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
Infinite branches.
It feels more intuitive, and doesn’t involve any strange problems. It implies that the multiverse has infinite possibilities, they are all realized somewhere, and a time machine allows you to jump between them.
Multiverse theory doesn't really allow jumping like that though, each term in the wave function is independent and that's kinda the point.
At best a time machine can just allow for further splitting of those terms, but that doesn't actually mean anything special because we can do that without time travel by just measuring particle spins.
Sounds like a very different kind of multiverse than what I was thinking of. If that word is already taken, I should probably call this thing with a different name.
What you described to me sounds exactly like what I'm referring to, so I'm not sure tbh. I'm referring to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.
I just looked it up, and it seems like my intuition aligns pretty well with MWI.
Anyway, the idea is that as you jump 100 years back, you enter a special timeline that isn’t exactly like the one you left. It’s mostly the same, but a time traveler visited at some point, which could radically alter the future of that timeline.
So if you become your own grandmother, there's no real paradox, since you and your grandchild are not the same person. You are from different timelines, you are different branches of the same tree. Time traveling doesn't cause branching, since every branch already exists.
A time machine can't travel entirely freely to any branch, but since there are infinitely many branches you get the illusion of complete freedom. You can not jump to a timeline that doesn't already have you jumping in it.
That makes sense, and I think it literally just is the Deustchian model at least according to this source. It's been a long time since I read the original paper so I guess I misremembered it as a slightly different thing, though further reading suggests this might be a flawed explanation of his own theory, so I'm just thoroughly confused now haha.
I can think of a number of problems with how it would work, depending on the way you set it up it could result in something like "wormholes" to the future just randomly opening up constantly and everywhere just due to the way probability works. There are certainly a lot of interesting mathematical phenomena that arise from time travel like that.
If that model results in wormholes randomly opening up here and there, it doesn't necessarily mean it's going to violate our current observations. What if the probability of a wormhole event is incredibly unlikely. You know, like a tennis ball tunneling through a solid wall sort of unlikely. Even if the probability is a lot higher, those wormholes could open up anywhere in the universe, which just so happens to be incredibly vast. Or what if the wormholes are absolutely tiny, and last only a nanosecond? There are lots of ways it could still be compatible with observations.