Should Congress pass a law banning time travel to the past?
And before you go saying there’s no need since that can’t happen, keep in mind they have already added the Lake Champlain Monster to the endangered species list just in case it exists.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
DocSavage · M
[@Zaphod42
Traveling back in time would create a separate timeline
One where you would exist both as your past self and your future self. Like “Looper” your future self would exist independently of your past self. But your past self can still change the decisions.
Traveling back in time would create a separate timeline
One where you would exist both as your past self and your future self. Like “Looper” your future self would exist independently of your past self. But your past self can still change the decisions.
DocSavage · M
@LordShadowfire
It rules of time travel are iffy. If you go back into the past in which you still exist you can alter your future, in which case both past and future selves would continue. There are several different possible outcomes.
It rules of time travel are iffy. If you go back into the past in which you still exist you can alter your future, in which case both past and future selves would continue. There are several different possible outcomes.
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@DocSavage Okay, but as I understand it, your "past" and "future" selves would be in separate timelines, or parallel universes basically.
DocSavage · M
@LordShadowfire
Not necessarily. You go back in time. There is no reason for your past self to stop existing. A causality loop would allow the future self to co-exist, but the future self would experience a change in history branching into a parallel timeline.
It would really just come down to which timeline you observe.
Not necessarily. You go back in time. There is no reason for your past self to stop existing. A causality loop would allow the future self to co-exist, but the future self would experience a change in history branching into a parallel timeline.
It would really just come down to which timeline you observe.
Zaphod42 · 51-55, M
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@DocSavage I feel like we're both saying the same thing. The two timelines wouldn't ever come into contact. You would basically travel into a new one.
DocSavage · M
@LordShadowfire
Hard to say. I’ve read a bunch of science fiction dealing with time travel. As I said before the rules are iffy. In some cases the timelines never meet, but are similar. In others they’re fluid, and can change when events are altered. Then there always the idea that time is constant, and takes all events into account regardless, so there is never a change. Until we actually see a T.A.R.D.I.S we’ll just have to go with timey winey, as the Doctor says.
Hard to say. I’ve read a bunch of science fiction dealing with time travel. As I said before the rules are iffy. In some cases the timelines never meet, but are similar. In others they’re fluid, and can change when events are altered. Then there always the idea that time is constant, and takes all events into account regardless, so there is never a change. Until we actually see a T.A.R.D.I.S we’ll just have to go with timey winey, as the Doctor says.