Time travel and Multiverse Theory

[chronus]

I am curious as to others' beliefs/opinions on how time travel and/vs. multiverse theory correlate.

Theory/Question 1. If you could go back in time and try to alter an event, could it turn out that you can't change it and are actually only helping history along it's course?

Theory/Question 2. Or could you go back in time and actually change the event, effectively creating a parallel universe, an alternate reality where events will now play out differently?

Scenario: Your family is killed. You go back in time and save them.

What happens then if you succeed in your endeavor and travel forward in the timeline you just altered to when you last left only to find yourself trapped in a branch of the timeline where you are out of place? You could potentially find yourself living alongside yourself since the alternate version of you would then have no motivation to travel through time, thus leaving the time traveling version of you displaced. To return to your place of origin, you would then need to find new means to travel through alternate time dimensions. If traveling through your own timeline is like traveling in a straight line, then you would have to find a way to travel across parallel lines to return to the point where there isn't another you. Would this then not defeat the whole purpose of having traveled through time in the first place?

I myself like to fall back on Occam's Razor for this one.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Yup. A very good point that has been made, as far as I know, only in fiction. Lord Dunsany had a short short story on it back in the 1920s, I believe it was, and there was a long series of paperback novels by a Viet Nam vet where the hero tried to help a future civilization using time travel/multiple universes, but became trapped (multiple copies of him) in a quagmire where the bad guys won as often, and in as many branches, as the good guys.

Seems to me this argument could be rigorized, and used against Kaku's idea that many worlds gets us off the hook on causality violation.

 

[chronus]

Thank you selfAdjoint, that is also what I was thinking about Kaku's theory after reading Hyperspace. I myself have not seen the theory I presented elsewhere, even in fiction. (I'll have to check this out Lord Dunsany to see how portrayed it). I have seen it posted elsewhere on the internet, but after I thought it up one night after arguing with some friends of mine.

But on to another subject: What about travel forward through time? What happens? Will you meet an older version of yourself or will time play out as if you did not live out those years? Thoughts, opinions?

 

[Spacestar]

I think your point is a very good illustration of how the “ branched timeline solution” is a logical fallacy. It shows that the argument is rhetorical.

 

[selfAdjoint]

What about travel forward through time? What happens? Will you meet an older version of yourself or will time play out as if you did not live out those years? Thoughts, opinions

I really have no thoughts, but I would point you to another piece of fiction: Harry Turtledove's Counting Up - Counting Down. It's about a man who meets his younger self through time travel and tries to fix some of the problems he remembers, with disastrous results. It's in the form of two novellas, each telling the story from one of the ages' point of view. Another cautionary tale, I seem to be drawn to them.

 

[Mad_Gouki]

sorry, i don't think that whole parallel worldline thing is possible...

if you go back in time and kill yourself, you changed history, so you don't know how you would react do you? maybe you would be able to kill yourself and still exist, because you existed to kill yourself, either that or you would cease to be altogether.

 

[chronus]

Well, I don't believe that history can be changed. I don't think time paradoxes are possible and that's why I thought up of the whole timeline thing, I was trying to rationalize IF you could change things, then how would it work?

My belief was if you go back in time and kill yourself either you'ld fail, because here you are, or, you'ld create a parallel timeline that you'ld be stuck in.

I think time paradoxes are overly complicated and superfluous. Especially ones like killing yourself in the past. Why not save the universe some trouble and kill yourself in your present?

 

[ambient]

I agree with chronus, leaning more towards the "history cannot be changed" theory.

Mad_Gouki didn't really explain his argument well. You can't go back to
the past to kill yourself because you are alive now. If you killed yourself, you wouldn't
be able to live to the time when you would go back in time and
kill yourself. (i guess i am just reiterating what chronus said earlier)

Altering time is not possible. It is there,
always has been, the future, present and past, ever progressing for us,
yet in many ways static.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

While I keep my mind open to ideas and theories on the subject I personally do not believe that it is possible to travel back in time. Having thought it over I don't really even believe that there is an actual 'temporal dimension' to travel through. The multiverse theory of which I have read seems to me really only to be a conceptual model for a dynamic universe that exists something like a probability wave. It would seem to me that if you were to have multiple time lines especially infinite time lines it wrecks the functionable logic. As an example if you have time travelers in the future that travel back in time then across the 'multiverse' there must be an infinite number of them or even an infinite number of anyone of them. If you cross into parallel time lines when you time travel, ala John Titor, something of a bigger worry than running into a past self might be running into other time traveling yous.

A good book involving time travel is 'Anubis Gates' by Tim Powers. I liked the way he dealt with the paradox of trying to change the past and the intricacy that he gives his plots does it justice.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Yes the Anubis Gates was a terrific novel. I wish Riobbins would write some more. Notice the "closed timelike loop" in the subplot of Ashbless' poetry.

 

[Why]

Time Travel Is A Fallacy.

Observable knowledge - why time travel is an illusion.
( I am in no way trying to be 'spiritual' or 'metaphysical' here. These observations are based on my experience of reality and I'll try to express them in as clear and simplistic terms as I can - thanks)

What we call the 'moment' is existence.
Everything happens 'here'.
There is no existence outside of the moment.
The moment has no beginning or ending, it is eternity.
The whole, our collective essence/substance, cannot be outside of itself - it is all there is).

Our primal essence or stuff is active...I call it energy.
It is always moving and always changing...parts of 'us' move in repetitive patterns and appear as form/matter.
In totality, each movement or expression of energy(us) is different as all of us are always active and moving in slightly different ways. The more complex our movements get the more impossible it becomes for an 'exact' duplication.

Their is no existence outside of our whole, collective field.
What we call the past is no longer in existence or real it is just our memory or image of part of the movements of the whole(only our memory is in eternity...the 'now'). it is not 'stored' anywhere as there is no other place 'to be' besides existence.
The future is not real either but is our image of part of the movement of everything to happen in the only place that is real - existence - the moment.

In summation, all there is is our total expression right NOW.
In fact we can simplify more by stating in reality the moment is our body and is always moving within itself.
Our experience and focus as humans and a mind experiencing a subject-object experience fools us into believing there can be something outside of ourself.

As far as multiple universes, dimensions, etc. I see no problem with that as it does not violate the reality of existence but is/can be another division of what is existing right now.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Just a suggestion. Find another word for what you call energy, at least on these boards. The word energy is a specific term of art for physicists, and we here follow their ideas. Call it chi or whatever, because if you don't somebody is likely to ask if it equals mc squared and how it transforms under Lorentz transformations.

 

[Why]

'Stuff"

Since scientists don't even know what the ultimate 'stuff' of reality is...no problem...I'm just a layman and I did say 'I' call it energy...the reason I do is because I believe the 'stuff' of reality is inherently active and indestructible and that is the given definition of energy.

What do you call 'us'/'it'..'.string essence'?
Factor 'x'?
'Life'?

 

[MadIce]

Hello all,

I am starting a portal to time travel forums and found your spot on the web. I like much of your content here. Compliments.

Chronus,

You mention a multiverse model, but you wave it away by using logic often found in papers describing the possibilities or inpossibilities of linear time travel. If you think linear then maybe even Hawking's Chronology Protection would apply. The multiverse model is not linear, is very handy for time travel, no Chronology Protection is needed because history is automatically protected and it would remove all paradoxes.

In the following I assume that a time machine exists which is able to travel to parallel universes to any given moment. In these parallel worlds nearly identical copies with a history close to yours or exactly like yours may or may not exist. BTW: How to built such a machine is another question, but you didn't ask that.

It's easy to explain if you consider yourself to be part of a worldline. A worldline resembles history as one expercienced it. Decisions split worldlines. For an example, in one branch you may continue to read this response and in another you may not.

Travelling back in time would cause a split in the worldline at the moment of arrival. In one branch of the worldline you did not arrive. That is the one you came from. In the other branch you did arrive. Anything you change in the worldline (you now occupy) would have effect only on the worldline you now observe. It means you cannot change your history, because it already happened, is happening or will happen in the other worldline (you came from). You will remember the history before your journey just like any history from a normal past. Because of the split of the worldline that history is safe as well.

To go back to your scenario... If you would kill your father before your birth than you would see him die, but the other worldline (in which you did not arrive and which resembles your past before the journey) would still continue and thus ensures your birth. The "father" you killed is a near identical copy of your true father. Therefore it does not threaten your existence.

Another scenario... If you would travel to a past after your birth then you would simply meet a nearly identical copy of yourself. You would be able to shake hands. If you kill him then you'll survive. Afterall, you are not killing yourself but a nearly identical copy.

The main problem is when you want to go back to your own worldline. Because of your "unexpected" arrival, changes are that the future of the worldline you now occupy will be different, because the Butterfly Effect will kick in. So traveling from that point forward does not really work. The answer to that problem is a technique which I call backtracking.

To backtrack you travel to a moment before your arrival in the past and then travel forward to a moment just after you left in the future. There is still a slight problem here, because your second journey to the past causes your presence there. That will cause a split again and it is important to travel ASAP to the future on your moment of arrival in that auxiliary moment. However, it will cause you to never arrive in the worldline of origin, but it will look nearly identical. No matter how well planned you do that, it cannot be the same.

Remember that in each universe a nearly identical copy of you may exist who also travels to a momemnt in his past. Again, that's not your past. It may be nearly identical. Some of these copies may not jump afterall for some reason or another. They too would be backtracking to return to a time which resembles their origin.

When returning you may end up in a worldline in which a nearly identical copy of you traveled as well so you may succeed in returning to a future which is nearly identical to your origin.

 

[renassault]

Although many of these arguments have a very good point none are as helpful as the 2nd law of thermodynamics. If you went back in time, your matter would be exiting this universe, violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

 

[renassault]

Well, actually there is no such thing as the butterfly effect (except for the movie), and it is called Chaos theory, or that is any slight deviation can have a tremendous effect in a (large) amount of time in the future. Though this is very radical, yet true, it does not have much to do with travel.
Let us suppose that when indeed you do leave your universe and go to another time in the past (yes it has to be an alternate universe, since different time is different space), but it will be the same (unless you believe in there not being soul) unless you traveled to the future.
To get to another universe they would have to go through the 4th spatial dimension and it might as well be that that parallel universe had its time behind ours, which would make it as if you didn't travel in time at all, but it is the same thing.

Let us suppose for argument's sake that when you exit this universe, in the near distance, the exact amount of particles have come with you (so as not to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics).
Now we go to the above questions. If you did kill yourself, then how would you ever live to do it? I suppose that the previous post was right that you would live to do it and live beyond that, since your previous self was in that other universe parallel to this parallel one. It just so happens that in the universe you are now, your own self (following exactly what the world did, had you not interfered and had that been an exact copy of the previous universe, the original,) would just continue to exist, and I suppose the you that was to jump to the another parallel universe from the one you are already in, would not do it, and so not really achieve anything but see the world from the time you went back and on,(and you might give some grief to relatives, esp parents).
The other options that u would have no free will, since it will all add up to u coming back to that moment again, and not killing urself (as the episode in the Twilight Zone where the woman was supposed to kill Hitler). These options would not be available, since if it is in a different time, different space. Further logic, if it were an event, if you were to prevent it, then in the future, you would have no way of knowing about it to go back in the past and prevent it. For all we know, people would have to time travel for every second of the universe for every inch, and have a supercalculator to calculate what disaster they have prevented, so that they could prevent it from being prevented and not knowing that they should prevent it.
This just isn't possible, but fortunately, neither is time changing, or at least none of us would miss what didn't happen, if somebody came from another universe.
I guess this only brings us to whether different dimensions can interact, and as to whether a 3D object could move in the 4th dimension. In my opinion it cannot, since it would have 0 hypervolume.
Hey, this kind of makes me feel safer that I would exist right now!

 

[yowda]

Laws have been made in time and broken in time. This time runs a straight pass through our lives we think but what if time could be stopped? Would we have any sideaffects of having or "mass" frozen in time? Laws have also been broken in the past and today are all the laws we have come but the "truth" or correct? Not trying to insult you in any way but thermodynamics is not my specialty because i have only very briefly read over the laws it states and maybe they will be broken just like the theory that the world dropped off beyond the horizon.

I don't mean to dismiss people but my one question is... Why do the laws we think everything follows have such assurance that nobody seems to be looking at the possibility that in the future these laws COULD be bent or even broken?

 

[selfAdjoint]

Why do the laws we think everything follows have such assurance that nobody seems to be looking at the possibility that in the future these laws COULD be bent or even broken?

Because we have no evidence NOW that they will have been broken. Science works on minimal assumptions, and finds no need to assume the breaking of laws that as far as anyone can see today, work just fine.

 

[Saoshant]

What happens then if you succeed in your endeavor and travel forward in the timeline you just altered to when you last left only to find yourself trapped in a branch of the timeline where you are out of place? You could potentially find yourself living alongside yourself since the alternate version of you would then have no motivation to travel through time, thus leaving the time traveling version of you displaced. To return to your place of origin, you would then need to find new means to travel through alternate time dimensions. If traveling through your own timeline is like traveling in a straight line, then you would have to find a way to travel across parallel lines to return to the point where there isn't another you. Would this then not defeat the whole purpose of having traveled through time in the first place?

The way I see it, all you would have to do is travel back to a point before you came and saved your family, and then move forward again. After all, would you not be going back to a point before the universe branched off in two? I don't think you would run into yourself going forward in time to save your family, as your mere appearance before your appearance would spawn another universe that would be very similar to the original.

 

[MadIce]

renassault,

Although many of these arguments have a very good point none are as helpful as the 2nd law of thermodynamics. If you went back in time, your matter would be exiting this universe, violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Why? In Max Tegmark's theory everything is accounted for. I am not sure if he ever mentioned TT, but there would be nothing disappearing or appearing as far as I can see. His Level III multiverse is the quantum version of our obeservable Level I multiverse (in which we - because of its size - observe part of our own universe). See http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/multiverse.html.

Let us suppose for argument's sake that when you exit this universe, in the near distance, the exact amount of particles have come with you (so as not to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics).

You may exit the universe, but you'll stay in the multiverse. Nothing gets lost and nothing appears. You are changing location instead.[/QUOTE]If you want to change something in the past then return to that time and change whatver you want and stay in that worldline. I.e. stop traveling and stay in that worldline. But remember that the parallel universe you are now in is just one which closely resembled the past of your own and contains all the changes you made since you got there. You should avoid terms like "yourself" because it's not "you". It's a being that closely resembles you. It's not copied either. It was already there. If you mix these things up then it will get you nowhere.

And about the free will... Yes. That's the price you may have to pay. You don't like that thought, right? Well, neither do I. It's probably like most laws in maths and physics: They don't give you a choise. It either works that way or it doesn't. ;)

For all we know, people would have to time travel for every second of the universe for every inch

Erm... We already are doing it. The famous plane experiment with the two atomic clocks (one in the plane and one on the ground) or the one with 2 clocks on different heights on earth, etc.

 

[tougo]

Sorry to pop up, but i wanted to make a suggestion for a book. It is called "The time ships" by Stephen Baxter, a very interesting story with multiple time parodoxes and a person that travels even in the moment of the big bang. It is supposed to be the sequel to H. G. Well's "time machine" because everything starts when Well's Book ends. I found it amazing that why i decided to post it here.

 

[MadIce]

Well, actually there is no such thing as the butterfly effect (except for the movie), and it is called Chaos theory, or that is any slight deviation can have a tremendous effect in a (large) amount of time in the future. Though this is very radical, yet true, it does not have much to do with travel.

Sorry, the Butterfly Effect is more real than you think. And yes, I know it's from Chaos Theory.

http://www.pha.jhu.edu/~ldb/seminar/butterfly.html .

You'll find more of the history of the Butterfly Effect here:

http://library.thinkquest.org/3120/text/c-his1.htm.

Even NASA takes it very serious:

http://www.physicscentral.com/news/news-04-01.html.

In the above (which does not follow the discussion of parallel universes) you'll notice the talk about the movie. That movie is fiction, but it illustrates its effects. To time travel using multiple worldlines it would be very important. Because of your arrival in a worldline you change "history" by just being there, by walking around and interacting with the surroundings. That is what causing the changes. The problem is that you will not have a clue what the long-term effects are of your actions. It's therefore very hard to use your own past as a guide line to predict a future on a worldline you travel to in the past. The more complex the system, the harder it gets.

 

[Grev]

Hi, I'm new and would like to post some opinions from myself (even though I'm a layman).

You can't go back in time, kill yourself and expect yourself to disappear because what has happened is already been done, if you have lived long enough till now then no matter what happens (or happened), you won't be able to kill yourself. I came up with: 1) At that moment that you kill yourself, the universe splits into another one. 2) Fate has it that you can't kill yourself because you are physically alive (in the future).

Am I thinking along the right track here even without all the physics? [?]

I've read 'Hyperspace' but still has a long way to go.

 

[sol2]

Ronald Mallets Experiment

I was just wondering if there has been any progress in his experimentation.

Most will know who I am. I will stay out of the other areas and confine myself to Kaku's stomping grounds, if this is okay?

 

[selfAdjoint]

Hi Sol, welcome back. Say have you got a link for the troops on Mallet?

 

[sol2]

Hi Sol, welcome back. Say have you got a link for the troops on Mallet?

Thank you. I have Pdf file yet do not see its link. Type into google title and I am sure it wll come up.


Weak gravitational field of the electromagnetic radiation
in a ring laser

Ronald L. Mallett


Abstract

The gravitational field due to the circulating flow of electromagnetic radiation of a unidirectional ring laser is found by solving the linearized Einstein field equations at any interior point of the laser ring. The general relativistic spin equations are then used to study the behavior of a massive spinning neutral particle at the center of the ring laser. It is found that the particle exhibits the phenomenon known as inertial frame-dragging. q2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

 

[sol2]

A User's Guide to Time Travel, By Michio Kaku

Not anymore. Having examined Einstein's equations more closely, physicists now realize that the river of time may be diverted into a whirlpool - called a closed timelike curve - or even a fork leading to a parallel universe. In particular, the more mass you can concentrate at a single point, the more you can bend the flow.


http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.08/pwr_timetravel_pr.html

 

[sol2]

Will UConn physicist Ronald Mallett build the first time machine?

http://www.walterzeichner.com/thezfiles/time2.gif

Imagine then--and put aside the engineering problems for a moment--a machine big enough to walk into. As you would walk forward within the confines of the light beam, (see diagram below) you'd have the impression of moving forward, but because of the space-time vortex, you'd actually be moving backward. You could walk back through time--maybe even passing yourself as you entered the ring.


http://www.walterzeichner.com/thezfiles/timetravel.html

 

[sol2]

Ronald L. Mallett

. It is found that the particle exhibits the phenomenon known as inertial frame-dragging.

I was wondering if someone could help explain this better for me.

I have extended the length of the three posts to another perspective, that I have contained in my own forum, under the heading of the Van Stokum Cylinder.

I will refer to that resource of information to help forward perspective here as well as extend my own perceptions. I think it is a fair trade?

Will there be a problem with this?

 

[Grev]

Yes, please further explain.

Can someone common on my previous post as well?

 

[sol2]

Yes, please further explain.

Can someone common on my previous post as well?

I am a lay person myself who does a lot of reading:)

The book you are reading called Hyperspace is a good introduction.

The very first chapter when Kaku is standing on the bridge, we are given a perspective that is extremely amazing about how we can look at surfaces.

Imagine like he saids the pond, and what realization comes to him with the raindrops. Being able to envision the world from two different view points.

If you move through the undertanding of shape, from the saddle to a hyperbolic view, how does one understand these movements, if we did not first start off in a euclidean view, and then end up in a non-eclidean view?

So imagine then what a triangle measures, in its angles. On a flat surface? On a saddle or on a sphere?

 

[sol2]

Parallel universes, the Matrix, and superintelligence by Michio Kaku

I am curious as to others' beliefs/opinions on how time travel and/vs. multiverse theory correlate.

Theory/Question 1. If you could go back in time and try to alter an event, could it turn out that you can't change it and are actually only helping history along it's course?

Theory/Question 2. Or could you go back in time and actually change the event, effectively creating a parallel universe, an alternate reality where events will now play out differently?

Scenario: Your family is killed. You go back in time and save them.

What happens then if you succeed in your endeavor and travel forward in the timeline you just altered to when you last left only to find yourself trapped in a branch of the timeline where you are out of place? You could potentially find yourself living alongside yourself since the alternate version of you would then have no motivation to travel through time, thus leaving the time traveling version of you displaced. To return to your place of origin, you would then need to find new means to travel through alternate time dimensions. If traveling through your own timeline is like traveling in a straight line, then you would have to find a way to travel across parallel lines to return to the point where there isn't another you. Would this then not defeat the whole purpose of having traveled through time in the first place?

I myself like to fall back on Occam's Razor for this one.

I found this article you might be interested in.

Now, there are at least two ways to resolve this. The first is the Wigner school. Eugene Wigner was one of the creators of the atomic bomb and a Nobel laureate. And he believed that observation creates the Universe. An infinite sequence of observations is necessary to create the Universe, and in fact, maybe there's a cosmic observer, a God of some sort, that makes the Universe spring into existence.

There's another theory, however, called decoherence, or many worlds, which believes that the Universe simply splits each time, so that we live in a world where the cat is alive, but there's an equal world where the cat is dead. In that world, they have people, they react normally, they think that their world is the only world, but in that world, the cat is dead. And, in fact, we exist simultaneously with that world.

This means that there's probably a Universe where you were never born, but everything else is the same. Or perhaps your mother had extra brothers and sisters for you, in which case your family is much larger. Now, this can be compared to sitting in a room, listening to radio. When you listen to radio, you hear many frequencies. They exist simultaneously all around you in the room. However, your radio is only tuned to one frequency. In the same way, in your living room, there is the wave function of dinosaurs. There is the wave function of aliens from outer space. There is the wave function of the Roman Empire, because it never fell, 1500 years ago.

http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0585.html?m%3D1

 

[rtharbaugh1]

I am curious as to others' beliefs/opinions on how time travel and/vs. multiverse theory correlate.

Theory/Question 1. If you could go back in time and try to alter an event, could it turn out that you can't change it and are actually only helping history along it's course?

Theory/Question 2. Or could you go back in time and actually change the event, effectively creating a parallel universe, an alternate reality where events will now play out differently?

Scenario: Your family is killed. You go back in time and save them.

What happens then if you succeed in your endeavor and travel forward in the timeline you just altered to when you last left only to find yourself trapped in a branch of the timeline where you are out of place? You could potentially find yourself living alongside yourself since the alternate version of you would then have no motivation to travel through time, thus leaving the time traveling version of you displaced. To return to your place of origin, you would then need to find new means to travel through alternate time dimensions. If traveling through your own timeline is like traveling in a straight line, then you would have to find a way to travel across parallel lines to return to the point where there isn't another you. Would this then not defeat the whole purpose of having traveled through time in the first place?

I myself like to fall back on Occam's Razor for this one.

The thing is that when you travel in timespace, you can only rarely deviate very much from a straight line. Actions are very small and you hustle along so fast that you can hardly be expected to see a single change, so you, like me, like all of us, have to watch the statistics. Consider the idea of your timespace existence cone. Your maximum possible futures. All the potential universes your presense here may participate in or have some effect upon.

But the counter argument to multiverses is that infinite energies are required to justify their complexity. No one asks the sky to justify its infinite complexity, and who looks at how long our Universe will exist in time? And who looks beyond that to wonder about other universes. And I have to bow to those who say there is no use in wondering about those other universes, because the only things we can ever know must exist by definition in this Universe. The others have no bearing. Go ahead, point at an event that will occur after our Universe turns to cold dust or ultimate density or whatever it is sceduled by the clock to become.

Another way to say this is to consider what an event is, in space time. Think of yourself as an event if you like, or as the main event if that's what it takes to keep yourself awake. You make actions in this Universe. And in the utlimate multitude of universes in the multiverse every thing that can happen has to happen somewherewhen. If you could go on forever, my friend, you could circle back again, my self, my other, our beings united by a grand scale that here in our rooms we can have no imagining of, or hope of living long enough to participate in, again. Being is not conserved. You see this means that we must die, but it means also that we can live. It means that we are one in our infinite multitude.

Can you relive your past again? And again and again and again, in a sort of time fugue? Well, what do you imagine? If you imagine it strongly enough, you may be condemned or blessed to revisit it forever. Is that the kind of limit that you choose?

Old story, I should have such a memory as to attribute but I don't: monks meet girl crossing stream. Leagues later one monk says "How could you bear to touch her like that, carry her across the stream?" "I put her down on the other bank, brother, but you still carry her."

ANyway by the time you return to your past in a straight circle you forget everything. Being does not last two Pi in any universe.

Wandering again.

Thanks for Being

 

[deedubbleyoo]

I wondered about multiple line lines, non-linear time, singular time and positive/negative time, starting with the question, "does time exist?".

I decided that time as we know it, does exist, since time is just a label we put on the measurement between start and end points that we are measuring. I also decided that time is relative to the things that we are measuring, as a yard stick. I don't think time can be said to exist, though, because we use time as a variable to describe something, not a constant that we can hold.

Whilst considering different types of time-lines (linear, non-linear, mutliple, +/-) I reached the conclusion that there must be multiple time lines and wondered how many there might be.

I decided there couldn't only be one time line since that would be far too infinity like, and therefore could only be relative to parts of itself, which would then have times, and therefore many time lines would exist, each instance having its own sets of parameters.

That thought provoked the rejection of any other theory whilst I scraped around in my head for the bigger picture of such an idea.

The idea is that each atom, or particle, or piece of anything that contains substance (call it a being), has its own time line. Sometimes actions on that time line can be predicted because they follow suit of other actions that have taken place on other time lines, however, the end may be different for each occurence of the same action - which gives us chaos.

The relation of time to each being is personal to that being. One cannot relate time for another being unless one applies that beings rules of time to oneself. However, one can disrupt another being's time through one's own actions, for example, by interrupting the other being's action.

Therefore it is possible that there are many many universes that have actions taking place at the same time as the other universes - but maybe with different endings. A bit like a mandlebrot.

To prove such a theory is probably similar to proving there is a god. Maybe if we look for clues we can guess that it could be right - deja vu, out of body experiences, ghosts, stuff in dreams and how some amazing thoughts ever get into our heads. They are all natural phenomena that are often explainable unless somehow, time lines have crossed or matched each other in that short instance.

Could this really happen?? How could two time lines cross and how do we decide which time lines we're on?

Simple, we all have our own time line and sometimes we steer ourselves towards events through positive thinking, belief, a goal or some other state of mind that makes us go after something important.

Things that you consider to be bad luck are often things out of your control, a crossing of time lines where yours met a bunch of others that resulted in a negative action for you. Good luck is supposedly the opposite. Both have the ability to be looked back upon and avoided, but neither were planned by you.

When you live with someone you can often predict things they are about to say, finish sentences for them, carry out actions in preperation for something you predict they are going to do and you still get surprised by this because you didn't intentionally plan it.

Maybe the answer to life,the universe and everything is intention. If you can predict another being by being close to it, and so on, for every being there is, there can be harmony, and each being could exist for longer except for the fact that each being is responsible for its own actions (the chaos bit). Therefore the only thing that lasts forever is nothing because it isn't there - I suppose that's the reverse of everything.

As for time travel, this theory suggests one cannot travel in one's time to a previous time unless one can experience another instance of one's lives in another universe.

Why would actions take place at the same time? How can one catch a glimpse of an action in a time line that conflicts with one's own time line?

It must have something to do with nothing, and everything being its opposite. The multiverse is a living organisation. Life exists to protect life, evolution is the result of this action.

If the multiverse exists then why wouldn't it thrive to survive? We are such small parts of the universe, and there are many smaller parts, but we can effect much bigger parts, in the same way that some miniscule particles can effect us (gas, poison etc). Because we are intelligent we have some control over the things that effect us and we can make plans that will improve our chances of survival.

In such behaviour, other universes would be dieing and being created throughout our lives. If your time line crossed with a time line in such a universe, you would get the impression of traveling in time, although you would simply be witnessing a different instance of yourself.

If there was a way to really travel in time, the answer would be to share a multiversal existence. For your mind to be one with each instance of yourself (and the same application for each being).

This would give the multiverse the best chance of survival, but also a greater chance of failure, unless the multiverse is intelligent.

What sort of intelligence could do such a thing?

The natural behaviour of a being, is to multiply. Some things do not need to multiply because they are replaced by another instance through some other means than breeding, such as blood cells do. For intelligent beings, there is often a choice about breeding, but natural beings are designed to thrive, or they become nothing. I can't prove that we share the minds of other instances of ourselves, but it might explain those things that we call the paranormal.

What about God? Whatever he is, I don't think he's a person. This theory does allow for cause and effect, and therefore behaviour (which religion teaches) is a part of it. If we lived a perfect life, that harmony that I mentioned earlier would become more of a reality...but that's another discussion altogether.

 

[sol2]

.

The idea is that each atom, or particle, or piece of anything that contains substance (call it a being), has its own time line. Sometimes actions on that time line can be predicted because they follow suit of other actions that have taken place on other time lines, however, the end may be different for each occurence of the same action - which gives us chaos.

The relation of time to each being is personal to that being. One cannot relate time for another being unless one applies that beings rules of time to oneself. However, one can disrupt another being's time through one's own actions, for example, by interrupting the other being's action.

Therefore it is possible that there are many many universes that have actions taking place at the same time as the other universes - but maybe with different endings. A bit like a mandlebrot.

There is so much more to quote here that I quickly grabbed this for now.:)

A bit like mandlebrot?

If one was to consider pascal's triangle, the potential for expression has certain patterns emerging. This fruitation of sorts, like a fractal design (the tree fractal)?

We see where Stephen Wolfram uses such an idea here about such possibilties?

What might emerge and from where? What pattern will it grow into? Fortunately crystaline natures have been catelogued:)

I am often remind of John Nash here and the birds as they gathered and while others played the game of Go. How might he of perceived such a pattern?

The danger was losing himself in dillusional acts, but he also realized, that the pattern for negotiation could exist. It had to be mathematically proven.:)

The anomalies in nature. It takes a keen eye It has possibillites? All we have to do is create the space for it?