IN A WORLD OF CONSTANT SHORTAGES, ONE QUANTITY remains in an abundant supply. It’s called entropy. The science of thermodynamics is based on four fundamental axioms which are called the four laws of thermodynamics. Of these four laws, the second law wass discovered first, and the first law was discovered second, and the third to be discovered was called the zeroth law and the fourth law is called the third law. Now all of that makes perfect sense because thermodynamics is the most implacably logical of all the sciences. Let me tell you briefly what those four laws are.
The zeroth law just says that the idea of temperature makes sense. The first law is the conservation of energy. The second law is the entropy principle. And the third law says that there is a temperature so low that it can never be reached (absolute zero.) From these four laws people have deduced, not only the properties of matter, but the ultimate fate of the universe itself.
Now, if we’re going to get anywhere on that in this here, let’s get started…
Consider a billiards parlor where beyond the harsh glare of the limelight celebrities of sport, dandies of high scoeity, and captains of industry gather to pursue a common interest. One may wonder how these gentleman manage to keep their names out of the newspaper, to say nothing of the learned journals; and the casual observer may ask, ‘What are nice guys like these doing in a place like this?’ But to those in the know, the purpose is obvious: to investigate the laws of thermodynamics. But why a billiards bar? Partly, of course, it’s the ambience, which is the last word in understated elegance, but that goes without saying. Mostly, it’s the equipment, the specially called for apparatus that, in the interest of science, the billiard’s bar always has on hand. Consider two scientists at a table, holding beakers, held with the greatest care, each beaker contains a small amount of experimental fluid, which unfortunately, is an acquired taste. However, before things begin to get out of hand, the booze was poured into the beakers at a temperature of 295 kelvins, and with scientific precision, several geometrical blocks of h20 were added; the initial temperature of the cubes is 273 kelvins.
As time passes, heat from the warm fluid flows into the cubes, but the ice fails to warm up in response. The cubes don’t melt at once, which stirs up a scientific controversy, and, of course, this calls for more tests. During 126 experiments, none of the billiard’s scientists can find a single instance of a warm ice cube; on the other hand, they have a dillution of the properties of their experimental fluid. The ice, staying at a constant temperature of 273 kelvins melts into liquid water as heat flows into it.
What accounts for this strange behavior in billiard’s bars, or, for that matter, everywhere in the world? Eventually, of course, ice melts, but, along the way, in its solid state, why won’t it warm up? In any case, in the end, the ice, the experimental fluid, and in fact, everything else reaches a state of equilibrium. Somewhere, at least in theory, there’s a heavenly state called equilibrium. But in the real world, equilibrium is hard to find. On a Polynesian Isle, when liquid fire bubbles from below, and in the polar center of the arctic ocean, the world’s original ice machine works around the clock. In the deep and darkest heart of equitoria, the sun sees the savannah with relentless regularity; a shout away, liquid thunders to the rocks below. Indeed, from the beginning, through the middle, and to the end of the Earth, the earth itself is a great machine, a factory that never runs down, never takes a break or goes on strike. The engine of nature, a powerhouse, is driven nonstop by the limitless energy of the sun.
Whether it’s trade winds of the oceans, or the diesel engines of the great ships that fly them, all engines work because heat in motion can set matter into motion. For several hundred years, the heat engine has gone far and wide; but, past or present, the heat itself goes only one way: from high to low temperature. The existence of any engine on Earth, including the Earth itself, depends on one of its parts working at a higher temperature than another.
In nature’s engine, for example, powerful currents are driven through the Earth’s atmosphere by the difference between the equator’s temperature and the temperature at the poles. From pole to pole, and engine to engine, the principle is the same. In this vehicle, it’s the difference between the temperature of the exploding gas and air and its cylinders, and the circulating water of its cooling system. Steam engines operate in the temperature in the fire box and the low temperature in the atmosphere. The bigger the difference in temperature, the hotter that one part is, and the cooler the other is, the better it works. But if the fuel stops flowing, and the hotter part of the engine is allowed to cool down, the engine grinds to a halt and, obviously, that’s not good.
If every part of the engine has the same temperature, if all motion ceases, and there’s no vitality left, the engine reaches its final state: the state of equilibrium. From a scientific perspective, then, what’s the picture?
In this molecular dynamics calculation, each pair of atoms is programmed to interact the realistic inner-atomic force. So, then, what really happens when a warm body is brought into contact with a cold one? Thermal energy spreads from warm to cold, until both bodies reach the same temperature. This is the state of thermal equilibrium. At first glance, thermal equilibrium seems different from the mechanical idea, which keeps a body safe from falling, but take a closer look at an elevator; when a falling body hits the ground, each bounce is smaller than the last. Why? Because the kinetic energy in the body as a whole becomes transformed into the chaotic motion of the atoms that compose it, and that process is very similar to heat flowing into a cold body. The end result is the same. All of the available energy eventually becomes shared out as kinetic and potential energy of all the motions of all the atoms. Therefore, although the idea of equilibrium seems the ultimate in peace and serenity, that view hides the seething motion of the atoms within. Understanding equilibrium is a matter of perspective, of seeing within, and of seeing beyond.
Because equilibrium is a state in which all temperatures are equal, it’s a place where no machines operate, no geysers spray, no volcanoes erupt, no water falls, no big engines want to do any work, and no little engine can. Everywhere, nature seems compelled toward the equilibrium. Hot bodies and cold ones striving towards the same temperature, and falling bodies turning perfectly good work into useless heat. From the physicist’s point of view, when nature tends to behave in a universal fashion, there must be a scientific explanation–and there is.
The explanation began as an idea, of course, an idea for the construction of the better steam engine. There was a young man named Cornell, whose logic was able to show, for a work source proficient, there’s none so proficient as an engine that won’t go. His greatest ideas never worked, and in the real world, probably never will. Yet he had the desire to create an engine that’s perfect as nature would allow, and the logic to come pretty close. Given a difference in temperature, a high temperature, and a low temperature, Cornell designed a perfect abstraction–the Carno engine takes in heat at the high temperature turned into work, that expels the rest as heat at the lower temperature.
Because the Cornell cycle could run just as well in reverse, it was the picture of the ideal engine, the most efficient machine the laws of nature could possibly permit. But with Cornell’s early death, his ideas, practically ignored from the beginning, seemed destined for oblivion. That’s probably where they would have ended, had not taken interest in Cornell’s theory: Rudolph Clauseus, a German physicist, and William Thompson, who would become lord Kelvin. These scientists rescured Cornell’s writing, and from these pages brought forth the science of thermal dynamics. Within the Corneu’s reason, Klauseus and Thompson saw an amazing fact, and saw in terms of a mathematical simplicity. In Corneu’s ideal engine, the ratio of the heat taken in to the heat wasted was the same as the ratio of the two absolute temperatures needed to drive the engine. In other words, and this was the ideal that stemmed that stemmed from Carneu’s imagination, something that goes in is the same when it comes out.
If it’s not the heat, and if it’s not the temperature, what is it? It’s the heat divided by the temperature at which it flows. According to Klauseus, that is called entropy. In a Carneu engine, some entropy flows in at high temperature, does its job, and the same amount of entropy flows out at low temperature. So an ideal engine not only conserves energy, it conserves entropy as well. That’s the ideal.
But what about the reality? In the real world, with the clanking and hissing puffing engine, what really happens? For one thing, all engines conserve energy; the work equals the difference between the heat in and the heat left over. Using the same temperatures, a real engine does much less work than Carneu’s ideal. It does less work and leaves more heat to release. So, even though the entropy that flows in might be the same as Carneu’s, the entropy that flows out is bigger. That’s an amazing fact.
The entropy that flows out of a real engine is bigger than the entropy that flows in. Think about this.
Could this mean that real engines create entropy out of nothing? As a matter of fact, yes; that’s because, in real engines, heat flows isn’t isothermal and there’s always friction between moving parts. No matter what the final product will be, all real engines manufacture entropy. No matter the conditions in the workplace, the supply of entropy always increases, and no matter the workplace, the humans don’t own the manufacture on entropy. Day in and day out, mother nature’s machines crank out entropy, and nobody can compete with her output; every body of matter, everywhere in the universe, contains a certain amount of entropy. And although it isn’t always easy to tell how much entropy a body has, it isn’t too hard to determine when entropy flows from one body to another.
If heat flows out of a body at a given temperature, the entropy of the body decreases. If heat flows in at a given temperature, the body’s entropy increases by that amount. Throughout the cosmos, when and where heat flows, entropy goes with it. All engines extract heat from somewhere, the sun perhaps, or the boiler of a ship–using some to do their work and releasing the rest. Where the heat is released doesn’t matter too much in the bigger scheme of things. It flows into the atmosphere, the sea, anywhere that’s cool and too large to be affected by the flow of heat. Engines designed by humans operate pretty much the same way as those created by mother nature; as long as heat flows from a high temperature to a lower one, thing keeps rolling. And as long as there’s fuel, coal or oil or fuel, it’ll keep rolling.
If the fuel is cut off, the heat ceases to flow. The body cools, its temperature lowers little by little, and when a body finally has the same temperature as its surroundings, it’s in a state of equilibrium. As long as heat flows, as long as a warm body is warmer than a cool one, entropy will increase. And it will continue to increase until nothing else can possibly happen. The state of equilibrium, and should that happen, entropy would increase no more. In other words, the state of equilibrium is the state of maximum entropy.
All of nature’s processes can be seen as a constant drive to increase entropy, all through time, throughout the universe. While these facts have been established in scientific circles, a handful of dedicated researches, just can’t leave it alone. Perhaps that’s because one fact still puzzles the most curious among us. Though ice melts as heat flows the experimental fluid, the ice doesn’t warm while there’s any solid left. Why? A flow of heat crosses the transformation of ice into water at a constant temperature; therefore, from changing from ice, the water’s entropy is increased. And so water is a state of higher entropy than ice. In fact, any solid is a state of lower entropy than the same matter in liquid form. Liquid is a more disordered, chaotic state of matter, than solids are, and it has a higher entropy. On land and sea, or sea on land, or, indeed, anywhere in the universe, increasing entropy means increasing disorder and randomness; and the ice itself is a crystalline solid, wherein molecules exist in a geometric framework; in a solid, when the atoms cluster into a favorable configuration, the molecules are arranged to reduce their potential energy to a minimum, but water is a very different picture.
Remember, liquid molecules are chaotic, disarranged and scattered, disorganized; obviously, liquid molecules don’t minimize their potential energy as the solids do. So liquids not only have more entropy than solids, it has higher potential energy, and therefore more total energy. To melt or not to melt, that’s the question. And, if the dynamic is not yet clear as crystal, in this case an ice crystal, look at it from the ice cube’s point of view. If the ice melts, it becomes water–a state of higher entropy, and that’s good because nature just loves to increase entropy.
IF TIME TRAVEL IS A POSSIBILITY, WE MUST FIRST consider the possibility that time, and moments, are forever recurring from a superpositional perspective. If the multi-worlds theory is to be believed, there is a superposition in which every action is forever recurring. The mechanics of this probably follow relativistic progressions of time. As we have already discussed, from differing views of an astronaut entering a black hole, after crossing the event horizon he is in more than one place at the same time. (I’ll discuss this phenomena on the subatomic level in the transposition of subatomic particles in Cartesian coordinates.)
To an observational spaceship he is frozen at the boundary between the event-horizon and the black hole, frozen there in time.
To the astronaut, after he passes over the event horizon he is destroyed by the black hole. From one perspective, then, he is forever alive–frozen at the lip of the event horizon. In another relativistic frame of reference he is dead. This actually happens on much smaller scales, this type of relativistic time dilation and superpositioning. The superposition is that he is both dead and alive at the same time. Extending the superposition to be a backward looking, trans-dimensional (including all forever recurring moments), then time, each moment that we’ve ever lived, can be seen as still occurring and forever occurring. In fact, if time travel is possible, it must be a passage through gravitational spheres from one temporal procession coordinate system to another, lower one, one in which the event is yet to occur.
To travel backwards in time would be to travel forward in time as well. Let me explain. When objects move closer and closer to the speed of light, the mass of the object, as it inches closer to the light barrier, as was discovered through the Lorentz Transformation, the object begins to get heavier and also begins to contract. In addition to this, the closer an object gets to the light barrier, the slower time appears to be moving around the object. As a thought experiment, let’s discuss what would happen if a ship could somehow travel at the speed of light and the possible mechanism by which this could take place.
From the beginning of talk of time travel, in my opinion, the most important aspect about its possibility is the permanence of actions, static memories that are frozen in temporal coordinates. If time is not forever recurrent or physically embedded quantum information, then time travel into the past would not be possible. If time, all of time and all of the moments of our life, are from some perspective forever recurrent, then time travel is physically possible. This is not a metaphysical issue; this is a mechanical issue.
Since time is the product of the curvature of space, and space and time are inextricably connected, physical manifestations of the past ought to be, if general relativity is correct in all of its postulates, then the reversal of a mass’s movement forward in time is a physical response instead of a metaphysical abstraction we use to divide our days and nights and moments. In this view, to some system of temporal progression, time has yet to progress past a certain moment in our past. Time dilation of this sort is possible and has been known since the early 20th century. But is time travel a physical possibility? If so, a superposition that looks backward on all physical recurrent moments must be more than an abstraction to explain the behavior of subatomic particles.
We know from subatomic particles that travel into the future, though it be millionths of a second, is possible. Richard Feynman believed that antiparticles travel backward in time. If antiparticles travel backward in time, there is a physical future from which they regress in temporal position. This also means that from a positional reference frame, we’re living in a temporal position that has yet to catch up with the actual position in time we’re at. This means that to a certain degree we’ve already lived past the point that we’re at now–we just haven’t experienced it yet. This may seem disconcerting to think.
As I once found it fascinating that any civilization over 65 million light years away, if they had anyway of traveling to the Earth, instantaneously, they would arrive during the age of the dinosaurs–well the end of the age. Stars even further out are seeing the Earth as it is just forming. These two obvious considerations give credit to the theory that memories may be static and that from a reflective superposition that all events are perpetually occurring, in perpetuity.
Since time and the rate at which it is experienced is determined by objects of mass as they move through curved space-time, could the inverse of that proposition be true? Temporal positioning accounts for the way that time proceeds, accelerates, decelerates, and the curvature of spacetime is responsible for this.
The reason we haven’t a theory of quantum gravity that can account for the temporal procession of subatomic particles is because, due to the infinitely microscopic nature of subatomic particles, they don’t have the mass to warp spacetime in the way that bodies of greater mass do, bodies like planets, suns, and black holes. This brings me to the second part of the essay–how to identify procession acceleration in order to pinpoint temporal coordinates in reverse–by this I mean, if ever there were a time machine, someone of sufficient genius would know the way by which to pass through gravitational spheres in order to reach points of perpetually recurring and physical temporal coordinates.
In this view I believe that there are markers, nodes that switch between one moment of procession to another, and that these temporal coordinate systems can be considered tethered together by physical aspects, not to use a word for the wrong reason, by coordinate strings. Coordinate string calculation would be a way by which future scientists could calculate the manner in which they descend through temporal procession systems to physical coordinates in the past, which are, by necessity, data nodes tethered from one period to another–operating like a track of sorts.
My line of thought along these lines first came to me when considering the microscopic applications of the information paradox, the simultaneous life and death of the astronaut, depending on the reference frame. And I’ve tried to apply this to quantum fields. I’d like to go further in establishing a backbone to what I believe separates different coordinate procession systems.
I will begin with a few remarks on the definition of time that is being used in this paper. Time is a gravitational assignation; the rate at which time is experienced is determined by the object of mass and the mass of the systems passing through curved spacetime. Objects of greater mass experience time at slower rates than objects of lesser mass. The discrepancy between the passage of time for objects is due to time dilation. Gravitational time coordination systems exist within differing spheres, spheres in which time is passing at different rates.
My first conception of this came when I found out the speed of clouds moving across the horizon. To us they appear to be slowly drifting along. Without being too technical, I can say that they are moving much faster than we see them. Although this is going to refresh the reader in aspects of the earlier section, Temporal Position and the Event Mass, it must be said that, in this line of thought, mass determines the event mass constant–the event mass probability is the assignation of temporal procession and is based on mass. Light, therefore, being made of light quanta (photons) therefore have an event mass. The mass, however, is negligible; it is not beyond sanity to suggest that time dilation between our vision of moving clouds suggest that physical coordinate systems in temporal procession are a reality and, as they must be, permit a form of time travel which I will explain in a moment.
To a self conscious particle, lets say a proton, it could be moving at an infinitely quick and erratic rate to us as observers due to our reference frame. Another, more tangible supposition could be forth in the argument that a flea, or organism sufficiently small, would see us moving in slow motion much in the same manner as we see the clouds. If so, the possibility of events having already happened, despite the fact that the temporal procession of the flea’s event mass probability has yet to experience it is a tantalizing bit of information that underpins the notion of events happening in perpetuity.
To take this microscopic system of time dilation to its logical conclusion, once again we must consider the flea and its event mass probability. Now, one knows why a fly can so easily escape a human. It’s because, to a fly, we’re big, lumbering oafs. Their heart beat is faster, their mass is much less than ours, and they, therefore, have little effect in the procession of time defined within relativistic curved spacetime. This is a proposition made between two systems of observation. Let’s assume that human beings have the temporal procession (assigned by mass) of 1. In the same stroke let us contend that the event mass probability for a fly is .001. This could mean, theoretically, that if a human were to swat a fly, and kill it–in our manner of temporal procession–the fly would continue to live, in its own temporal procession before being killed. This postulate means that there are events that have happened in our future even though we have yet to experience them. This postulate is enough to suggest that from differing relativistic viewpoints that all periods of time, well maybe not as far back as the dinosaurs, but certainly within our own lives, can be accessed by calculating time dilation mechanics between systems of disparate mass. When we peer through these systems of event mass probabilities we are looking through gravitational spheres, gravitational spheres being the operative mechanism behind the procession of time. This means that the rate of time, the passage of time rather, is not an absolute and, by extension, can be woven into the laws of relativity on a microscopic level–something which has yet to occur.
My own thoughts lead me to believe that objects of different event mass probabilities experience time in layers of procession that go back to static memories that are perpetually occurring depending on the frame of reference of some particular particle. Gravitational spheres account for the differing rates of temporal procession and lead all the way to the top–the gravitational sphere encompassing light, and perhaps another in which entanglement, purported to be in excess of 10,000x the speed of light, could be another system of temporal coordinates tied by nodes of distribution along spacetime procession corridors.
The gravitational pull of a singularity, created by a star gone supernova, is strong enough to bend light–indeed, strong enough to pull light into the vortex that is often called a black hole. If light cannot escape, the inverse pull of the gravitational field is pulling at a speed greater than that of light. Our universe, having existed ‘within a nutshell’ as Stephen Hawking erroneously suggests, is as big a leap of faith for the scientist as the burning bush and the parting of the red sea is for theologians and those of faith.
It is a tautology to ask what came before the big bang in this view as there was nothing before it and, in the beginning, there was nothing–and it exploded. This is not a very good answer and it seems futile at best and puerile at worst. It is of interest to note the big bang was initially a theory proposed to account for the overabundance of hydrogen in the early universe.
As for the big bang being the beginning of all time and space and matter, I firmly reject this proposal. My primary postulate, which will be iterated in numerous ways to further elucidate the subtleties of its mechanistic reaction, is that the universe existed for billions of years before the big bang led to the fluctuation of matter into what we call four dimensional space time. The big bang, to me, is the result of a nature process of replication, replication of quantum information. The information is arranged according to the law of rearrangement, something I will devote more time to later.
Once when I was studying a particular segment of the Brothers Karamazov, the idea struck me that our universe couldn’t be the origin of space and time for the same reason that the Earth wasn’t the center of the universe. It was an egotistical stretch that time began in our universe, while ignoring the possibilities of prior big bang transitions (photospheric transitions) between the progenitor universe and daughter universe. This is what I scribbled onto a piece of paper (that I’ve documented electronically not to forget my original focus):
The universe existed for billions of years, perhaps infinitely receding into the earliest fluctuations of arranged matter, before the impetus that led to what is known as our big bang model of universal expansion. The big bang is a result of a natural process, not an explosion before which nothing existed, but an explosition as the result of a systematic process that perpetuates and seeds universes, each progenitor universe carrying the quantum information that would lead to the rearrangement of particles and elements, which I will deal with in my essay on the law of rearrangement.
I went on to further say that it is akin to biological reproduction with quantum information being the DNA from which newly propagative galaxies are assembled. It is akin to biological replication of quantum information as one universe, pre-existing another, recycles the atoms and matter when giving birth to a daughter universe. But one must ask what this has to do with the perpetual recurrence of static moments etched in time as encoded by nodes between temporal procession markers.
Another example that could attest to this theory in principle is the fact that if the sun were to burn out, we’d still see it burning as it always has for seven minutes before we knew it happened. This again leads credence to the idea that something has already happened in our future though we’ve yet to live through it. It is therefore not a large step to suppose that objects with different event mass probabilities experience time at different rates and these rates can be calculated through time dilation mathematics, which we’d have to understand in order to travel into the past.
A machine of sorts, a split integer magnetic system, are based on the universe through the lens of magnetism. If one were to take a permanent magnet and surrounded it with electromagnets, and if the polarity of the permanent magnet were positively charged and, if you arranged the electromagnet to face it with an equal positive charge–like poles repel.
The two forces of charges pushing against each other would cancel one another out. Every charge of the permanent magnet would be pushed back with a similar charge from the electromagnet. The permanent magnet would float from the cancelation of charges.
Now imagine spreading the electromagnet apart so that they are three-sided instead of four, but the permanent is still one piece. Next we make the permanent magnet into a wheel with a hole in the middle. The forces from the electromagnet will push in all directions which will force the wheel to hover.
Now, lets take the permanent magnets attached to the wheel and align them so that all positive polarities face outward. The negative polarities would point up; all the magnets on the bottom would produce a positive charge. Next we would surround the wheel with the electromagnets facing out.
Since the wheel is canceled out by the forces around it, it would be easy to spin and would have no resistance except wind, perhaps. In order to get movement out of the wheel, one would need to angle the electromagnets with pulsating charges pushing against the permanent magnetic wheel. If the entire unit is placed in an air free vacuum, the wheel will continue to spin as fast as the force pushing. Since the electromagnets are all facing out, this would allow the wheel to stretch to a perfect circle at high speeds. Since the electromagnetic waves are doing the pushing at 186,000 miles per second, the wheel would continue to spin until it reached the speed of light.
Now, one would stack several of these engines on top of one another and place a protective enclosure in the middle. The enclosure would have to protect the occupants from the harmful magnetic waves produced by the Machine (hereafter referred to as the BERM Device.)
As the BERM machine start to reach the speed of light, the entire structure would begin to move. The unit would no longer be associated with its environment and neither would the occupants inside the enclosure. For this would become the gravitational sphere that they inhabit and they would be relative to their surroundings. This can, in principle by observing an atom.
The electrons around the nucleus are moving at a much faster rate and yet the nucleus is part of the atom. For students of Einstein’s theory on traveling faster than the speed of light or possible time travel (which are one and the same) it wouldn’t be hard to imagine if it were possible to mount a BERM device to the outside edge of the wheel of a large BERM device. The outer BERM device would then be relative to its surroundings and already traveling at the speed of light–what, then, would the out BERM device be traveling at?
The last point of this argument is when the BERM device is enclosed with an outer casing, in order to make it an airtight vacuum, the BERM device would most likely take on a disk shape, due to the same law that produces the pearl, the spiral galaxies, and the elliptical orbits of the planet–angular momentum. An interesting experiment would be to galvanize the outside of the wheel and turn it sideways so that it becomes a standard wheel. In doing this I can’t help but wonder what land speeds could be obtained.
As I’ve said, in traveling at the speed of light, regardless of how far you go, you’re going both into the past and into the future. If one were to position a BERM device atop a gravity well and send it down the shaft, like electrons being sent through a synchrotron, it would gradually approach the speed of light and time would be processing at an infinitely slow rate around it. But once you reached the bottom of the gravity well after approaching the speed of light, more time will have passed for those outside the BERM device than for those inside it. Instead of traveling back to a static point in temporal coordinates, you’d have traveled into the past and the future simultaneously.
The people outside, whom you may have known only minutes before, will have aged by several years, and the time around them will have progressed in the temporal procession endemic to macroscopic objects on the Earth. You would be in the past, because all of your friends would be still a young man while the friends, who did not take the trip, would be much, much older. This is one view on how it would be like traveling into the past. Another view postulates that it would be akin to traveling into the future since the development of so much would have taken place in the brief moments that you close in on the light barrier. Would you be in the past, since you’re still young and those around you are your elders, or would you be in the future, having happened around you as you descended into the gravity well? This is something that is open to debate, though I believe that this is the type of time travel that will first become available. It will begin this way, I would hazard a guess, and proceed from there to more exact calculations of when and where you’re going. I don’t believe, however, that once you’ve traveled back in time, you can make it back to the time you traveled from.
Events, though forever recurrent, include events that lead into the past. These moments might be forever recurrent as well, but to use such a BERM device to travel into a future/past scenario as detailed above, would be irreversible for the simple reason that you can’t plan a return trip that brings the others, those who didn’t take the trip, back to the age they were before you descended into the gravity hole.
Your passage through the gradual gravitational spheres would be able to take you back to static moments, but would become a static moment, and though forever recurring, it is not a reversible process. A physical future ahead of the past you’ve descended to would from certain relativistic positions be there, there would be no way to unwind the process and return things to their normal order.
This postulate revolves around the idea that what we look at is already in the past and therefore we’re in a potential future, a superposition from which such and such events have already taken place. To an advanced civilization, say one hundred million light years away from the Earth, when, and if, they observed our planet, they’d be looking at the Earth during the time of the dinosaurs. If they had any means of space travel over such a distance that somehow broke the light barrier, they would arrive in what we would consider the past. This notion is also true of people you look at, as it takes reflected like a finite amount of time to activate the optic nerve and transmit the information to your brain. We’re in a future position vis a vis the stars we observe in the night sky, the galaxies; they are appearing to us as they were millions of years into the past. In this sense, the past retains a reality that is ever present.