Full Picture

Article analysis:

The article "Time travel: five ways that we could do it" provides an overview of different methods for time travel, ranging from travelling at high speeds to using wormholes. While the article presents some interesting scientific concepts and examples, it also has some potential biases and missing points of consideration.

One potential bias is the focus on time travel to the future rather than the past. The article acknowledges that travelling back in time may not be possible, but it does not explore this idea further or present any counterarguments. This could lead readers to assume that time travel to the past is completely impossible, which is a controversial topic in physics.

Another potential bias is the lack of discussion about the risks and ethical considerations of time travel. For example, if someone were able to travel back in time and change a historical event, what would be the consequences? The article does briefly mention the risks of travelling too close to a black hole, but it does not delve into other potential dangers or ethical dilemmas.

The article also presents some unsupported claims and missing evidence. For example, it mentions that wormholes might be able to bridge distances of a billion light years or more, but there is no evidence to support this claim. Additionally, while the article discusses some experiments with mice and pigs regarding suspended animation, it does not provide any evidence for whether this method could work on humans.

Furthermore, there are unexplored counterarguments and missing points of consideration. For instance, while the article mentions that GPS systems have to account for time dilation effects in order to work properly, it does not explain how this works or why it matters. Additionally, while discussing Ron Mallet's theory about using light to twist spacetime for time travel, the article only briefly mentions that others have criticized his assumptions as being impossible without providing any further explanation.

Overall, while "Time travel: five ways that we could do it" provides an interesting overview of different methods for time travel, it has some potential biases, unsupported claims, missing evidence, and unexplored counterarguments. Readers should approach the article with a critical eye and seek out additional sources to gain a more complete understanding of the topic.