Re: Bob Germanicus
The one concept that John talked about that I don't personally agree with is the multiple timeline theory where everything that can happen has happened somewhere. I am a firm believer that I could not have possably done anything differently (creating other timelines) because everything I've done was done because I thought that it was the best thing to do based on what my priority was at the time and my knowledge at the time. I am confident that this applies to all people. So no one would do anything differently if they went back in time and didn't retain their knowledge of the future. The difference that John described such as different teams winning football games, etc., is simply the result of probabilities. Much the same way that flipping a coin would produce. If you watched someone flip a coin and then went back 30 seconds in time and watch them again, there would still be a 50% chance that the same side of the coin would come up. Similarily, if two well matched football teams play, one team may win once, the other the next time.
In other words, I believe there is only one past and only one future, but infinite possabilities for either. However, I do not believe in the paradox theory that if I went back in time and killed my father before I was concieved that I would disappear, or that if I stopped a time machine from being built then my time machine would disappear. In the first case, I would be "parentless." My mother would not be aware of having given birth to me. In the second case I would have the only time machine in existence. It's like breaking the mold where the past was the mold that made me or the time machine.
Furthermore, I do believe that if I went back in time and prevented something from happening that had historical significance and then returned to the present that I would notice significant differences, but I would be the only one to notice the difference. For everyone else, things would have changed instanttaneously and no one would be aware that it was ever different. This is the reason why no time traveler in John's 2036 would ever admit to causing any changes. No one else would know so why tell them something that could possably get yourself in trouble? Or that they would have trouble believing? Until someone personally knew that they wouldn't know. Apparently John hadn't experienced it yet, questioned what he did notice, thought that it was due to "worldline varience", or was simply passing on what he was taught regardless of whether he believed it or not much as religions do today.
I just want to add that the universe is a paradox already. I do not want to discuss my spiritual beliefs here now to explain but there is not a structual problem that would occur if there were two or three of me existing simultaneously, or if I killed my father before I was concieved and yet still existed. Christians would call it a miracle. They term anything a miracle that does not have a logical explanation that can be proved. There would be a logical explanation for my existence (I was born then removed all proof) but no proof of the explanation, hense the term miracle. There are instances of people "materializing" objects out of thin air (check out "The Occult World" by A.P. Sinnett) and making objects disappear into thin air. People have levitated objects and made ordinary objects like tables so heavy that ten people could not pick it up (that was done in front of an audience of over 100 aristocrats. The same table was levitated first.) The simple explanation (but hard to believe) is that physical reality is no more real than our dreams but our minds make it real, like in the movie the Matrix. The movie was heavily based on Buddhism but laden with Biblical significance as well. The movie was actually a very good representation of reality, but there is a lot of symbolism such as "the machines" being symbolic of atheists and "Neo" being symbolic of the second coming of Christ.
