Solve the grandfather paradox.

[Rixus]

What's your favourite solution? I realise that the Vulcan Science Directorate has determined that time travel is impossible, but let's say it is. For one reason or another you find yourself transported back in time.

Imagine you're not a very nice person. And you really want to know what happens if you kill one of your grandparents before you were born. So you do it.

What happens next?

There are a few answers I can think of.
Deterministic - Time is unchangeable, so you cannot succeed. Somehow you fail in the attempt, kill the wrong person or they escape.
Parallel Universe - You create a new timeline or get stuck in an alternate timeline where you didn't exist.
Loop Theory - If you succeed you loop back to the start of the time shift until you fail (but why?)
Hollywood version - You fade away in a dramatic moment having changed the past. No one remembers you existed.
Universal Armageddon - You made a tear in the space time continuum and now it's earthquakes, volcanoes, cats and dogs living together...

 

[Jennywocky]

Mistaken Genetics: You shoot your grandfather, nothing changes, and then you figure out your grandmother must have been having an affair.

 

[Nymus Anon]

I would guess a parallel universe where whenever you go back in time you move to a different universe/timeline where another you could have existed but now they won't because you killed his grandfather before he had the other you's father or mother.

 

[QuickTwist]

I would guess a parallel universe where whenever you go back in time you move to a different universe/timeline where another you could have existed but now they won't because you killed his grandfather before he had the other you's father or mother.

You are still here. It seems we have a new member.

 

[Nymus Anon]

You are still here. It seems we have a new member.

Yay.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Time is a multi-dimensional entity, and we only move at any given time in a particular direction, constantly shifting - our space-time velocity.

So, if you get the idea of a linear timeline out of your mind, the paradox never even occurs.

 

[QuickTwist]

Time is a multi-dimensional entity, and we only move at any given time in a particular direction, constantly shifting - our space-time velocity.

So, if you get the idea of a linear timeline out of your mind, the paradox never even occurs.

Is it a worthwhile goal to try and still your body/mind in time?

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Is it a worthwhile goal to try and still your body/mind in time?

Attempting to do so may have the reverse effect - actually increasing the uncertainty regarding what is occurring.

I think an analogy might be a bike, which will wobble more if you slow down.

Certainly stilling your body/mind is a worthwhile goal anyway, and could have quite fun effects.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Futurama already solved this. Become your own grandparent!

 

[Cognisant]

Send a single particle back in time and you have created a timeline where the universe has one extra particle, until the time comes when that particle got sent back, now even if you send back the exact same particle you've create a timeline where the universe has two extra particles, this loop continues until the effect disrupts the cause.

One day Jimmy is instantly vaporized by a several megaton explosion in a neighboring town, he never grows up to invent time travel and take revenge on his abusive grandfather.

Maybe this is how all advanced civilizations end, somebody figures out how to do time travel and shortly thereafter everything starts inexplicably/spontaneously exploding

 

[Jennywocky]

Send a single particle back in time and you have created a timeline where the universe has one extra particle, until the time comes when that particle got sent back, now even if you send back the exact same particle you've create a timeline where the universe has two extra particles, this loop continues until the effect disrupts the cause.

One day Jimmy is instantly vaporized by a several megaton explosion in a neighboring town, he never grows up to invent time travel and take revenge on his abusive grandfather.

Maybe this is how all advanced civilizations end, somebody figures out how to do time travel and shortly thereafter everything starts inexplicably/spontaneously exploding

Apparently either time travel never gets invented, or people simply have not been coming back to our current time or earlier, since we are still here (because we'd be caught in that explosion surplus of molecules)... although I have a hard time believing that no one in history after the invention of time travel would travel back to look at some pretty nostalgic or important historical events.

 

[Reluctantly]

Only way I could ever see time travel making sense is if you could separate yourself from its causality and at the same time see its infinite timeline as a whole. Then you could inject yourself into it at various points and positions in time and effect a new infinite timeline.

However philosophical problems arise due to the nature of space-time being relative to your position in its entirety. In other words, 10 seconds passed for person A can be 1 billion years passed for person B; you end up with a potential problem where say 1.00001 billion years passed for person B and 1 billion years passed for person B has a significant difference, yet very little if any for person A. This can go further where person C also has a billion years passed relative to each second passed for person B, making the time difference between person C and person A of greater magnitude. And this fractal magnification can go on for infinity, if matter can always be broken down into smaller parts or combined into bigger parts, meaning that any unit of time passed for person A can mean an infinite amount of time has passed for some other person. So if you wanted to inject yourself at 10 seconds passed for person A, you'd also need to be capable of specifying the time for every other of the infinite objects in the timeline or you'd end up with potential randomness. Basically, if you couldn't do this, then each time you traveled to 10 seconds passed person A, the configuration of that timeline going forward would be slightly or dramatically different; and then if you did the same action every time you went to 10 seconds passed for person A, you'd get potentially different outcomes.

But I guess you could infer that a stable universe has all random configurations converge on one causal timeline or we wouldn't exist the way we do. So at every position in time, all possible configurations would exist, yet one reality emerges. So maybe the point is moot. Of course, all of this is assuming matter can be broken down or combined infinitely and that time is relative between all objects (which Einstein's relativity strongly suggests, given that it has been verified and no one can prove it wrong). So it may not even be a point of contention to begin with. Then again, it might only matter in special cases where you try to interact with matter on a smaller (quantum) or larger (cosmic) scale; changing the scope of how you interact with and see reality might alter it on a fundamental level, where before it had one timeline, no matter the configuration of its nature. Kind of like how different languages can mean the same thing and produce the same affect, yet are fundamentally different. A change in the nature of one language will have a different effect than a change in another. Either way, I'm thinking this would make for an interesting plot-angle for the right kind of scifi show.

edit: but then again, this brings me back to when I mentioned that time is an uncountable set. To view infinite time isn't to see one timeline as an infinite set, but to see an infinite amount of infinite sets that make up one complete reality. So you'd really have an infinite amount of infinite realities that make up the whole of reality. So yeah, to travel precisely in time, you'd have to specify the infinite of the infinite essentially, otherwise, you'd get a random underlying nature each time you went to the same position in time. So I guess to answer the question, I'd say there would be parallel realities, but not really parallel, since they are both part of the same reality; you just play out a specific part, seeing it only as real. And the relative consistency of time travel would depend upon how much of reality you could specify.

 

[Rixus]

The idea of time travel also assumes that any matter that once existed in that time period still exists in that time. Imagine if you travelled backwards only to discover that all particles that were there the last time you were were no longer there because they were now in the present - which meant that nothing was there for you to go back to.

It's also interesting, as Reluctantly alluded, that the passage of time is not a constant everywhere in the universe. It's possible with time dilation to control the rate at which we naturally move forward in time. As this happens naturally under curtain conditions, now maybe now here for both points, but how far backwards would you have to travel to be in a specified different time frame? Would you have to use some sort of universal base measure? And since all particles that make up everything we see even on Earth have been around since the dawn of time, how can we determine that all particles nearby have the same time reference?

Or what if time travel had existed, but various people have abused in over the course of the future and altered the timeline until a timeline existed in which time travel never existed? And that explains why we never see anyone coming back. Because in the timeline we're in, time travel didn't exist because someone prevented it from ever existing?

 

[QuickTwist]

Attempting to do so may have the reverse effect - actually increasing the uncertainty regarding what is occurring.

I think an analogy might be a bike, which will wobble more if you slow down.

Certainly stilling your body/mind is a worthwhile goal anyway, and could have quite fun effects.

Those are possible side effect, yes. But I am not interested in how it can't work, I'm interested in what happens if you can get it to work.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Those are possible side effect, yes. But I am not interested in how it can't work, I'm interested in what happens if you can get it to work.

I hadn't meant it to be a negative side effect. Actually, the idea of increasing the level of uncertainty regarding future states is quite a thrilling one to me. I like to gamble, after all, and I love free will.

But assuming you're referring to something like meditation, this is definitely something I recommend.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Only way I could ever see time travel making sense is if you could separate yourself from its causality and at the same time see its infinite timeline as a whole. Then you could inject yourself into it at various points and positions in time and effect a new infinite timeline.

Spoiler

However philosophical problems arise due to the nature of space-time being relative to your position in its entirety. In other words, 10 seconds passed for person A can be 1 billion years passed for person B; you end up with a potential problem where say 1.00001 billion years passed for person B and 1 billion years passed for person B has a significant difference, yet very little if any for person A. This can go further where person C also has a billion years passed relative to each second passed for person B, making the time difference between person C and person A of greater magnitude. And this fractal magnification can go on for infinity, if matter can always be broken down into smaller parts or combined into bigger parts, meaning that any unit of time passed for person A can mean an infinite amount of time has passed for some other person. So if you wanted to inject yourself at 10 seconds passed for person A, you'd also need to be capable of specifying the time for every other of the infinite objects in the timeline or you'd end up with potential randomness. Basically, if you couldn't do this, then each time you traveled to 10 seconds passed person A, the configuration of that timeline going forward would be slightly or dramatically different; and then if you did the same action every time you went to 10 seconds passed for person A, you'd get potentially different outcomes.

But I guess you could infer that a stable universe has all random configurations converge on one causal timeline or we wouldn't exist the way we do. So at every position in time, all possible configurations would exist, yet one reality emerges. So maybe the point is moot. Of course, all of this is assuming matter can be broken down or combined infinitely and that time is relative between all objects (which Einstein's relativity strongly suggests, given that it has been verified and no one can prove it wrong). So it may not even be a point of contention to begin with. Then again, it might only matter in special cases where you try to interact with matter on a smaller (quantum) or larger (cosmic) scale; changing the scope of how you interact with and see reality might alter it on a fundamental level, where before it had one timeline, no matter the configuration of its nature. Kind of like how different languages can mean the same thing and produce the same affect, yet are fundamentally different. A change in the nature of one language will have a different effect than a change in another. Either way, I'm thinking this would make for an interesting plot-angle for the right kind of scifi show.

edit: but then again, this brings me back to when I mentioned that time is an uncountable set. To view infinite time isn't to see one timeline as an infinite set, but to see an infinite amount of infinite sets that make up one complete reality. So you'd really have an infinite amount of infinite realities that make up the whole of reality. So yeah, to travel precisely in time, you'd have to specify the infinite of the infinite essentially, otherwise, you'd get a random underlying nature each time you went to the same position in time. So I guess to answer the question, I'd say there would be parallel realities, but not really parallel, since they are both part of the same reality; you just play out a specific part, seeing it only as real. And the relative consistency of time travel would depend upon how much of reality you could specify.

I see 4D Time as a line and each person's point extends from their primordial essence to the last dying idea that traces back to their principal form. Like you say a person is naturally bound to the causality, i.e. to travel on this line means you forget everything before/after.

[bimgx=200]http://i.imgur.com/GJSWfhO.jpg[/bimgx]

It isn't until 5D spacetime that true time travel is possible with omnidirectional movement. However there are multiple universes that are only echoes of life, in that they are all both real and not real. If you are loud enough you can disturb a universe, but they cannot perceive you in full, only the manner in which you intersect their dimension.

So if a person kills their grandfather while in 5D spacetime I think they immediately close the path that brought them to their current point in 5D, possibly becoming stuck in eternity. The reason I believe the person would not vanish is because if it is possible to travel back in time to kill your grandfather, it must be possible to be stopped from killing your grandfather. However I think it creates an infinite loop like a mirror. Since you'd only be going back to save yourself for eternity, you're basically dead but in a higher dimensional form of death.

 

[2babylon]

I have 2 answers

deterministic - it's impossible to kill your grandfather in any way because your time travel was always a part of history, and you are never successful

parallel universe - you enter the parallel universe where you kill your grandfather, and you remain in it, unable to return to your universe

 

[QuickTwist]

I hadn't meant it to be a negative side effect. Actually, the idea of increasing the level of uncertainty regarding future states is quite a thrilling one to me. I like to gamble, after all, and I love free will.

But assuming you're referring to something like meditation, this is definitely something I recommend.

Yes, the question remains: is it possible?

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Yes, the question remains: is it possible?

Could you elaborate on what you mean by stilling the mind/body in time?

 

[Seteleechete]

[Silina: We like the idea of a casuality timeline. You are born, you travel back in time, you kill your grandfather and remain in this timeline, not as a parallel universe but as the same universe.

Effectively the timetravel occured because something that happened in the previous timeyline and that would have to had to happen for you to travel back to kill your grandfather which results in a timeline dependent on the previous one.

Which just makes it one chain of casuality (and arguably therefore a single timeline) regardless of how many times you travel back in time. The original timeline would effectively have stopped existing except for the fact that it happened for the new timeline to occur.(It becomes part of the past/history)]

 

[QuickTwist]

Could you elaborate on what you mean by stilling the mind/body in time?

Its a question of how powerful we are as living beings. Is there some supernatural force we have at our disposal to control things like time with our mind alone.

I know there are buddhist monks who essentially die while meditating, but the weird part is that their body is perfectly preserved in death. I want to know if its possible these monks are still alive somewhere possibly living on another dimension or something.

What have they done? How have they been able to keep their body in tact when by our standards they are dead?

I just want to know how powerful our minds really are. What if we have only begun to understand what our minds are capable of?

 

[Seteleechete]

I know there are buddhist monks who essentially die while meditating, but the weird part is that their body is perfectly preserved in death. I want to know if its possible these monks are still alive somewhere possibly living on another dimension or something.

What have they done? How have they been able to keep their body in tact when by our standards they are dead?

I just want to know how powerful our minds really are. What if we have only begun to understand what our minds are capable of?

[Silina: It's rare but not unheard of for the the original identity/ego of a tulpamancer to commit egocide. You basically have a thoughtform take over all operations and dissipate/fade away from existence.

I guess it would be possible to dissociate sufficiently from the bodies functions without a replacement and also fade away... Though it seems fairly pointless(and there is nothing necessarily supernatural to it).]

 

[Rixus]

[Silina: We like the idea of a casuality timeline. You are born, you travel back in time, you kill your grandfather and remain in this timeline, not as a parallel universe but as the same universe.

Effectively the timetravel occured because something that happened in the previous timeyline and that would have to had to happen for you to travel back to kill your grandfather which results in a timeline dependent on the previous one.

Which just makes it one chain of causality (and arguably therefore a single timeline) regardless of how many times you travel back in time. The original timeline would effectively have stopped existing except for the fact that it happened for the new timeline to occur.(It becomes part of the past/history)]

I was thinking about this possibility recently while I was watching the first 2 Terminator films, and how they make a complete story, if one accepts that T3 was just milking it for money.

The first one is sent back to change history by removing removing John Connor from the original timeline. Thus inadvertently creating him and alerting his mother into educating him to fulfil the task he must undertake, and also by being destroyed the terminator provides the blueprint for Skynet - a deterministic plot. Perhaps Skynet even sent it back in order to ensure it's own creation.

However, now another is sent back in the sequel. At the end of the film, they destroy all the research and prototypes and the story ends with the final "one more chip" being lowered into the molten steel (a scene that reduced me to tears as a child), and that entire timeline is erased. The Terminators no longer existed. The timeline is now restored to what it would have been if the first Terminator had never even been sent back. Which means that none of it ever happened, and Judgement Day need not occur. The characters involved, however, fully remember what happened so it did indeed occur.

So where is the timeline in which Terminators exist and the near destruction of humanity? Is it now in a parallel universe still happening? Or did it no longer happen, in which case it only exists within the event of the movies. I think in this context it exists only within the temporal loop that only exists during those events, and not in a parallel universe, within a single timeline. It did not exists before, and does not exist afterwards, but exists during the course of the events as a possibility.

Which is another solution to the grandfather paradox. If you look at it from the perspective of the time you arrived, and not the perspective of the time you came from. The future in which you exist and discovered the secret of time travel is only a possible future, which only exists from the time you went back to the time you finished your task. But there remains a question - if you are made entirely of particles that have existed since the dawn of time, then where did your particles come from? Even before you exist, the matter that makes up you is already lying around somewhere. So where did you come from? Where do you go?

My solution to this is that time travel would have to be some form of information transfer - whatever makes you up is deconstructed on a quantum level and transferred back through time, and made up of matter that exists within the current time frame. This is theoretically possible, but the matter that makes up what is you has to be completely deconstructed in order to avoid the Heizenberg principle. So you're only transferring information back through time, and not matter. Therefore, the information that makes you up continues to exist in the current time within the need for the future in which you originally exist, because all that was transferred was information, and that information exists within you and continues to exist even if the actual events no longer occur. And you can continue to exist in a timeline in which you never existed.

Does that make sense or am I not explaining it well? I think it's a neat explanation that doesn't require any parallel universes, determinism or the destruction of the universe because the same particles and matter need not exist together at the same time.