What is your MyCard?The New World OrderWho wants to be on the Advertising Team?


Spirituality, Religion, Theology and Philosophy


All faiths & lack of faiths welcome.
All debate styles welcome.
WARNING: Posts may contain sensitive and controversial material.
I don't think time travel paradoxes are possible
Posted: Posted August 25th by Xhin

If you go back in time you're basically just altering reality at that point so that someone with your memories appears from nothing.

Anything that person does doesn't really matter because reality has already been altered and the time when the person traveled back in time has been erased. It might happen again, it might not.

Also the person that appears at some point in the past isn't causally related to that person in the future where they deparated. From the universe's perspective they were created from nothing with a bunch of future memories intact. The future event (using the time machine) didn't cause that person to appear in the past, and in fact that future event may not actually happen.

Furthermore, the person that appeared in the past is very unlikely to actually be the same person as the person in the future. If separate timelines are a thing (and this is kind of showing how they're not in any meaningful way), then from the perspective of the alternate timeline the time traveler actually died and vanished into nothing.

If there aren't alternate timelines, then the point is moot because the future event may not happen, depending on the actions of the person who instantaneously appeared in the past.

settingsOptions
There are 16 Replies

If you think of time as this fixed object and the passage of time as some physical pointer that reads the information from the fixed object, then you still don't need alternate timelines..

Time travel in this case would be something that makes the pointer go back to some date and also create a copy of something in the old future and adjust the fixed object accordingly. So time travel would actually just be a mechanism of altering the fixed object and moving the pointer back.

Furthermore "jumping timelines" could just be mechanisms that alter the fixed object. You don't need to actually have alternate timelines for this to happen, "jumping timelines" is just a mechanism for altering the fixed object.

Posted August 25th by Xhin
Xhin
 

Also yeah I know this is really abstract and kind of out of nowhere, but that's how I am on this forum sometimes. Welcome back, xhin :)

Posted August 25th by Xhin
Xhin
 

.

Edited October 3rd by I killed Mufasa
I killed Mufasa
long live the king

.

Edited October 3rd by I killed Mufasa
I killed Mufasa
long live the king

You lost me at "If you go back"

Posted August 25th by chiefsonny
chiefsonny
 

Time travel paradoxes aren't possible because they're not actually paradoxes.

We think they are because we're limited 4-dimension creatures. We perceive only the infinitesimal cross-section of time known as the present, not the entire shape of it.

Posted August 25th by nullfather
nullfather

.

Edited October 3rd by I killed Mufasa
I killed Mufasa
long live the king

What if when you travel back in time you're actually traveling into a different universe. This would allow you to alter history all you want without ever affecting your own continuity.

Posted August 26th by Louis De Pointe du Lac
Louis De Pointe du Lac
No love = No future

You're talking about a predestinaiton Paradox. any attempt to cha nge history inevitably results in either failure or actually cuasing the thing you tried to change. Either that or you're talking about John Titors version of the multiverse wherein it's i mpossible to return toyour own WOrldline.

Edited August 26th by tnu
tnu

Another take on it would be that time does not exist. Until time travel is possible, the existence of time has not actually been empirically proven. We like to think that we live in a 3 or 4 dimensional universe, but, then, how many axes are there? Could temperature be an axes (thus the 4th dimension, or is it the 6th since we already declared time is the 4th and decisions are the 5th)? Why do quantum physicists have such arrogance to say that the universe splits every time something intelligent is offered a decision to make? Do mathematical principles actually exist, or is it just how the human mind simplifies the actual universe

That is not to say that multiverse theory is wrong, but we seem to be daisy-chaining our what we consider real, when we can't even empirically verify the things we say exist and/or are factual. It seems incredibly arrogant, and, more so, it seems like a mere revival of the ancient greek religion of Pythagoreanism.

Posted October 10th by Kohlrak
Kohlrak

Ah time travel, something all scf-fi shows, books and stories always have to include. What is so fascinating about going to the past? To change something? Well, IF you were to go to the past of your current timeline/continuum/universe and correct or alter the event you traveled back to correct, you would make it to where the whole reason you went back in time to being with invalid, thus creating a paradox of you traveling back in time for a reason, that now doesn't exist, negating the reason you traveled back in time in the first place, but now that you didn't go back to correct that event, that event will happen causing you to travel back in time. This basically creates and infinite loop of cause and effect.

"Why do quantum physicists have such arrogance to say that the universe splits every time something intelligent is offered a decision to make? Do mathematical principles actually exist, or is it just how the human mind simplifies the actual universe "

Is it really arrogance to try to fathom something you do not understand? Was it arrogance that led humanity to the progress of flight? Of sailing? Of being able to go into outer space? I'm not saying we are going about it the right or wrong way, I am saying that it is not arrogant to try to understand our universe and our place in it.


Edited October 10th by Q
Q
 

I do believe it is arrogance to suggest that every time we have a whim, the universe spawns another self.

Though it is arrogant to suggest we know something that we do not. There's no more empirical evidence for multiverse than there is God. Multiverse is just the new flavor of the day with religion. If there was any sort of empirical evidence, I'd b OK with it, but it seems more like it is being used to goalpost move in regards to religion. The big bang makes little sense, we're having trouble with gravity, and the list goes on. With absolutely no evidence, suggesting that there's alternative universes allows to buy time on explaining why "it's irrational to believe in god," but "it's scientific to believe that the universe bends to every decision we make." Or, the "programmer theory," which is just God without calling Him "God," but simultaneously suggesting God is impossible (to be fair, I haven't heard this one go mainstream, yet).

Posted October 10th by Kohlrak
Kohlrak

I think you are confusing arrogance with ignorance.

Posted October 10th by Q
Q
 

The difference is there, but it's small in this context. Arrogance, however, requires ignorance.

Posted October 10th by Kohlrak
Kohlrak

No.

Posted October 10th by Q
Q
 



Posted October 10th by Kohlrak
Kohlrak
Reply to: I don't think time travel paradoxes are possible

Enter your message here


Site Rules | Complaints Process | Register Complaint Facebook Page
GTX0 © 2009-2017 Xhin GameTalk © 1999-2008 lives on