What happens when you alter time?
- Thread starter kimberlyd
- Start date
Darby
Epochal Historian
Well, of course if you cancelled the Roman Empire nothing would change. The past 2,000 years of the development of Europe, the Middle East, Australia, New Zealand, Africa and the Americas would be as we know it. Rome had zero influence on our history. <Head slap>
Seriously, if the Roman Empire never existed you would not be asking about the effects on history if the Roman Empire never existed; nor would you be musing about the "original time line". If it never existed there is nothing to cancel. Memories are recollections of the past. If something never existed in the past you will not wonder about it.
Here's the real problem with this sort of scenario. Think about it and try to answer the questions for yourself rather than rely on my assessment:
1. Fred Dokes is a major player in history as you know it.
2. You don't like what Fred Dokes did 1,000 years ago.
3. You time travel to the past to fix Fred Dokes errors.
Question 1: If you fixed Fred Dokes' errors, which occurred 1,000 years ago, how did you know about Fred Dokes errors in the first place?
Question 2: If Fred Dokes' errors were fixed 1,000 years ago what motivated you to time travel to his era and change history?
Question 3: If Fred Dokes' errors were fixed 1,000 years ago and you do not time travel to his era what physical agency intervened to affect the change in history?
This is not a faux paradox. It is a real paradox, assuming the scenario as you have phrased your questions. How does one change the past, live in the present, remember the past as it was before it was changed, know that the past has been changed to the situation that they desire yet decide to travel to the past and change it?
You might respond that you don't like the past as it is presented therefore you time travel to the past to change it. The problem is that it is the past. Whatever happened in the past is how you will recall the past...the change had already happened 1,000 years before you were born.
There's no easy way of getting around this conundrum.
Last edited by a moderator:
Retrace the branches. Current time may move "forward", but the past doesn't disappear. Even if you branch off and create a new timeline, the new timeline would potentially still connect to the old one, leaving a point to point path. And yes, the multiverse would be a mess.I can't get a visual of that. Can you explain it a little more.If my timeline tree conjecture is correct, if nothing else, time travel will be one hell of a game of twister.
Darby
Epochal Historian
Paula,
You actually used a good object in your thought experiment - an exploding balloon. Things like exploding balloons are excellent constructs for gauging the arrow of time. Balloons explode by first having a small hole in them and then, as the gas inside floods out, the fabric of the balloon shreds, tatters and the multiple pieces fly away. Electron bonds were unzipped in this process so both electrons and photons also fly away.
Now as a matter of general conservation laws we could run the "film" of that even backwards and see the air rush back to a point inside the perimeter of the popped balloon, see the balloon reassemble itself and "heal" its wounds, see the electrons and photons return and integrate with the ensemble. Nothing in the conservation laws say that is a violation of physical law.
But this will never happen unless we add new energy to the situation. General conservation laws are not the only laws in play. Gas dynamics and more generally thermodynamics are also in play here. Gas does not move from low pressure to high pressure without some "help" (an input of energy). Pieces of balloons don't leap back together without some "help". Chemical bonds don't form without an input of energy. Thus we most definitely see a thermodynamic arrow of time and it points to the future...it always points away from lower entropy and toward higher entropy.
This isn't philosophy, this is experimentally verified fact. We can distinguish the past from the future and time marches in one direction only.
Well it is a hypothetical question musing on the theoretical possibilities and consequences of time travel and changes that can be enacted. For instance, if Rome had not existed then Jesus may not have been crucified, or lived to be crucified. Gangis Khan would never have been influenced by the Roman Empire, so would his people have advanced as they had done during that time or would they have taken longer to catch up? The Roman Empire influenced more then you think by the way, but they were just an example. The question implied to any point in history. To speculate the possibilities of what could happen if a single event were to have been changed. If Hitler never made it to power. Attila The Hun never attacked China. Americus Vespucci never put the Americas on the world map.... you get my drift. Has nothing to do with whether we would know about it or not, but what would occur and whether the time traveler who exacted the change would know about it or not.Well, of course if you cancelled the Roman Empire nothing would change. The past 2,000 years of the development of Europe, the Middle East, Australia, New Zealand, Africa and the Americas would be as we know it. Rome had zero influence on our history. <Head slap>
Seriously, if the Roman Empire never existed you would not be asking about the effects on history if the Roman Empire never existed; nor would you be musing about the "original time line". If it never existed there is nothing to cancel. Memories are recollections of the past. If something never existed in the past you will not wonder about it.
Here's the real problem with this sort of scenario. Think about it and try to answer the questions for yourself rather than rely on my assessment:
1. Fred Dokes is a major player in history as you know it.
2. You don't like what Fred Dokes did 1,000 years ago.
3. You time travel to the past to fix Fred Dokes errors.
Question 1: If you fixed Fred Dokes' errors, which occurred 1,000 years ago, how did you know about Fred Dokes errors in the first place?
Question 2: If Fred Dokes' errors were fixed 1,000 years ago what motivated you to time travel to his era and change history?
Question 3: If Fred Dokes' errors were fixed 1,000 years ago and you do not time travel to his era what physical agency intervened to affect the change in history?
This is not a faux paradox. It is a real paradox, assuming the scenario as you have phrased your questions. How does one change the past, live in the present, remember the past as it was before it was changed, know that the past has been changed to the situation that they desire yet decide to travel to the past and change it?
You might respond that you don't like the past as it is presented therefore you time travel to the past to change it. The problem is that it is the past. Whatever happened in the past is how you will recall the past...the change had already happened 1,000 years before you were born.
There's no easy way of getting around this conundrum.
In the anime Dragonballz and the manga, Future Trunks travels to the present day to warn the others about what will happen in three years time and about two evil androids who will come and slay them all and only gohan will survive but die 13 years later. Since he comes to this one, and tells them and gives the antidote, goku survives the fight with the androids who are presumed to be the evil ones but it turns out they were weaker versions who drained energy the real ones were asleep and had to be turned on. When they are turned on they destroy their creator as in the timeline where Trunks is from, and are shown to have a third one who is android 16 who only wants to fight goku and all three are shown to have a calm personality and don't kill innocent people like the ones in the other timline do but use their full power when they do fight but leave the fighters alive. Also Cell comes a creature who is a android and meant to merge with these two and comes from a timeline where the androids are shut down and kills trunks and takes time machine to the present day. Gohan in this timeline kills cell in a fight, and 17 and 18 are turned into normal people and shown to change for the better, so we see Gohan and the others survive only that goku dies when taking cell to another planet when he blows himself up.
Mylo.X.
Quantum Scribe
Yes, if such a thing a mutliple time lines exist, then it stands to reason that there must be a common point that existed which unified the vast amounts of time-line off-shoots. For example, baby x is born. The birth will exist in all timelines, but the nature of the birth could/would differ i.e. one time-line for baby x could be a traumatic birth, another could be a c-section birth etc.
mr_paradox
Chrono Cadet
TIme can not be altered since it is just an illusion. TIme is like a river where a stick is flowing down. So if you go up the river the water is still there, if you go down the river the water is also still there. The thing is you are the stick floating down the river and most of us can not move the stick.
So if you are look at the river it is obvious that time is an illusion, but when you are the stick you can not see this.
So if you are look at the river it is obvious that time is an illusion, but when you are the stick you can not see this.
Darby
Epochal Historian
And that's the point. You create a paradox with the scenario: If you are aware of past events that's how they played out. It doesn't make any difference if they have been altered or not...it's how the history is recorded. If that's how history is recorded what motivates you to go back and change it? The implication of time travel to the past is that from your perspective the effect (the result) precedes the cause (the event). In your Hitler scenario how can you both recall that Hitler was a monster while also recalling that Hitler never existed? How do you recall something that doesn't exist?
You can't speculate about time travel and then ignore the elephant in the corner...the effects of time travel. Part of the definition of time travel to the past is that in the present you perceive certain cause-effect relationships to be reversed...the Grand Paradox of all paradoxes. If somehow you could recall Hitler the monster but history does not record his existence why time travel to the past? If you don't time travel to the past and we assume that your recollection of the monster is correct you now have effect with no cause at all. That's the Super Grand Paradox!
Last edited by a moderator:
TIMETRAVEL_177TH
Temporal Novice
Greetings 'm a time traveler 'm here to take your questions , well what happens if you change the future will happen next , you will end up creating another world that is a parallel world that it is you who takes over but that world you I wanted to change it is impossible to be done this because every time you travel in time you end up creating other worlds I have helped .