sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (02/11/85)
I think you guys are finding out that time travel IS a paradox. Sean
psal@othervax.UUCP (02/18/85)
==== < FOR THE LINE EATER > ==== Don't you mean that time travel will bave been a paradox? - C.Thomas Weinbaum von Waldenthal
metz@troll.DEC (08/23/85)
In order to make any sense of time travel, as in "back to the Future" or H. G. Wells' "The Time Machine", it must be realized that each event which creates a change in the time line itself will cause anoth time line to be created and a new series of events to transpire. This could lead to an infinite number of time lines for a series of acts caused by a time traveler. If it is assumed that time is a positive flowing river, a move back in time would place the traveler in position to retrace a given path. Since the future from the point at which he/she intrudes could not be changed or else the traveler himself would be changed, it must be true and necessary for a new time line to be formed and the travelers path be in a new direction. The original time path must stay intact or the future where the traveler was would not be if he changed it in any way. This will lead to an infinite number of time lines as each event takes place. To discuss the events in a time travel movie as if they should be logical is in itself illogical and only is a manifestation of our human egos. It is not possible for us to perceive what is taking place around us for we do not have the necessary senses to react to stimuli beyond our limited range. So when you go to a movie, enjoy what it is and do not try to rationalize what is basically irrational.
jtb@kitc.UUCP (John Burgess) (08/28/85)
In article <95@decwrl.UUCP> metz@troll.DEC writes: > >In order to make any sense of time travel, as in "back to the Future" or >H. G. Wells' "The Time Machine", it must be realized that each event which >creates a change in the time line itself will cause anoth time line to be >created and a new series of events to transpire. This could lead to an >infinite number of time lines for a series of acts caused by a time >traveler. If it is assumed that time is a positive flowing river, a move >back in time would place the traveler in position to retrace a given path. >Since the future from the point at which he/she intrudes could not be >changed or else the traveler himself would be changed, it must be true and >necessary for a new time line to be formed and the travelers path be in >a new direction. ... What is stated above is One possible postulate for the way time travel might work - or rather, the way it DOES work in some real fictional universes, for example Doctor Who (see net.tv.drwho). Just as in Geometry, where different sets of postulates make for different (so-called non-Euclidian) geometries, an author can postulate different time-travel postulates, and create different (fictional) universes! Some other postulates, which create different universes, but which are used by various other science fiction authors, are: 1) Since the past is past, one cannot change it, therefore any particular time travel event into the past was/is NECESSARY in order to make the past what it was/is. This assumes there is one and only one time line, and thus one can return to the present with no changes evident. One can even THINK one has "changed the past", but in this type universe, all one is doing is forcing an event that would have happened anyway. 2) "Free" time travel. Some authors don't get hung up over stuff like infinite time lines and such, and merely allow time travel to happe. 3) "Uncertain time" - in this model, the only point in time that is "true" is the current instant, whatever that may be. The past and future fade away (as a function of time) into uncertainty anyway, so time travel is sort of like moving in a fog. (This one is the toughest to explain, much less deal with!) 4) Are there others? beats me. This discussion should probably move to net.sf-lovers, anyway. There are interesting paradoxes that can happen in ANY of these. Think about it! -- John Burgess ATT-IS Labs, So. Plainfield NJ (HP 1C-221) {most Action Central sites}!kitc!jtb (201) 561-7100 x2481 (8-259-2481)
tonyf@mmintl.UUCP (Tony Faulise) (08/30/85)
In article <95@decwrl.UUCP> metz@troll.DEC writes: > >In order to make any sense of time travel, as in "back to the Future" or >H. G. Wells' "The Time Machine", it must be realized that each event which >creates a change in the time line itself will cause anoth time line to be >created and a new series of events to transpire. This could lead to an >infinite number of time lines for a series of acts caused by a time >traveler. If it is assumed that time is a positive flowing river, a move well, hey now, that's an idea! (not original i'm sure, but the first time i've thought about it this way.) if you let time-space be a four dimensional flow, non-turbulent (maybe not a good assumption), non-viscous (why should it be?), and irrotational (??? what does this mean?) then my calculus tells me no two paths of three-space through time can intersect, right? maybe we can do something with conformal mapping here? i have to read up on this. by the way, i broke one of the electrodes off my flux-capacitor, anyone have a spare? :-) tony 'the meek and jumbled' faulise =================================================== ...allegra!princeton!yoyo!faulise after sept 10
tankus@hsi.UUCP (Ed Tankus) (09/10/85)
> > When an airliner travels from the East Coast to the West Coast, > no one is amazed that it travels along an arc of a circle rather than > > etc., etc., etc. > > Joe Barone, {allegra, decvax!brunix, linus, ccice5}!rayssd!m1b > Raytheon Co, Submarine Signal Div., Box 330, Portsmouth, RI 02871 Why not move all these discussions of time travel to net.misc and out of net.movies. I think these particular digressions from the original theme of "Back to the Future" have gone on long enough. -- " For every word there is a song upon which inspiration lies ..." Ed Tankus Net : {noao!ihnp4!yale!}!hsi!tankus Snail: Health Systems Int'l, 100 Broadway, New Haven, CT 06511 Bell : (203) 562-2101
goldman@umn-cs.UUCP (Matthew D. Goldman ) (09/13/85)
In article <257@hsi.UUCP> tankus@hsi.UUCP (Ed Tankus) writes: > >Why not move all these discussions of time travel to net.misc and out of >net.movies. I think these particular digressions from the original theme of >"Back to the Future" have gone on long enough. > No, no, no, no... net.rec.timetravel!!!!!! oh yea, O__\ ____} O / -- ------- Matthew Goldman Computer Science Department University of Minnesota ...ihnp4!umn-cs!goldman ...stolaf!umn-cs!goldman Home is where you take your hat off... Banzai! Kyllara : What did you just do? Moederan : I don't know but it's going to be fun...