Main Temporal Paradox Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

05:31:12 PM Oct 9th 2014
The article needs a proper section on "multiverse theory", the many-worlds interpretation, or whatever it's called. If there's already another page, a link.

The concept is brought up several times without any explanation until the end of the article.
08:13:57 AM Aug 25th 2012
What film does this line refer to? "The reason the universe is ending in Star Crossed is because of all the various paradoxes created by the Federation, from Jim Kirk to Captain Janeway."
12:46:57 AM May 19th 2014
None. I thought it might be a misplaced novel, but I can't find one by that name. There's a comic arc by that name, but it's about the romance of Jim Kirk and Carol Marcus.

I say we delete it.
12:25:36 AM May 16th 2012
Which one will 999: Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors fit under?
08:50:05 AM May 11th 2011
There's also the example of the movie "Lost in space"

And also "butterfly effect" uses 2 different ways of time travel. different dimensional time travel and the butterfly effect theory. Like why he had a knife when he was a kid.
09:41:17 PM Feb 27th 2011
This example was connected to a Legend of Zelda example in the video games section. If anybody can figure out what media type to add it under, go for it. If somebody is feeling ambitious, retool to to be added to the main Doctor Who example set. Please reply here if you've readded it so we don't have several people making the attempt.

  • Once a Doctor Who Expanded Universe did that exact thing - that is, leading a musician into the future and having him hear a song he was destined to write. Problem is, he had still not written the song in question. The Doctor, horribly alarmed by the very real possibility the musician tried to rip himself off, warned him not to - as this would mean the song had been written by Time itself, opening the gate for many potential paradoxes to occur. Guess what happens.

08:33:49 AM Dec 9th 2010
Sub-point under "The Information Loop" removed from main page:
  • Modern scientific understanding is, however, that information is explicitly not subjected to the preservation laws, that is, it can be created ex nihilo and destroyed completely, thus making the point moot.
To this troper's understanding, that may be equivocating on the meaning of the word "information." The sub-point seems to be referring to information a la quantum physics, such as the phenomenon identified by Hawking of particles and anti-particles constantly appearing to split from each other out of nothingness and then mutually annihilating, or some other quantum phenomenon. Yet it seems that the information the super-bullet point is referring to is symbolically-communicated information: words or ideas, such as "Doc, you will be gunned down by terrorists in 1985; please take precautions." That information has to be transmitted via some kind of medium (paper, or sound waves in air, or etc.), and thus is subject to erosion and entropy (just as data on DVD-R discs is) - unless the point can be made that the medium enjoys loop anti-decay, like what is explained (somewhat) in the Object Loop section.

Another issue with the removed bullet is the vague, non-specified reference to authority (what the other wiki would call "weasel words"): "Modern scientific understanding" - if the claim in this sub-point does reflect current scientific thinking, then it would be helpful to have more specific detail to clarify the point, such as an example or at least a definition of "information" in this context, and even more helpful to link to a credible external source for the idea. Otherwise, the sub-point seems simply to hand-wave a contradiction of its super-point.

If I'm completely off base here, please forgive my error and restore the sub-point to its place ... but it struck me as too weak to work in the context, so if the removed sub-point is to be restored, I'd be happy at least to see a revised version that clarifies the idea(s) it's advancing, if possible.
09:36:27 PM Oct 30th 2011
I'm sorry but why does the Information Loop have a listing at all in this context?

Warning your past self would be covered under the mentioned Reverse Grandfather, as its equally valid to warn yourself because you remember receiving the warning as it is to act to save yourself where you were saved in the past.

A scan of the what physicists talk about as information seems to me to still be covered under the Object Loop as it deals with information within a medium. Thus Information only applies if one choose to warn oneself with the exact same warning item your past self received and kept. So I'm deleting the bullet and if someone can distinguish it as a third type better then they can add it back.
09:50:25 PM Oct 6th 2010
Another time travel paradox that is much less frequently noted occurs when their is actual 'travelling' through time that takes 'time', as (unless some coherent argument is given to the contrary) it essentially amounts to a self-referential, recursive action necessitating an infinite regression. (It requires time to describe a change in time.)
07:49:49 AM Jul 14th 2010
Not sure where the temporal paradox example from the ending of Timeshift should be placed.

here the ending
01:11:10 AM Mar 31st 2010
Digression removed from main page:
  • Part of the problem with understanding stable time loops lies with quantum physics. Suppose a watch is sent through an object loop. Reasoning classically, we assume it goes through the loop time after time, getting older with each iteration. Quantumly, all the different version of the watch go through the single loop 'simultaneously', with the different histories interfering with each other in the usual quantum way. This can potentially result in mutually exclusive events both happening in some sense, not particularly unusual in quantum realms, but not something the human mind can comfortably intuit.

Without getting too technical, the distinction between mixed and pure states isn't important here, though apparent paradoxes would tend to force mixed states.

Really, saying that something inside a stable time loop is infinitely old is like saying the equator is infinitely long. While it has no end, you can never be more than 24000 miles east of the Greenwich meridian. Going east past that point resets the count, even though nothing special happens there.
02:50:55 PM Jul 9th 2010
I think there should be a picture from MGS 3 instead of this comic. "Snake! You've created a time paradox!"
05:30:48 PM Oct 9th 2014
edited by
edit: replied to wrong topic
Collapse/Expand Topics