tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post111130941114154486..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Branching TimelinesRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1111566816207861962005-03-23T03:33:00.000-05:002005-03-23T03:33:00.000-05:00I suggest from the universes point of view the fut...I suggest from the universes point of view the future is fixed just as is the past.<BR/><BR/>I think greg is right.<BR/><BR/>the way the universe seems to work if you know quantum mechanics is that it alows breaches of things like time travel or speed of likght or wave behaviour as long as it donest breach laws about transfer of information or entropy etc.<BR/><BR/>this means that you might be allowed to travel back in time if the universe was able to make that trip entirely inconcequential. It would also be likely to require a very large amount of energy.<BR/><BR/>You would not jsut have trouble killing oyur own grandfather but even doing minor things unles they could effectively be "undone".<BR/><BR/>but you might be able to have an interesting loop where you apparently create yourself.Geniushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11624496692217466430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1111375064931505242005-03-20T22:17:00.000-05:002005-03-20T22:17:00.000-05:00For all that, a not insignificant number of scient...For all that, a not insignificant number of scientists actually believe in multiple universes :)<BR/><BR/>I just remembered a past post of mine about time in case anyone's interested. I claimed that it didn't exist :)<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://melbournephilosopher.blogspot.com/2004/11/philosophy-of-time.html" REL="nofollow"> Philosophy of Time</A>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11384742711203790401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1111322988930139732005-03-20T07:49:00.000-05:002005-03-20T07:49:00.000-05:00All time travel paradoxes strongly depend on the n...All time travel paradoxes strongly depend on the nominological nature of the time travel. None of the paradoxes are logical ones in the end.<BR/><BR/>If there is only one timeline, then everything is permanently fixed. Regardless of the appearance of time-travel, in actual fact there are no realy physical laws as such, there is just a static reality. Problems of killing your own grandfather do not arise, because it is not consistent with a static reality.<BR/><BR/>The logical nature of the paradox can be easily resolved by writing down the logical structure of a particular conception of time-travel. For example, which kinds of causation are transitive, and which are not? Does a paradox only occur in one direction? Is it part of the nature of time travel that it makes irrelevant the circumstances of its own causation? If not, in what sense is a time traveller genuinely moving into his or her past? Perhaps time travel is trivial, but unfortunately the traveller un-ages, and arrives in the past exactly as they left it all those years ago.<BR/><BR/>The question is too loose without considering what the physical rules you are playing by actually are.<BR/><BR/>Cheers,<BR/>-MPAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11384742711203790401noreply@blogger.com