It's worth bearing in mind that, in the example using the Theory of Relativity to "time travel" into the future, it's a one-way trip. If you do what is described, quite apart from using immense amounts of energy, you'll never be able to get back to your own time. Why we'd want to realise this pointless achievement is frankly beyond me. But yes, it could be done.
Also in the "lame reality versus science fiction" bracket is that of commercial space travel - posted for 2015. The type of commercial space travel that Richard Branson is trying to achieve has tragically already been made unlikely to meet its target by recent events since the Telegraph article was written. But compared to what people think of as "space travel", it's like a rowing boat on the Serpentine compared to crossing the Atlantic. Real space travel isn't a nip out of the Earth's atmosphere and back. If you ask people what space travel means, it's a trip to Mars at least, and ideally one to Barnard's Star.
Then teleportation - here's the quote from the expert:
"Teleporting a person, atom by atom, will be very difficult and is of course a physicist's way, but perhaps developments in chemistry or molecular biology will allow us to do it more quickly. The good thing about teleportation is that there is no fundamental law telling us that it cannot be done and with technical advances I would estimate teleportation that we see in the films will be with us by 2080,” she said.I'm gonna stick my neck out here, and call "drivel". If the argument is that physics won't work but biology will do....oh you, know, something biological, "perhaps".... nah, drivel. I can almost see the good Doctor's hands waving from here.
Anyway, must get on. Tonight's the night we're Beating the Bounds of the Community. Better fire up the old jet pack, put my silver suit on and leave the androids to cook tea.