Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Maybe this is the same as what you're saying but my issue with the idea that "You’ve already taken said actions but just didn’t know about it so nothing changes" is that it means time travelers don't have any free will once they go back in time. If that's the case, then it bring up existential concerns and that might extend to non backwards time travelers (i.e. us)
I think from a physics standpoint, strict free will is already an illusion and the only useful definitions of free will basically boil down to "choices can be made", perhaps as far as "Slight differences in initial conditions can lead to different choices" (but somehow excluding random processes). That kind of definition doesn't even require consciousness, and is compatible with a deterministic universe like ours seems mostly to be. Would also be compatible with the time traveler unwittingly doing everything as must happen, but still via individual choices.
Choice is one of the slight differences that can lead to different outcomes. A rock falling down a hill will always fall downhill because of gravity. An animal can choose to slow itself or even work against gravity to move uphill. Instead of gravity, there are a ton of prior experiences that will influence that choice, but choice is still a distinct part of the process.
Exactly. That's why I think the only useful definitions of free will are those that are weak enough to distinguish between the animal and the rock in a situation like that.
Are you saying that even without time travel, free will is an illusion? Surely there has to be a time travel scenario, like going back 1 second in time and shaking hands, where all information is known to both travelers, and the future self would know what was done previously, and can choose to take a different action.
I can think of a couple ways around that, the easiest is that I actually think time travel is impossible. (Like this for example)
If it's not impossible, then single-timeline travel probably is, and all (backwards) travel would start a new timeline.
Short of that, maybe something ridiculous would have happened when the traveler "first" went back, like one of them tripping or whatever, and the handshake they agreed to try didn't go as planned, and then "still" didn't the traveler's second time. Basically this.
Let’s suppose a time travel event occurs in which an agent with free will travels to their own causal past, and let’s suppose this creates a parallel timeline which can differ from the first (leading to a new version of the agent which creates a third timeline, and so on).
We can consider this time-travel event as a function in which one timeline maps to a successor timeline — or in general, the event is an iterative map from the space of possible timelines to itself. If this map meets a few general criteria, we can apply the fixed point theorem and conclude that, after enough iterations, the process will converge to some fixed point that maps to itself (that is, the agent causes the past of their own timeline, even though they have free will). This timeline maps to itself—but it is also mapped to by an infinite succession of timelines in which the agent is free to alter their successor timeline, converging on one in which their choices cause no further alteration.
At that point, we can dispense with the assumption that time travel creates parallel timelines, and assume instead that the fixed-point, self-causing timeline is the only real one.