrees, and outside a shallow spacelike worldline that cannot be travelled by any massive object. x t EVENT timelike (v < c) — you can ride it null boundary spacelike (v > c) — unreachable Time travel means tracing a timelike path that arrives before it left.
Null lines sit at exactly 45° because light covers one unit of space per unit of time. Timelike paths are steeper, spacelike shallower — and only steeper ones are physically realisable.

2. Time Dilation & Proper Time

The proper time $\tau$ along a worldline is the time shown by a clock that travels with the object. For constant velocity it's $\tau = t/\gamma$. For a general path, integral and proper time are different things — that is the resolution of the twin paradox:

$$d\tau = \sqrt{dt^2 - \frac{d\vec{x}^2}{c^2}}\,, \qquad \gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}$$

A clock moving with the Earth is a frame, not an event. Comparing an accelerating traveller against a stay-at-home twin requires integrating along each actual path, not applying $\gamma$ to a velocity:

$$\Delta\tau = \int \sqrt{1 - \frac{v(t)^2}{c^2}}\;dt$$

Under uniform motion the integral is identical for both twins. It is the acceleration — that is, the failure of the journey to be a single inertial frame — that breaks the symmetry and lets the age difference be predicted in advance.

Example. A traveller accelerates at $g = 9.81$ m/s² for one year, coasts, decelerates for one year, and repeats. In the stay-at-home frame the total elapsed time is about $2.8$ years, but the traveller experiences about $1.1$ years — and at turnaround they are at most $0.9$ years old again. The traveller has genuinely, physically become younger. This is the classical constant-acceleration case, and the effect is unbounded.
Not a paradox. The traveller sees their own age increase monotonically; the stay-at-home sees theirs increase more slowly. Neither observer sees the other's clock run backwards. This is the single most misunderstood result in relativity — there is no second step where the traveller goes backwards.
Twin paradox spacetime diagram A stay-at-home twin travels a straight vertical worldline while the traveller's worldline curves away and returns, meeting again. Light signals sent from the stay-at-home twin catch up to the traveller, showing the traveller's view being blue shifted near turnaround. x t stay-at-home (worldline) traveller (turnaround) departure reunion The traveller's path is shorter, so ∫dτ is smaller — they are younger at reunion.
A spacetime diagram. Note the traveller's worldline leaves the light cone's straight-line symmetry by kinking — that kink is the turnaround, and it is the whole resolution.

3. Penrose Diagrams

An infinite spacetime cannot be drawn on paper. Roger Penrose's 1968 trick makes it finite: light rays are null, so under a conformal transformation you can compress every path of light to 45°, which lets infinite distance be drawn as a finite point. Infinity becomes a line in the diagram, and the whole geometry fits on a sheet.

$$ds^2 = \Omega^2(\eta)\,\bigl(-d\alpha^2 + d\beta^2\bigr)$$

$\Omega$ is the conformal factor. The causal structure — which events can signal which — is unchanged, while every path of null geodesic becomes 45°. This is why the diagram is the right tool for studying horizons: a horizon is not a material surface but a boundary of causal reachability, and causality is exactly what conformal compactification preserves.

Penrose conformal diagram of a Schwarzschild black hole A Kruskal-Szekeres conformal diagram. Null lines run at 45 degrees. The vertical event horizons divide the diagram into a left exterior region, a right exterior region, and two interior regions containing horizontal dashed spacelike singularities. The timelike infinities i-plus and i-minus and the null infinities scri-plus and scri-minus are marked, and the two exterior regions meet in a white-hole past singularity. FUTURE SINGULARITY r = 0 spacelike — the future is cut off here PAST SINGULARITY r = 0 spacelike — this is a white hole ℐ⁻ ℐ⁺ ℐ⁰⁻ ℐ⁰⁺ ℐ⁰⁻ ℐ⁰⁺ ∞ — infinite spacetime compressed to finite paper light rays compress to 45° lines; horizons are the vertical boundaries EXTERIOR (our universe) EXTERIOR region II BLACK HOLE (interior) WHITE HOLE (interior) event horizon event horizon
Kruskal–Szekeres conformal diagram of a maximally extended Schwarzschild black hole. The vertical lines are event horizons; the horizontal dashed lines are spacelike singularities. Our region (II) can never signal into region I — the white hole — which is causally sealed. This is why you cannot travel to a white hole even though it is "the past of" a black hole.

The Kruskal extension has four regions, and that structure is the payoff. Our exterior (region II) shares a boundary with an identical exterior (region I) connected through a wormhole. Signals from region I could in principle reach us. But the white hole (region IV) has no past you can enter — its past boundary is spacelike, so nothing inside it, not even light, can be sent backward to become the cause of anything in region III.

$$ds^2 = -\left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)c^2 dt^2 + \frac{dr^2}{1 - r_s/r} + r^2 d\Omega^2$$

Defining new coordinates $U$ and $V$ that are regular at the horizon, $U = -e^{-u/r_s}$, $V = e^{v/r_s}$, removes the singularity in the metric at $r = r_s$. Coordinates are a choice; the horizon is a coordinate-independent boundary of causal reachability. That distinction — the difference between an apparent singularity and a genuine one — is the reason Penrose diagrams exist at all.

4. Closed Timelike Curves

A timelike path that returns to its own starting point is a closed timelike curve — a CTC. By the equivalence principle, an observer on one would meet their younger self and, in principle, interact. Nothing in the Lorentzian metric forbids it.

$$\oint \mathcal{L}_\text{proper}\;dt < 0 \quad\text{(a CTC exists where the "time" integral is negative)}$$

The shift function $\xi = -T_\text{out} + T_\text{in}$ in Gödel's solution gives $T_\text{out} < T_\text{in}$, so you can circle and arrive before you left. The catch is the price of admission: Gödel's universe requires an infinite rotating dust cylinder of negative cosmological constant — unphysical on any reasonable account.

Gödel's metric (1949) — the first rigorous construction of closed timelike curves in a solution of Einstein's equations, with a closed universe and a rotating dust solution. Kurt Gödel himself considered it a warning, not a discovery.

5. Wormholes & Tipler Cylinders

The cleanest time-machine candidate is a traversable wormhole: a throat connecting two distant regions, shortening a route without creating a shortcut to the past. Morris and Thorne (1988) showed that to keep such a throat open against vacuum tension you need an unphysically negative stress-energy density — but it does not violate any known energy condition, only the weak one.

$$g_{tt} = \left(1 - \frac{r_0^2}{r^2}\right), \qquad \text{throat at } r = r_0$$

To turn it into a machine, Morris and Thorne added a pair of disks moving fast along the throat. Tipler's 1974 analysis showed the whole arrangement is unstable: any perturbation at the throat propagates with a divergence, and no finite energy keeps it open. Magnetic fields destabilise it; so does self-gravity. The price is exactly what is hardest to pay.

Cosmological protection. The "chronometry protection conjecture" (Hawking) proposes that any attempt to form a CTC is actively prevented — that the laws of physics, quantum effects included, conspire to break the chronology condition the moment it is threatened. It has never been proven, and quantum gravity is not complete enough to test it.
Morris-Thorne traversable wormhole throat A side-on embedding of a wormhole showing a flat exterior on the left, a throat pinching in the middle, and a second flat exterior on the right, with the time-shifting disks shown in cyan. exterior A throat exterior B time-shift disk Morris–Thorne: exotic matter holds it open
A traversable wormhole is short, not long — it reaches region B without cutting through the intervening spacetime.

6. Why Macroscopic Travel Is Believed Impossible

Given that the metric permits it, why is the standard answer so confident that time machines are impossible? Three independent lines of reasoning.

1. Energy conditions. Every proposed construction needs exotic matter violating the weak or dominant energy condition — negative energy density or tension. This is not a technicality; it would imply repulsive gravitational effects (Morris–Thorne) and a driving force of roughly $10^{42}$ kg for a year of acceleration, vastly exceeding the observable universe's mass-energy. Thorne's "time machine security report" argues no civilization could ever build one.
2. Horizon is already a computational bottleneck. Bardeen's 1973 result: because a black hole horizon equation is stationary, a comparable event-horizon equation would also be stationary in time, and stationary equations like it are strongly resistant to solution. Long-standing singularity theorems suggest a horizon-producing device would not stay stationary.
3. Instability. As Tipler showed, any wormhole-based time machine is violently unstable to perturbations; no amount of exact geometry keeps it open. Quantum field theory in curved space independently predicts the "minus-infinity catastrophe" near horizons, where outgoing radiation is infinitely blueshifted.
Consensus. Working relativistic star club: time travel is forbidden for reasonable physics with high confidence, allowed by the bare equations, and unresolved in quantum gravity. "Impossible" is really "no mechanism survives scrutiny." Any working machine would have to be different from every proposal so far.

Key Takeaways

🏠 Back to all topics