If you are thinking of coming up with rules or laws which will somehow govern the use of time travel, then you might as well go find Murphy and ask about that law of his again. Some philosaphers have postulated that time is a river that flows from one point to another. You just throw in a stone(a change in time, or wrinkle) the stone gets swallowed to the bottom or gets carried along in the current. This analogy describes that time can't be changed no matter what you do. Then again maybe you need a bigger stone. Or perhaps block the stream with a boulder, changing the course of the stream. This analogy would mean a very large disruption in time. Unless something catastrophic happened, like the near destruction of man, who would want to. Even then some believe that the slightest disruption, such as stepping on a very rare insect that might have carried the cure for some disease, might seriously damage the timeline. This holds true if it meant mans toe hold on this planet might be eradicated. If you really want a stepping stone to ethics of time travel try this one. You travel back in time to check out the old west. While there you insult a gunslinger. In self defense you kill him. That man happened to be the great great grandfather of the man who invented the horseless carriage which would lead to the modern automobile. Our current technology level then would suffer and then where would we be. Perhaps the man was the great grandfather of a tyrant not yet born. Would it be okay to kill him then. Would it be ethically correct to kill to save the future. Would you go back in time to save Jesus from the cross. Would there be a new passage of how a stranger appeared from nowhere and pulled him off the cross in the bible. Would there even be a bible, or would a few select passages that have guided millions be changed. Ethics, conscious, history. Some of those bad things in our history have allowed us to advance. From chinese rockets, to bullets, to space shuttles. Why disrupt time. If it works why mess with it.
