Why the most famous time travel paradox is no paradox

[Terxpahseyton]

Copied from one of those time travel threads in the history section:

I'd go back and stop my parents from meeting, so I wouldn't be created.

Paradox, etc

I never really understood why there is the assumption that this is a paradox.
This seems to rest on the idea that one is somehow magically tied to ones past/origin.
But since you are already there, what is the problem with not having another you created? No need for that. You you already exist! Right there preventing your parents from hooking up or having sex that particular night. All that this does is that you won't be able to meet another you.
If you decided to not prevent your parents from having a TK and traveled back in time to meet past you. There would be two yous. And if both yous traveled back further there would be three yous and so on... But your parents only had one TK! Paradox? Nope. Time travel in the past by definition means that there is more than there should be.

Stupid ass paradox
-----------

Opinions?
Thoughts?
Snarky one-liners?

 

[Lillefix]

You're talking about the Many world's interpretation of time travel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

Hard to say if it's right. But it solves the grandfather paradox yes.

 

[Tahuti]

Why would it be restricted many worlds theories?

One could argue that travelling time creates a completely new instance of yourself in your destination.

 

[warpus]

And if the many worlds interpretation isn't right.. how do you explain the paradox then?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

You're talking about the Many world's interpretation of time travel:

No, really no. I don't.
Many worlds says that time travel creates / means a change between different parallel realities. I am not making this assumption.
What I am talking about is what time travel into the past always is: The movement of matter/energy/physical entities where they shouldn't exist. That is btw also the fundamental difference to time travel into the future.
I shouldn't stand in ancient Rome listing to Rhianna on my ipod. Time travel into the past makes it possible anyways. So why should it not make it possible for me to exist without parents? Chains of causation mean nothing once you start to travel back in time.

edit: That in principle is also the reason why while we know that future time travel is a reality, we are not so sure about the other direction.

 

[Lillefix]

And if the many worlds interpretation isn't right.. how do you explain the paradox then?

Now that is interesting. One fun way would be that it would be impossible to kill your parents in some way. I've read a couple of interesting scifi books concerning this. Can't remember the names though. Heinlein possibly.

 

[warpus]

Now that is interesting. One fun way would be that it would be impossible to kill your parents in some way. I've read a couple of interesting scifi books concerning this. Can't remember the names though. Heinlein possibly.

My take on it is that you probably couldn't send a human back in time, only individual particles (maybe).

And if you could, you would be able to kill your parents.. but then the timeline would change (as per star trek), and your existence would be wiped from history, going forward. The timetravelling you would still exist, up until the moment of your death.

That seems like a paradox, but I don't think that it is.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

The timetravelling you would still exist, up until the moment of your death.

Makes no sense
Do you mean a death unrelated to the time travel? Like all humans die eventual? Or what do you mean? Am confuzd

 

[warpus]

Makes no sense
Do you mean a death unrelated to the time travel? Like all humans die eventual? Or what do you mean? Am confuzd

K so say I go back in time and kill my parents (even though I love them) .. also assume that multi-world interpretation is false.

I stay in the past and live out my life, and then eventually die. My parents, since they're also dead, are unable to give birth to baby warpus... However, adult warpus is able to live out the rest of his life, like I said.

No paradox, even though technically you can say that I was never born.. but I was! from my point of view I was, and that's all that matters, IMO.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Ah okay, so it seems we are in total agreement on this whole issue.

I just feel like ill-considered sci-fi plots have twisted the minds of entire generations about this one. But it is so clear if you think it through IMO.

 

[Old Hippy]

Why would it be restricted many worlds theories?

One could argue that travelling time creates a completely new instance of yourself in your destination.

is that the paradox that 'you' can not time travel?

 

[timtofly]

Would that not depend on the mode of time travel?

 

[Old Hippy]

Would that not depend on the mode of time travel?

well if there is a new 'you' you either didn't get there, so time travel did not take place or there are two of you there, an obvious pardox either way...

 

[Samson]

K so say I go back in time and kill my parents (even though I love them) .. also assume that multi-world interpretation is false.

I stay in the past and live out my life, and then eventually die. My parents, since they're also dead, are unable to give birth to baby warpus... However, adult warpus is able to live out the rest of his life, like I said.

No paradox, even though technically you can say that I was never born.. but I was! from my point of view I was, and that's all that matters, IMO.

This is basically the Hitchhikers Guide solution to the apparent paradox, and one that appeals to me, if rather hard to reconcile with the common sense approach to causality.

 

[timtofly]

Saying that it is a new you does away with the paradox, but what if there is no new you? What if that was the real you?

 

[Old Hippy]

Saying that it is a new you does away with the paradox, but what if there is no new you? What if that was the real you?

it's still a paradox...

noun

noun: paradox; plural noun: paradoxes

a seemingly absurd or contradictory statement or proposition which when investigated may prove to be well founded or true.

 

[Krajzen]

I have a strong feeling that this paradox relies on some fundamental flaw in human view on time travel, something making us unable to see fourth dimension in the same way as blind cannot imagine colours.

I have a strong feeling that this paradox is not even wrong, that it completely misses the point, but I cannot rationally explain it.

 

[Bliss]

It would be a big fail if scientists manage to go back just 30 seconds in the past and realize its was in fact another instance of the universe. Get stuck there with 30 seconds younger family and reality. And possibly a new you.

Enviado de meu ST25a usando o Tapatalk 2

 

[timtofly]

it's still a paradox...

Only if it remains absurd and contradictory, otherwise it would just be a fact.

 

[Traitorfish]