Time Travel

[Agraza]

If you were never conceived then you never had the chance to murder granddad. That IS the paradox man. I don't see how you think this multiverse theory lets you slip past it. If it can't happen because it prevents itself or you unravel yourself simply by trying, it isn't possible. Therefore the situation never becomes one of the possible combinations.

 

[MRM]

If you were never conceived then you never had the chance to murder granddad. That IS the paradox man. I don't see how you think this multiverse theory lets you slip past it. If it can't happen because it prevents itself or you unravel yourself simply by trying, it isn't possible. Therefore the situation never becomes one of the possible combinations.

Well it works with the multiverse ( in theory ) because you stab not your grandfather, you stab his double from an paralleluniverse ( and not really yours ) - so in this way the multiverse only let the time traveller think he changed his past in fact it is not his past.

 

[Psyringe]

There's also a problem concerning the speed with which a change in the past propagates along the time line. Most people seem to assume that a change in the past will instantaneously change the far future. This is not necessarily true. There may even be conflicting scenarios which propagate along the same timeline with the same speed.

 

[MRM]

There's also a problem concerning the speed with which a change in the past propagates along the time line. Most people seem to assume that a change in the past will instantaneously change the far future. This is not necessarily true. There may even be conflicting scenarios which propagate along the same timeline with the same speed.

Ehm - how do you think there can be a "speed" for changes in the timeline ? you would need some kind of "overtime" for this since speed depends on time ...

 

[Psyringe]

Ehm - how do you think there can be a "speed" for changes in the timeline ? you would need some kind of "overtime" for this since speed depends on time ...

Hm, I'll try to explain. For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that time propagates itself forward at the same rate in our universe, which is not actually the case (see dilatation of time and associated effects). But for earth and it's history, time travels forward with a fixed speed of 1 day per 1 day.

Now, say you travel to the past and murder your father before you have been conceived. Most people assume that this change *instantaneously* affects the future, and that it's quite unclear whether you can actually survive this action or not. But that's not the only way to think about it. You could as well assume that the change that you created in the past does *also* travel forward with a speed of 1 day per day.

Thus, the effects of this change will never reach you, because they follow you with the same speed that you're going forward in time, hence the temporal distance between you and these effects remains constant. This means that you can safely murder your father, btw.

Such an action would create a timeline that switches between several states. Let's say you invent a time machine in 2010 and travel back in time to murder your father in 1950, before you have been conceived. This change now propagates along the timeline with a speed of 1 day per 1 day. The timeline itself is stable however, although there is a logical contradiction between the parts of the timeline which have already been affected by your applied change, and the parts that have not been affected yet. When the change reaches 2010, then something interesting happens: You are not there to invent the time machine and travel back to murder your father. So, at this point, the timeline from 1950 onwards changes again, and this change also travels forward with a speed of 1 day per 1 day. However, since the changes never collide, the timeline itself remains stable.

The only paradoxon is then that - when you go back in time again to any date after 1950 - you cannot be sure which timeline is in effect at that date.

This theory would allow for any change in the timeline you want, it would never affect you, since you automatically run away from the changes with the same speed with which they follow you. Also you could never actually destroy a timeline, just create a flowing equilibrium of switching alternatives in the same timeline.

 

[eddie_verdde]

How about a time travel mod? discover the time travel technology and you can go back however many turns or to a specific date, change something and then when you get back to the future it shows the impact of your change!

If you knew something about "time-travel" you would know that even if you had a time-travel machine, you couldn't travel farther than the point in the time when the machine was created. So, your idea doesn't make any sense at all...besides, this is not THAT kind of game.

 

[Psyringe]

If you knew something about "time-travel" you would know that even if you had a time-travel machine, you couldn't travel farther than the point in the time when the machine was created. So, your idea doesn't make any sense at all...besides, this is not THAT kind of game.

Now come on, saying a mod idea doesn't make any sense at all because it doesn't fit to the theory of time travel you believe in is a little harsh. First, there are several conflicting theories of time travel, and none of them comes even close to the state of "universal truth" that you seem to claim for yours. Second, Civ mods are not at all limited to ideas which adhere to current scientific convictions.

 

[Willowmound]

Hm, I'll try to explain. ....

Ah, that is sublime Very good indeed!

 

[MRM]

Hm, I'll try to explain. For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that time propagates itself forward at the same rate in our universe, which is not actually the case (see dilatation of time and associated effects). But for earth and it's history, time travels forward with a fixed speed of 1 day per 1 day.

Now, say you travel to the past and murder your father before you have been conceived. Most people assume that this change *instantaneously* affects the future, and that it's quite unclear whether you can actually survive this action or not. But that's not the only way to think about it. You could as well assume that the change that you created in the past does *also* travel forward with a speed of 1 day per day.

No - the current models ( strong determinism or parallel universes ) don't asume that changes in the timelines occure immidetly - they don't happen at all ( even with time travel )

In the deterministic model that past is at it is. If you travel into the past this event is already a part of our past and your grandfather might remember a crazy guy who claimed to be his grandson and tried to stab him ...

And in the parallel universe model you won't enter our past at all - so in that sence it is not really a time travell but more a trans dimensional travel ...

And for your model - for any movement you need an further dimension. For example sopmething simple as a car. It's a 3 dimensional objekt - but you need a 4th dimension ( time ) for movement ( otherwise it would just be a static picture )

And the same is true for timelines - only that timelines are 4 dimensional, the time is allready a part of the timeline, so you would need a fifth dimension ( overtime ? ) to move or change this timeline at all ...

If this 5th dimension didn't exist ( at least not as an overtime ) than the universe is somehow just a static picture of timelines, if you could watch it from outside ( anyone knows what I mean ? )

And if you have this 5th dimension than that would have a pretty strange consequence - you would not have a static past - you simply don't know if that what you read in historybooks or even that what you remember happened because the past could change permanently and I guess we wouldn' even notice that ...

 

[Tormunda]

Heh, that's the old "grandfather paradox" you've discovered there. It's one of the arguments used to prove time travel is impossible. Go back in time, kill your grandfather -- now how is it you were able to kill him if he never conceived your father, and you were never born?

Killing your grandfather does not disprove time travel at all....

You go back in time to kill your grandfather, so your father is not born and neither are you. So you are not there to go back in time to kill your grandfather, so you did not. Since you did not then you are now born and the event did not happen.

This then adds into the effect of perceived reality. The question you then have to ask yourself is did you really go back in time? Since reality is very much in the mind of the person in the event (Another topic) then it's hard to tell if
a) you did go back in time and the event was cancelled out by a paradox or
b) you did go back in time and the event was corrected by the sheet of plastic theory (yet another) or
c) you only think you went back in time to do this and you may have based on how many other people also believe you did. (Projected reality) or
d) time is a dimention and so is reality. All you did is jump from the 1 reality to another. In the new reality a whole new range of options is available for your current exsistance, the previous reality with your grandfather is still running but unless you can jump 'up' another dimention step (theology - afterlife?) it would not be very easy to get back to the first reality.


Ok enough of that before people break

 

[Tormunda]

If you knew something about "time-travel" you would know that even if you had a time-travel machine, you couldn't travel farther than the point in the time when the machine was created. So, your idea doesn't make any sense at all...besides, this is not THAT kind of game.

Oh I love the going forward in time theories.
The issue you have with NOT being on the event horizon in time (Where you would be if there was a future to go to) is that you have no free-will. Although you may think you have
As the future can look back on the past and see that you came forward in time, because that was the past you created when you went forward. So since it is the past then everyone knows it happened. If your not living on the event horizon but your actually that person in the past then you are going to do that event anyway as it is part of that future's history. So you actually have no free-will to do that event as your going to do it anyway!!!!

If there is no free will in a past event then you would not be able to go back to a past event and interact with the events of that time to cause a new effect, as free-will is no longer possible in the past event as it would have already happened in the future!

In other words if you went back and changed time then time is now the event that you went back and changed, so the past is now of you going back and changing it, so your going to do it anyway.

The problem with this thinking is that at some point in the future you are free to make the change to the past and as such had free-will at some point in future time.

If there was a free-will in a future time then at that point in time there was no pre-made future and you’re back to a point in history when your ‘riding the wave of time’.

Soooooo. The only place you can have free will is in the location where there is no future anyway. Else your just a recording. So going forward in time is not really much of an option unless you'r a repeat of last night's TV

 

[Psyringe]

No - the current models ( strong determinism or parallel universes ) don't asume that changes in the timelines occure immidetly - they don't happen at all ( even with time travel )

I was talking about people, not about scientific models. Although I'm habitually interested in the topic, I wouldn't claim to be able to evaluate current scientific models. I'm just an amateur who likes to raise strange questions.

In the deterministic model that past is at it is. If you travel into the past this event is already a part of our past and your grandfather might remember a crazy guy who claimed to be his grandson and tried to stab him ...

Isn't this model prone to circular reasoning - like "you cannot kill your father, because the model wouldn't allow you to kill your father (so something has to happen to prevent it)"?

And in the parallel universe model you won't enter our past at all - so in that sence it is not really a time travell but more a trans dimensional travel ...

Yep.

And for your model - for any movement you need an further dimension.[...]

If this 5th dimension didn't exist ( at least not as an overtime ) than the universe is somehow just a static picture of timelines, if you could watch it from outside ( anyone knows what I mean ? )

And if you have this 5th dimension than that would have a pretty strange consequence - you would not have a static past - you simply don't know if that what you read in historybooks or even that what you remember happened because the past could change permanently and I guess we wouldn' even notice that ...

Yes, that's an implication of this model. Or, more precisely: You can know *your* past, but traveling back to it may not be possible, since the past state of the universe may have changed radically (though without its consequences ever reaching *your* present, since your present is also traveling along the timeline).

I'm not sure whether this model *requires* meta-time as a fifth dimension. May well be - you do have a point with your explanation that any movement requires a dimension in which it can take place. I'm unsure however whether the four dimensions we have may not be sufficient to explain the effects I'm describing. For example, you can still describe any event with coordinates in the four space-time dimensions, even in "my" theory. However, with this theory, you can't be sure whether you actually find the event you expect there because the past may have changed.

Perhaps this theory is just a variant of the "parallel universes" theory, with the twist that instead of parallel universes, you still have *one* universe, but with a timeline you cannot be sure of and that may switch between different realities.

Interesting discussion

 

[warpus]

a lot of talk about timetravel in this thread seems to be based on sci-fi rather than hard science.

for those truly interested in the subject i would highly recommend anything written by brian greene.

 

[Tormunda]

Perhaps this theory is just a variant of the "parallel universes" theory, with the twist that instead of parallel universes, you still have *one* universe, but with a timeline you cannot be sure of and that may switch between different realities.
Interesting discussion

The Parallel universe theory holds more weight than most as it overcomes the mass-in-the-universe issue of most time theories.

As in, if you could go forward-back in time along your own timeline then you could transport all the mass from all of time into just 1 moment of time......

Not good

 

[Psyringe]

The Parallel universe theory holds more weight than most as it overcomes the mass-in-the-universe issue of most time theories.

As in, if you could go forward-back in time along your own timeline then you could transport all the mass from all of time into just 1 moment of time......

Well, that might be an explanation why there is less mass in our universe as scientists expect, so much less that a theoretical construct such as "dark matter" or "shadow matter" has become necessary. There is less mass in our universe because the time travelers are busy transporting it back in time so that the Big Bang can actually happen.

(Note: I know that this is rubbish. Just couldn't resist. )

 

[r0ck]

okey..

i've had just enough classes about possibilities of time travel.


here is the deal as accepted in the books (or articles)


by building a time machine, and returning to past, you wont return to the current universe, cause (as far as we know), on the moment when you arrived in THAT universe you didnt arrive in this.

So, whichever changes you happen to make on that base-new-universe, it will affect only a different timeline, one that was touched by a time-traveller.

if so you happen to return to your original timeline, you wont find anything changed, except the fact of your cronological age, for you will have spent at lease some seconds and then you have to return to your own timeline (or time frame, as scholaly accepted)

therefore, we can imagine that eiter time travel is currently impossible and we are bound to discover it, or we are unaware of the effects of time travelers arriving in our time frame.

so, that's it... straight from "modern day uses for quantical plasma masters degree"

/out

r0ck
first post since may, 24, 2004

 

[warpus]

If so you happen to return to your original timeline, you wont find anything changed, except the fact of your cronological age, for you will have spent at lease some seconds and then you have to return to your own timeline (or time frame, as scholaly accepted)

how would you return to your original timeline though? say you go back in time.. this creates another timeline and branches off from the original. if you stepped back into your timemachine and went forward in time, you would end up travelling forward in time, but in the new timeline that was created when you went back in time.. so you wouldn't end up where you started, you'd be in a different timeline entirely.

 

[MRM]

There seem to be different concepts of parallel universes - AFAIK there is no splitt off, they allready exists, so you don't create a new one by travelling back in time ...

 

[Gargoyle]

Heh, that's the old "grandfather paradox" you've discovered there. It's one of the arguments used to prove time travel is impossible. Go back in time, kill your grandfather -- now how is it you were able to kill him if he never conceived your father, and you were never born?

edit: by the way, you can't steal techs in civ4

Because you killed just one of an infinite number of your grandfathers in one of an infinite number of parallel universes. This is the Manny Worlds interpretation of Quantum Physics.

For that matter, it was another you that when back in time, among infinite yous that did and didn't, that are now dead, etc.

 

[Agraza]

Well it works with the multiverse ( in theory ) because you stab not your grandfather, you stab his double from an paralleluniverse ( and not really yours ) - so in this way the multiverse only let the time traveller think he changed his past in fact it is not his past.

Ah, I missed that. Good point.