18 replies to this topic

[Darkademic]

Quantum mechanics implies unpredictability and that nothing is pre-written.
The Newtonian world view suggests all future events are predetermined.

Do you believe you can alter what is going to happen?

In my view, I see that time is one-dimensional. You can go forwards, or backwards. This sways me to believe that everything is pre-determined. Although we have a choice, and we dictate what happens within our own lives, those choices will lead to one future. The future will reveal itself as choices are made, but you can't make more than once choice in each case. Thus, one future will unfold.

Parallel universes imply an infinite number of time-lines where the choices that were made were different. Since we have no comprehension of these worlds, they are irrelevant. Our timeline is completely seperate from any others if they exist.

Any ideas from anyone else?

[Parquay]

I think that our actions can change the future, but that future that we create is the only future there will be.

I don't think I could comprehend there being thousands of alternate universes, that are what our universe would be if different paths had been taken by people, however, it could be possible! (Actually, it would be quite cool if that was true...).

[Lozzaa]

Has anyone ever read "Timeline" by Michael Crichton?

Time itself is merely a measurement that doesn't move on, and it is in fact the universe itself that changes. Therefore time travel is impossible etc etc

As far as fate and pre-destination go, I agree with dreaver in that our choices will only ever result in one future. In this sense, we have no free will unless the world is viewed from outside the bounds of time and space (which is seemingly impossible).

Parallel universes are the result of all the other choices we could have taken, and they are constantly splitting off.

[Darkademic]

Consider that there is a 'plan' and all events happen according to this plan.

We could take the view that the plan, or reason, applies to the human race as a whole, and that the actions, or even the existence, of individuals is unimportant to the overall 'direction' of the plan.

By way of example let's consider the route taken by billions of electrons following a path of least resistance. They reach a 'gate' that allows 30% to go left and 70% to go right. The path splits at the 'gate' and 30% go left and 70% go right as the 'gate ' intended. The 'gate' works on probability and does not, indeed can not, choose which individual electrons go left and right, it has no bearing on the result anyway, it's only the percentage that go left or right that matter. When observing the electrons approaching the 'gate' it is impossible to predict which of the electrons will go left or right. The laws of Quantum Mechanics work on probabilities, but given a high enough number of electrons the outcome of such a 'gate' can be predicted with remarkable accuracy. So the selected percentage of electrons go where they were designed to go and our computer works.

We can imagine ourselves following a 'route', performing a function just like the electrons flowing through a circuit board. The electrons of course are unaware that they are part of a highly complex system and are performing remarkable feats of number crunching so that we can read a web page, they are merely existing and flowing along a circuit from which they have no escape, or even a notion of escape. The existence of individual electrons is unimportant, the route they 'choose' to take is unimportant, and in fact each individual electron does indeed 'choose' its own route. It is only the overall outcome of the statistical probabilities that is important, that is what makes the computer work, and the electrons of course have no notion of a circuit board, let alone a computer. Could we be like those electrons? Could it be that individually we are of no significance, that our individual actions count for nothing, that it matters not if we live or die, but collectively, as the human race, we do have a reason for existence, a collective goal for mankind that is beyond our comprehension?

This idea of a plan ignores the self-evident human faculty of volition (free-will). It does exist because we can simply choose any action we like rather than being bound to a particular course of action. It would also be quite pessimistic to think we are just following a plan, and I prefer the idea that we really do have control over what we do.

[Lozzaa]

Followed and agreed with that argument most of the way through, dreaver.

I don't think that there is a "plan" as such, as the parralel universe theory would suggest that all choices are insignificant, because their outcomes will all happen anyway in different universes.

We are, however, unaware of our part in what could be described as a highly complex machine and with no way of escaping from it other than death. Our choices are therefore rendered insignificant because of our eventual deaths (do we unconsciously "choose", or even perhaps desire death as a form of escapism !?!). The only way, I believe, that a person can see fate, both his own and of his universe, is to drag himself outside the "circuit board" of the universe; and the only way to do this is through death.

If a way could be found though...!

[KuinKra]

As far as physicists are aware, time-travel is a theoretical possibility. This doesn't mean that we're ever going to do it, as it's just completely impractical. And I don't think they're even sure if they're correct in their theoretical derivation.

But there are two leading theories as to what would happen when we alter events:

A ) Self-sustaining model: This model basically presents the argument that anything travelling through time is in itself part of time, and will have always existed in whichever time frame it travels. Therefore, it can't change history because it is already part of history. For example, you might go back in time to stop your grandparents meeting, but instead of stopping it, your presence is the catalyst that causes them to meet and conceive your parent.

B ) Parallel universes: When you alter time, your dimension is unaltered, but instead a parallel dimension is created where the result of your interference is played out. Another idea is that different dimensions exist at different points in time, so if you wanted to travel back in time, you just hop into a dimension that is several hundred years behind yours - it's not your dimension, so not strictly time-travel. But it's damned close.

Either way, you can't alter what's going in your dimension.

But this is all academic anyway, as if we do travel through time it'll happen a long, long, long time after we're all dead.

[James Daw]

My dear Nikolai, whatever Newtonian mechanics and physics say are irrelevant if one compares them to quantum physics or relativity, just so you know.

And KuinKra, what makes you think time-travel is "completely impractical"?

[Darkademic]

My dear Nikolai, whatever Newtonian mechanics and physics say are irrelevant if one compares them to quantum physics or relativity, just so you know.

I'll take your word for it; but would you care to elaborate on that?

[KuinKra]

And KuinKra, what makes you think time-travel is "completely impractical"?

I'm talking about the current theoretical constructs physicists have been able to contemplate. These involve completely ludicrous ideas such as situating someone inside a hollow sphere made of infintely dense matter, or travelling through a four-dimensional room. If you're interested in reading about them, a good book to get is "time travel in Einstein's universe".

[James Daw]

I'll take your word for it; but would you care to elaborate on that?

It simply means that if you are going to be exact you cannot use Newtonian physics. For example if you ride a car at 100 km/h and throw a stone so it reaches the speed of 10 km/h the speed of the stone is rougly 110 km/h. At these scales, I.e. daily scales, so to speak, Newtonian physics works. But if you are going to calculate the speed of the light that is coming from the lights of the same car the answer is not "speed of car" + "speed of light", since nothing can exceed the speed of light. Thus, there is no use of mentioning Newtonian physics at all if one is to use physics in one's investigation of reality.

I'm talking about the current theoretical constructs physicists have been able to contemplate. These involve completely ludicrous ideas such as situating someone inside a hollow sphere made of infintely dense matter, or travelling through a four-dimensional room. If you're interested in reading about them, a good book to get is "time travel in Einstein's universe".

Sure, but none of this has anything to do with practicality. Practicality is about usefulness, and it is most useful to be able to go back in time -- at least if there would be no troubles in doing so.

[Twilight]

So James, what is your view on the subject in question? Do you believe in fate / hard-determinism, or pure unpredictability, or a mix of the two?

I think I agree with Reaver in his initial statement:

"Although we have a choice, and we dictate what happens within our own lives, those choices will lead to one future. The future will reveal itself as choices are made, but you can't make more than once choice in each case. Thus, one future will unfold."

We only exist in one dimension, even if there are numerous ones. We will only experience one future, no matter what choices we make. So the future is determined. We can't predict it (fully), but it is "determined". There is only one future as there has only been one past. This however does not invalidate the fact that humans can act volitionally.

[James Daw]

In the ideal case where nothing goes wrong, it would be very much practical. Personally I prefer to think that the holographic theory is true -- not that I know any details about it -- and thus time travel would be no trouble to "the real world", which we're living in (are we?).

[Daniel]

I know it was really just a point in passing, just as this is but Dark Reaver mentioned the huge scale implications if people travelled back in time and changed the outcome of an event. If it is possible to travel back in time to change a past event in our own universe, then it is certainly possible that this has already happened. Let's say the government of the future travelled back into the past to prevent World War II and suceeded, then we would have no memory of there ever being a World War II. What if World War III actually took place and people from the future came back to alter the events that lead up to it? We would have no way of knowing that event ever took place.

[LordSilly]

Why do things happen? Cause and effect. Why is all this called Dark Reavers? Because somebody named it. So yeah we are in control of our own destiny because what we do has an immediate effect on the future.

However, we ourselves and the decisions we make are just bags of neurons recognising patterns so anything we decide to do is therefore predictable. So yeah, maybe there is fate.

So where do I stand on the subject?

I think that it's a STUPID POINTLESS FUCKING QUESTION THAT CANNOT AND NEED NOT BE ANSWERED AND I WISH PPL WOULD STOP GOING ON ABOUT IT!!!!

Oh... err... sorry........ carry on.

[KeniF]

Just wanna say at one point my mom took me to a fortune teller and he absolutely startled me. There was a line of books lying on the desk. He told me to open book x and read line y of page z. That line says the age of my dad and mom (roughly, as it's only the "zodiac" sign, the 12 animals which repeat after every 12 years).

[Zog0t]

As for time travel, it's impossible to achieve either way, in the way that we imagine time travel.. Travelling back in time isn't like it suggests, but more like letting time go past you. Travelling at the speed of light you will travel whilst an action happens in the real world, but it would never reach your eyes as you are at a constant speed with the light caused by the person's action. Everything you see, even now, is in the past, even if just slightly because it still takes time for light to travel from (for example looking in the mirror) you to the mirror and back again, meaning we are always seeing a delayed version of ourselves. Moving as fast as light means the surrounding world outside the object at such a speed would carry on as normal, but no action will every reach you except actions cast at the very moment of light speed.

An easier example is the stars in the sky. A large portion are dead, but light has only reached us after millions of light years of travel distance.

As such, time would appear to stop if you had a perfect view of the world around the area in which moved to light speed, but on return to normal speed the world would continue but won't be there, all you would see is the image continuing from your point of departure, and depending on the time spent at light speed will depend on the delay between JUST YOU and the rest of the world. There is no alternate universe because "time travel" as such is pretty much just freezing time, and being so, upon returning the actions would continue that nobody has done for the minutes/hours/weeks/months etc. in the period you were gone. From this it is also easy to understand that travelling forward in time is also impossible because to do such would mean to travel faster than the action could reach you keeping you ahead of the light caused by a person which is impossible because as we know, from the previous explaination of "backwards timetravel" there are no alternate universes.

As for everything being planned out we will never know. My own personal opinion is everything is set in stone, although it's not viewable or accessible by any means and if it was, the only way to ever see it would be to travel faster than the light ommited from the occured action, which isn't possible. Hopefully it hasn't destroyed anybodies wishes on building a time travel machine.

EDIT: I have left out the Einstein Rosen Bridge information because I don't have time for it right now lol.