Has anyone figured out how to bypass the feedback problem in the wormhole into the past

The words you use make sense, but the way you use them are meaningless.

What you claim is to science what watering a stone is to gardening.

"I need to know if there is a scientist out there who has figured out how to solve the equation that lies behind the constantly growing feedback that occurs with ripping open spacetime into the past."

I see you watched that Steven Hawking show on the Science Channel... even so, your question makes not sense.


"If someone can explain a solution mathematically or otherwise, I'm willing to listen."

It would be wasted effort. You'll need years of math and physics background before you have a chance of understanding general relativity.


"I keep using all kinds of polynomials but none have seemed to work!"

What do you mean? You're obviously not going to be able to model a wormhole solution to the Einstein field equations with a polynomial. That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard!


"I am at my wits end and I know this sounds extremely obsessive but I need to know the solution!"

I still don't even know what your question is.


"The closest thing I can think of is creating a temporal pocket around something instead of opening a wormhole but I would not even know how to begin to do that."

I have zero clue as to what this means. It's complete gibberish to me.


"Please, any brilliant mind out there who has at least attempted the calculations, I need your help."

The only people you're going to find who spend their time working problems like this are in universities.


"No sanctimonious lectures on why I should not do this, please because I am not attempting this in real life... I just need to know if it is possible."

If you're really intent on understanding general relativity, then be prepared for years of hard work.


"Time travel into the past is theoretically probable."

No, it is not. In fact, it is improbable. Time travel to the past creates a slew of logical paradoxes that can't be resolved without radical and unfounded assumptions.