Grandfather Paradox: Another Look.

Skarpz

Quantum Scribe
So I was talking to this guy about the grandfather paradox and he mentioned to me that if someone named Larry traveled a couple thousand years in time and had a huge family then eventually trickled down to where his grandma had the bloodline of his Great, great whatever Grandson and so he himself had his grandma was his own bloodline to make himself his own grandson. But here is where the guy I was talking to said about the situation: If a time traveler did that then it would create a new timeline but it's still weird thinking about the possibility of someone being their own grandson even if it took a couple thousands of years to happen. I don't fully understand this grandfather paradox, but we were talking about it this way one day. Maybe you can help me better understand this one?
 
So I was talking to this guy about the grandfather paradox and he mentioned to me that if someone named Larry traveled a couple thousand years in time and had a huge family then eventually trickled down to where his grandma had the bloodline of his Great, great whatever Grandson and so he himself had his grandma was his own bloodline to make himself his own grandson. But here is where the guy I was talking to said about the situation: If a time traveler did that then it would create a new timeline but it's still weird thinking about the possibility of someone being their own grandson even if it took a couple thousands of years to happen. I don't fully understand this grandfather paradox, but we were talking about it this way one day. Maybe you can help me better understand this one?

Skarpz,

He "borrowed" the idea from Robert A. Heinlein's short story "All You Zombies" where the time traveler, through a series of events involving his travels via a time machine, becomes"the bartender" who gives him the time machine, himself, his own his own daughter, mother, father, grandfather and grandmother - not to mention that his time machine, through the same set of events, is never actually invented. It's a "bootstrap" paradox - a set of circumstances that seem to create themselves without any intermediate chronologically ordered set of events. The creation of alternate univsrse is not implied by the paradox. The alternate universe "dodge" is a contrivance designed to avoid the paradox.

In quantum physics the "alternate universes" created in the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) come from the probability wave (a mathematical construct of the science). The possible outcomes (alternate universes) only includes that which is included within the probabilities given the laws of physics. It is a false statement that the probability wave includes "everything that one can imagine". If that were the case then flipping a two-sided coin would result in a infinite number of non-inclusive results - yet the possible number of results is three: heads, tails, lands and balances on the edge. Sure, you can get an infinite number of results if you include the orientation of the coin when it lands, but all of those results are gauged by heads, tails and edge. "The iron coin became a gold coin", is something that is included in "everything one can imagine" but it is not included in the probability wave of flipping an iron coin.

Moreover, the same set of laws of physics also state that there is no possible way to communicate with these alternate universes. Any attempt to communicate with them involves the same general scenario - a probability wave, possible outcomes, an action and alternate universes created based on the probability distribution. Attempts to communicate with the alternates just results in the creation of more alternates. "Theories" that postulate such communication negate the underlying premise of MWI and, therefore, are not MWI at all.

Your best bet is to do your own research and study of the grandfather paradox.
 
One last question. What if it all happened on one timeline and there was no mutliverse? An actual paradox? After that question then I will research on my own. Thanks, Darby.
 
I believe that there are many interpretations to every conceivable question, depending on the set of theories used to conceptualize the event. I believe that several things may occur and they will all differ greatly from one another.

Imagine you were to travel back in time to prevent yourself from taking a plane. You get back in time using the cumbersome timebox and appear in the past three hours before the flight. You run to your apartment and block the entrance with Ultimate Glue and right there and then despite many efforts from your past self to get out had actually stopped yourself from taking the plane...and that's that!!!

Well....many things might change with that temporal pranck to yourself.

Some people might argue that by introducing the change in the timeline another sub-temporal reality will be created different from your own in which things did occur differently, however, whenever you return to your present time things will be the same.

Some others might state that in fact the moment the traveler changes the event it dissipates into nothingness because there is no true reason for him to be there since in the first place there was no airtrip to prevent.

Some others might even state that in fact the event is altered and that when the traveler returns to his timeline things will be differently and unknown to him since every event that occurred after him loosing the flight is different to what he normally remembers.

Still there is yet another possible outcome.....

Imagine you were capable of going back in time. Imagine you were capable of changing the past as many dream up. Consider this....the past-present-future events are all locked in a worldline. Since that world-line exists as it is every possibility is negated and all that exist is the fact of the event that occurred. In this sense every event is timelocked for the lack of a better term. In this regards time to the past, future or present will not be able to change anything, everything will occurr just as it is supposed to, with every attempt to spoil the event actually creating it, making the traveler the author of the fateful unwanted event.
 
One last question. What if it all happened on one timeline and there was no mutliverse? An actual paradox? After that question then I will research on my own. Thanks, Darby.

I struck through "on one timeline" because it is redundant if there "[is] no multiverse".

The answer is yes, its a true paradox. Everything in "All You Zombies" pops into existence by creating itself. Its technically known as an ontological paradox (aka bootstrap paradox). Ontology relates to creation and the paradox is that when, where, how and by whom the items in question were created is (beyond) vague, is illogical and more to the point, unphysical.
 
The multiple worlds paradigm is the best one explaining how a time traveler can go back and tamper with his or her own past which will certainly change his or her own future. If it is the future of an alternate world, the time traveler doesn't have to worry about erasing himself or herself out of existence. In my world, Henry Kissinger was assassinated in 1992. In another world I visited, he was assassinated in 2011. In this world, he is still alive. The guy is a zombie! He keeps coming back.
 
That reminds that in EarthTR165.0749 Babe Ruth was president of The US instead of Franklyn Roosevelt in the 1933 elections. It was as a result of wanting a popular face after the 1929's economical crash. It was a great idea.
 
That reminds that in EarthTR165.0749 Babe Ruth was president of The US instead of Franklyn Roosevelt in the 1933 elections. It was as a result of wanting a popular face after the 1929's economical crash. It was a great idea.

I heard on the radio in the ealry 2000s that Patrick Stewart aka Captain Picard died but it never happened in my true timeline.
 
That reminds that in EarthTR165.0749 Babe Ruth was president of The US instead of Franklyn Roosevelt in the 1933 elections. It was as a result of wanting a popular face after the 1929's economical crash. It was a great idea.

How fortuitous for George. His Yankee salary was $75,000 in 1933 as was the President's.
 
Back
Top