NO PARADOX-a theory

R

Risata206

Chrono Cadet
Here's a theory I thought of that I'd like to throw out for discussion.

I believe that if and when tt happens, it will indeed be linear. If you travel back to a time before you were born, you could be there as an observer only. You'd be invisible, and you'd be able to enact no change whatsoever. It is like that xmas movie with scooge or whatever, when the ghost from xmas past and future comes. So same for the future. If you travel to a time after you would obviously be dead, same thing. Maybe what we think of as "ghosts" or "psychics" are just sensing tt's, that "hunch" we get, from our tt self.
Now, as for traveling within your lifespan...here's where it gets tricky. First, I don't believe you'd run into yourself. I think there will be some weird physics "rule" that states you can't. Sort like taking two magnets and putting the non magnatized part together...theres resistance. So, just as you'd walk into a cafe in the front door, your "double" would be leaving out the back. something would happen so it would be impossible for you to meet. However, you will be mistaken for each other all the time. The "doppleganger" thing. And you would not be able to effect much change, because you cannot communicate with anyone you know. Lets say you left 2006 to travel to 2012. Thats only 6 years,so your friends and family would still be around. But you cant contact them. You can call, and they never answer, your voicemail doesnt record...its not "supernatural" but sorta. You will not be interacting with your friends and families future selves, because your future self already is. So, you can learn about them, and observe....but you are invisible to them as well. You are able to meet strangers and make new friends, but if you should leave again, the same thing would happen. You couldnt go in the past to meet them sooner, or travel to the future and contact them. Therefore, everyone you'd ever meet, you'd never be able to interact with on a past or future line. This way, you cant mess up your own exsistence, interfer with anyone elses that you know, so essentially, you cant mess up your own "karma". You might be able to wreck havoc on others, but not your own. But since youd be losing all the people you love, essentially....you wouldnt want to tt. So people wont. A few adventerious souls would, but no one would really want to as it means they wont know you..you cant. So the only reason to tt would be to observe. And you would know that if you go to 2012, and you cant talk, interact or are known to anyone, that you mustve died within those 6 years. You could go back to the present and live life trying to prevent that, but that just might be what kills you. So, for that reason and others..no one would want to do it. If you saw in the future that a friend is dead, because they killed themselves (morbid, I know, but for example) you know you cant go back in time to prevent it. You come back, you tell your friend what you saw...but its like you are psychic, not a tt...because now your friend will freak out and either change what happened, or in trying to, die anyway. Because you cant mess with free will or fate....everything will still happen, just in a different way. The friend will still die, even if you try and tell them to be careful and it ends up not being at their own hand. Sorta ala Butterfly Effect. Basically...that's why tt will never be, imho, because our minds dont want to deal with this stuff. Love to hear comments.
 
ok, i have to reply to myself here to amend this theory.....I just realized something.

Lets say I decided to tt today, 5 years into the future...making it 2011. I go to the future, and see something, decide to come back to my present time, 2006. Except there is now no "present" time. Once you travel into the future, to go back to your present time would mean you'd be traveling to the "past." So that makes it where there is essentially, no present time. Everything is either past or future. So, if you were to tt....you'd never be able to interact with anyone you currently know, period. So you couldnt go back and warn your friend of their impending death, because that would be traveling back to the past..ugh. i need some sleep. 3rd shift is making me think too much. lol
 
Hi Risata,

Just some constructive criticism that (hopefully) will help the thought process.

If you travel back to a time before you were born, you could be there as an observer only. You'd be invisible, and you'd be able to enact no change whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Your theory has a lot of "restrictions" such as this; however, for a theory to be tenable one needs to be able to explain the scientific and/or physical basis for these restrictions. IOW, what sort of physical mechanisms (that we are at least somewhat aware of today) do you think would prohibit all the things your theory says you would not be able to do if you were to TT? I'm not bashing the theory, just pointing out that there needs to be some substantiation for why you think this theory is correct.
Another example:
First, I don't believe you'd run into yourself. I think there will be some weird physics "rule" that states you can't.
Click to expand...
But this is where foundation is necessary. Now I know you might say "but I don't know physics, I'm just guessing" and that is my point. To "nurture" a theory you should want to dig into this, and see if you can substantiate it with existing physics, or if there is something in existing physics which, if extended, would support the precepts of your theory.
So the only reason to tt would be to observe.
Click to expand...
OK, but then this does not really represent what we typically talk about when we say "time travel". The "romantic" notion is that your existing, capable body is literally plucked from this time, deposited in another, and you are able to interact with that time. Another way to put this would be a question: So what would be the difference between your restrictive theory of TT and a VERY high-tech, 3-D, total-surround movie experience? In essence, that is really what you seem to be describing: A "total immersion" movie experience in which you could see, hear, smell, even taste/touch some events going on... but without any ability to change the "script".

My own opinion (and this is just a guess, tell me if I am wrong) is that you are concocting this VERY elaborate theory (in terms of what is restricted) simply as a means to AVOID the possibility of a paradox. The much easier (and much less restrictive route) is simply to ask the question: "What is wrong or incomplete about our current understanding of the universe, where if we somehow understood differently, there would no longer be a paradox?" This is typically how we deal with the concept of a paradox. IOW, a paradox is a signpost telling us "you are missing something... your understanding is incomplete."

Just some thoughts to chew on over 3rd shift!
RMT
 
Risata,

Basically...that's why tt will never be, imho, because our minds dont want to deal with this stuff. Love to hear comments.
Click to expand...

As Rainman pointed out you need to flesh out your assumptions to see if they are valid.

One step that you might want to explore is to change the scale of things.

A "person", in a very restricted sense, is nothing more than a collection of highly organized atomic nuclei and electrons - basically simple molecules and large complex protein molecules. Jump down to that scale.

Now, instead of looking at a whole person just look at the electrons.

If you send a single electron back in time to a place where that same electron simultaneously exists in a younger version of the person is there a paradox or is there any physical law that would prevent this occurance?

Next, send a complete simple molecule (water for instance, H2O). Same question.

Send a large protein molecule. Same question.

Send a collection of simple molecules and protein large molecules. Same question.

Now, look at the whole person as a collection of electrons, simple molecules and large protein molecules.

If there is no paradox or violation of physical laws for the first four scenarios does a change in the scale from "a few" items to a large collection of the same objects introduce a paradox or violation of physical laws?

PS: Thank you for not asking about John Titor or one of the present TT hoaxes! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif We do enjoy the occassional thread where someone asks good physics questions about time travel.
 
Risata,

In my last post I used the word "simultaneously". Take that word with a grain of salt. I didn't define what it means and in terms of Special Relativity it really is inaccurate.

I spotted it after posting and it made me recall Rainman's post. This is an example of why math is the language of physics. Explaining a physical situation using only the written and spoken language (English in this case) has serious limititations because it is imprecise, subject to interpretation and often inaccurate because of the specific words that are chosen.

With math one can be much more precise and any assumptions generally stand out boldly (especially when the physicist points them out in written English - or whatever language s/he speaks.
)
 
Hmmm. Well here's my responses to this, in particular rainmans since you assumed (correctly) that I was looking for no paradox.

My interest in tt is not really so much in the science of it, though it is fascinating. Unfortunatly, my aptitude for both physics and math is pathetically nil....in fact when I am in higher math classes soon, I suspect I'll have many questions and will need a tutor! In any event, my interests lies in more philosphical prospects, METAphysical ideas. For example, I believe we have free will. However, I do believe in "fate." I reconcile this in this way: You are running late for work. You dont want to be late for work. So, you have a choice. Take the expressway, which you think will be faster, or take the back route, which is longer, but typically free of traffic, because there is a chance that the expressway could be backed up.

Lets say you decide to take the expressway. You do, and it there is construction, backing traffic up for miles. You are late for work. Now, lets say you chose the back road. No traffic, but you hit a pothole, get a flat tire, as a result-you are late for work. Good thing because you work at the post office where somebody just lost it with an uzzi. So while you have "free will" and choice, if you were meant to be late for work, you will be, no matter what choices you make. So I do believe that certain relationships, situations, etc, were "fated". I do believe some things are destined to be.

That said, TT plays an intersting role to me in terms of questioning these issues further. If in fact we are able to move back and forth, not only within our own lifetime but thru time of man itself, then ? It makes NO sense to me. Because nothing would happen. Life would cease to exsist.

This is why I say that: Lets say tt was discovered in 2000. Someone traveled to 2005...and learned of 9/11. Lets say that person was the President of the United States. He comes back to 2000-and drops a nuke on Iraq,Iran, Afghanistan-the whole Middle East, as a pre-empitive strike. So, now 9/11 doesnt happen, perhaps something much worse. Now, lets take this further. TT is available to EVERYONE. Dont you think, that we would have people traveling back and forth, changing all sorts of scenarios, which then changes other scenarios? the world would literally be spinning. Forgetting the philosophy for a second....and since you guys are so physics inclined, dont you think that the generate of energy of so many people tt, changing things, etc...would cause a collapse?

The parallel universe thing, the endless universe thing, doesnt make sense to me, because that flies in the face of any belief system that we are here for a reason, our lives have a purpose, the pain that happens to us is to learn lessons-it would render our exsistence pointless, IMHO. I'll stop here. Oh, and Rainman...what would be so bad if tt was just a big virtual surround sound experience? I think it would be awesome to go back and view things as an observer without worrying about changing any of it. Personally, I am a person that lives with no regrets. I dont wish to change a thing in my life, as horrible as some of the things have been. its made me who I am today, and given me what I have (like my kids.) And like I pointed out, as did the Butterfly Effect, even if the intention is to prevent pain....you may cause more, and we need pain in life. Seems crazy, but we really do. So, I'd love to view the past and future as a big ass 3d very lucid dream!:)
 
Risata,

Now, lets take this further. TT is available to EVERYONE. Dont you think, that we would have people traveling back and forth, changing all sorts of scenarios, which then changes other scenarios? the world would literally be spinning. Forgetting the philosophy for a second....and since you guys are so physics inclined, dont you think that the generate of energy of so many people tt, changing things, etc...would cause a collapse?
Click to expand...

Good question.

I think that the answer to this question is no. The world, as an orderly construct, doesn't collapse into chaos.

In the world that you propose, where everyone has access to time travel, moving through time is the norm. The result of everyone traveling through time might appear to us, in a world where that isn't the case, to be utter chaos.

But that's where the metaphysical and psychological components come into play. The people in such a world would have a psychological make-up that is beyond our ability to comprehend - what we consider to be chaos is their normal world. If everyone has access then they have been using time travel "forever". Their ancestors had it and their future progeny have it - and they have the ability to visit each other, share ideas and any advances in the technology of time travel. In fact, there would be no advances in the technology. It would have already been "worked out" and spread into the past.

For us this is a huge paradox - the "Djinn" time machine. It has always been there in the past and will always be there in the future. There is no perspective that an inhabitant of such a world can take where s/he can say for certain, "Time travel was invented in Year "X"" because it appears to have created itself...the Djinn...a self-creating object that was always there.

Chaos for us - absolutely normal for their psyche because that is how they have evolved metaphysically, physically, psychologically and socially.
----------------------------------------
For the senario that you posed for the Middle east it gets worse.

In your scenario someone goes back in time to nuke them into the Stone Age. The problem appears to be solved. But not so fast. Someone from the opposing forces goes back even further and nukes Washington before the attack on the Middle East. Someone from Washington goes back even farther and does a double pre-emptive nuclear strike to stop the hit on D.C....and on, and on, and on. Finally someone nukes Ogg and Mogg before they have any children.

If a childless Ogg and Mogg are snuffed out where does humanity come from? (This is the Super-Duper Grand Grandfather Paradox
)
 
Exactly, Darby. That is why I said that if time travel exsisted, life itself would no longer exsist. We would always be going back to either strike first or prevent. Life would actually be going backwards in time in this respect.

You bring up another great point in the other theory that begins with a D-cant think of the name and havent your post to refer to. Anyway, yes. If time travel does exsist, then it always exsisted and we wouldnt be having this discussion right now. Because if tt became real today, we'd go back in time. Assuming we could interact with the past, we'd tell our great great grandfather about it (as would 1000 of other people, assuming they too, could tt.) even if it were limited to an elite few, they would still go back and enlighten those in the past, who would then "invent" tt in that particular year, canceling out the "true" birth of tt. Someone would eventually get to the first man on earth and in this respect, it gets even crazier. If you went back in time to the first man to speak a language, and gave him the technology to tt, maybe he took his tribe, all 700 inhabitants on the planet, with him, and landed in 1950. Then he and his clan integrated into society...a virtual "ellis island." That being the case, then the world did not populate up until 1950, at least not massivly. So our "clan" ended up in a 1950's world that was still archaic and was populated by only one or two groups of people, so there would be no cultural diversity.

Also, if you could go back in time, things like bubonic plaque never wouldve happened, because someone from our time could go back and teach "germ theory" and eradicate rodents. So on and so on. So, it seems to me, there would be no "history" to speak of. There are just way too MANY paradoxs and confusing scenarios to contemplate in tt, which is why I try to play Occam here and find a way for it to be possible without all the paradox. Ultimatly, I believe that if tt truly exsisted where we could live pro-activily in any time, then life itself would no longer be here. Thats why when people say that if tt exsists, it exsists now-if it did, then we would know and wouldve have always thought it did. We wouldnt question it. It would be as natural as the sun rising and setting. No?

I will say tho, I did like the idea of the Zeshua hoax. To be able to communicate in other timeframes via technology, not physically is a novel idea.
 
Hi Risata,
Oh, and Rainman...what would be so bad if tt was just a big virtual surround sound experience?
Click to expand...
Well, it is not that anything at all would be "wrong" with this. In fact, it would be the most advanced form of entertainment we could develop, which would be cool. It would be movies taken to their ultimate extreme. (Would we maybe call them "livies" since we lived thru the experience?)

But what I am saying is that it would not be "time travel" per se... not the way our culture has romanticized it. Right? It is just "more than a movie" since they would consist of more than just moving pictures with sound. It would have ALL the sensory experiences faithfully reproduced (from a massive database of information I might add).

If we could simply record all sights, sounds, smells, feelings, temperatures, pressures (the whole physical experience) on digital media... and then simply engineer a system that could "play history back with ultimate clarity of experience", but we could not interact with it or change it... then it would be nothing more than a limited "livie".

I think what you are then talking about is really nothing more than the Star Trek holodeck... but a crippled one, because in the holodeck you can interact with the situation and change it! In fact, when you think about the concept of the holodeck deeply, you will see that if you could create one it would VALIDATE the "Many Worlds Interpretation", for the simple fact that you could create ANY actors and environment and situations you like (and interact with that "universe" you have created).

RMT
 
I go with the "Many Worlds" (well, more accurately, "All Worlds") theory; imagine history is one long train track - when you go back in time and "change" something in the past, you aren't actually changing anything, just switching the points on the traintracks and shunting your train down a different route (into an alternate timeline).

No restrictions, no paradoxes. At least, not that I've been able to ascertain...but once you've shunted yourself into this alternate timeline and then return to the point in time that you originally left from, there is (or at least, there may be) an alternate version of you already there, belonging to that history (so two of you in this timeline now, and none in the one you originally left from...). That could get a little confusing for people, but it isn't a paradox at least. :D
 
Oh, and Rainman...what would be so bad if tt was just a big virtual surround sound experience?
Click to expand...

I dont think it would be a disaster, rather not optimal. But the sum total of its value may be best viewed within how much the participant can learn from their experience. So while mind TT already does exist, so will the dense physical variant.

Each one will have its own pros and cons...the cons of astral are already well known.

I go with the "Many Worlds" (well, more accurately, "All Worlds") theory
Click to expand...

Yes and we might also say that 'Many worlds' theory is also the universe's intention of expressing all avenues of potential. Therefore ultimately, all potential is expressed and experienced.

Regarding the lack of paradoxes within the 'Many Worlds' theory [specificaly] when viewed in relation to time travel, we should also be asking ourselves; when we switch tracks - are we even time travelling at all. Or is it something very different?

The general idea and aim of time travel, is to travel through time - to stay on the same track
(timeline). To move actively along its linear energy stream. Personally, i think that when applying 'many worlds theory' to time travel, we are starting to talk about something totally different.

kind regards,
Olly
 
Glad you guys posted. I was beginning to think that the board was totally lame and only wanted to discuss tt if the word "Titor" was in a post.

The "many worlds" thing I have enjoyed for years as an idea....Sliders was my favorite show while it was on. The problem I have with this tho, is then what does that mean in terms of the purpose of our lives? If you believe spiritually that we are all here for a purpose, some may call it "karma", then what is the point of living out all potentials, if in fact, you are only aware of one? You are only learning the potentials of one "soul" if you are only consciously aware of one particular alternate timeline. Even if your actions and choices constantly produce an "alternate" universe, you are only fully aware of one. Theoretically, you could end up created 10's of thousands of alternate time lines for yourself. Now multiply that by the six billion people on the planet. Just the physics alone is mind boggling. But it just makes me question the point of any of it. IMHO, the alternate universe theme is fun to ponder because we all wonder "what if" , if we had made different choices in life. The whole "if you had to do it all over again, what would you do different" or "what would my life be like if I had only done A instead of B?
There may be parrallel universes, but I believe in them in terms of after we die, we move on to a different "world." But as Olly stated, that's a different area of discussion.
 
Hi again Risata:
I was beginning to think that the board was totally lame and only wanted to discuss tt if the word "Titor" was in a post.
Click to expand...
Believe me... I am ALWAYS hungry for intellectual discussions of TT that avoid/omit the need to speak of Titor! I play the Titor debunking game just to pass the time when there aren't a lot of people interested in real TT discussions (like you).
The "many worlds" thing I have enjoyed for years as an idea....Sliders was my favorite show while it was on. The problem I have with this tho, is then what does that mean in terms of the purpose of our lives? If you believe spiritually that we are all here for a purpose, some may call it "karma", then what is the point of living out all potentials, if in fact, you are only aware of one?
Click to expand...
This is a very good point (the discussion of the PURPOSE of our lives viz-a-viz time travel possibility). I am more than interested in discussing it (and the spiritual aspects of it); however, just because we may not understand the "purpose" of how the universe may be structured does not prohibit that structure from existing. IOW, there may be no "purpose" at all, but the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) could still be "true".

On the MWI, there is a distinction I always try to point out, and I have tried to debate MEM (another forum member) on this several times. That is the distinction between "Many" worlds and "Infinite" worlds. I think the former (Many, but finite potentials) stands a much better possibility of being able to define relevant "purpose" in what our lives mean. However, once you introduce "Infinite" worlds, this is where you would clearly lose all attempts at defining a "purpose". The statistical problem of any infinite sample size is that causes a violation in what we know to be true about our universe... namely, the bell-shaped curve. Phenomena in our universe are shown to apply to this general principle, and this principle describes a propensity for a certain phenomenon to play-out to a certain result. Once the sample size becomes infinite, with all worlds being of "equal importance/impact", then the bell shaped curve goes away and it becomes necessarily "flat"...thus saying "all things are possible... you just need to keep looking for that one universe where it is possible." Indeed, anyone who claims there are "infinite" universes will then also claim that there is a universe where causality can be violated, and another where it cannot be violated. See the problem there? Whenever "infinite" anything is proposed, problems with consistency & coherency are not far behind!
Even if your actions and choices constantly produce an "alternate" universe, you are only fully aware of one.
Click to expand...
This innocuous little statement could be the start of a whole new thread, if you ask me! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif Are we (each and every one of us) only aware of one? Speaking of "purpose", could it be possible that part of the "plan" for the development of humanity includes a point where we "grow beyond" this limitation? IOW, what some spiritual traditions refer to as "ascension" may be something on the order of being able to be aware of "the whole track" (to borrow a term from Scientology)? What if this level of "knowing" is actually the "gift" for achieving this high level of awareness? Interesting discussions we could have all around this one.

RMT
 
Ray,

I have to admit, like you - i am also of the opinion that there is NOT infinite worldlines. If indeed, 'many worlds' theory is truth to start with (which i do believe to be the case).

I think that in the Limited 3 dimensional material universe, there is only finite possiblilty, even if the number of combinations etc, is bearly measurable within current maths. However - even if the potential (consiousness or whatever your term) behind the universe IS infinite - It doesn't mean that every manifestation that comes from it is likewise. And i think this is where people start to assume 'many worlds' should really be 'infinite worlds'. When in fact, its not like this. But thats just my opinion.

I'd also agree that we may be living out multiple realities at one time, Perception is a key word, as we often do not percieve things that we are taking in and outwardly expressing. However i think it is obsurd to think (from an evolutionary point of view) that one 'spirit form' lives out ALL doubles across the universe at once. This subject alone, really is a whole new tread!!

Kind regards,
Olly
 
Risata,

We have a huge problem with the pop-sci view of the many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Hugh Everett didn't give his theory the name. His dissertation advisor, John Wheeler, coined the term. Everett, upon receiving his PhD, never again worked as a physicist. He worked on computer game theory for the Department of Defense for the rest of his professional career.

Wheeler admitted years after coining the term that it was an unfortunate mistake because the "cute" term gave rise to the pop-sci idea of multiple entire universes being created which was never a part of the dissertation nor was it implied. But "Many Worlds Interpretation" is a lot more catchy than "Relative State Formalism of Quantum Mechanics" so we're stuck with the term.

Here's a problem with the idea of your whole body instantly splitting into multiple universes upon an "observation":

You're standing along the road and you see a friend drive by. You think about waving "hello". In the pop-sci version you split into two universes. In one you wave, in the other you don't wave.

But how can that be?

In the real world you look at your friend's car and photons strike the cones and rods in your eye. Electrons are excited. But there is an uncertainty as to what quantum state each electron will take. That's where the splitting begins...electron by electron. The maximum velocity for this spreading change in states of the electrons is limited to the speed of light. But in your biological body the actual rate is much, much slower. The velocity of neural transmission is hundreds of miles per hour - not of thousands of miles per second. It takes a finite amount of time for the process to occur.

The electro-chemical impulse eventually reaches your brain and you react. Again, the reaction is electron by electron - not your entire body instantly.

Whatever splitting there is that occurs does not result in your entire body, intact, dividing. It is individual sub-atomic particles that split. The universes that the many possible quantum states divide into do not have to be 30 billion light years in diameter. They only have to be large enough to contain a single sub-atomic particle when they are created.

The idea of Many Worlds is an "out" used by would-be time travelers. But its not a well founded dodge.
 
Why does a timeline have to 'split off' at every event example?

Maybe all possibilities run in parallel and not constantly branching off each other. Rather all playing out together from the start of 'time' until the end of 'time'.

Darby, Your view would appear to reply upon the idea that everything splits off, only at the moment of an event. not that all are playing out in unison at the same time.


I'm thinking more on the potential implications of the double-slit experiment, specifically here above all else as this is (wether it wants to be or not) one of the most profound experiments with regards to multiple worldline theory.


If we take the view that all events in a higher dimension are all occuring at the same time in one instant. Wouldn't it be a given that when Environmanetal Discohesion is broken (as it always will be on this level) the random nature of the intention of an electron, may not be so random. As technically nothing is spliting off

In terms of how this relates to the common perception of 'Many world' theory - (which i dont care how bastardised the original meaning has become), there is no 'splitting' in the first place.

If you stood there waving at a car, in another timeline, a different potential of the event is occuring at the same time. Nothing splits off from anything else. Its just one combination of all is being percieved and experienced by the individual. This relates entirely to the Intention (which is in Zero time and not limited by linear measures of speed) and current evolution of the individual rather then random physics, as to which version is percieved.

I also believe that this is something ignored by some theorists and is also one of the principles as to how what some people might term 'reality engineering' works. As the The mental program of the individual is connected with the larger external program that electrons run off, when they manifest under a specific intention.

All potential ways and reactions of the event in this case (waving at the car) are already carried out, Its just that we percieve only one - the one we choose to.

Obviously the (rather abstract - admittedly) Implications of the experiment are that only one manifestation of the collective potential combinations is percieved, rather then - there only being one manifestation happening AND any other variant of original event - must be a 'split' from the original one of action....All are unbiased and the potential for all exists in unison at the same time.
 
Back
Top