The grandfather paradox


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : The grandfather paradox

Author Message
Profile Mr. Majestic
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 07
Posts: 4752
Credit: 258,845
RAC: 0
United States
Message 734534 - Posted: 5 Apr 2008, 3:30:15 UTC

I was wondering what my fellow crunchers felt about the grandfather paradox. In case you are not familiar with the paradox here is a brief summery of it:
You gain the ability to travel back in time and you travel back before your mother was born. You kill your grandparents, which would stop your mother from being born, and thus stop you from being born. The problem is that if you were never born you could not have traveled back in time and killed your grandparents in the first place, thus everything would continue as it would have.

So my question is what do you think would happen if this were possible and you went back and killed your grandparents?
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2591
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 93
United States
Message 734584 - Posted: 5 Apr 2008, 8:42:09 UTC - in response to Message 734534.
Last modified: 5 Apr 2008, 9:06:49 UTC

I was wondering what my fellow crunchers felt about the grandfather paradox. In case you are not familiar with the paradox here is a brief summery of it:
You gain the ability to travel back in time and you travel back before your mother was born. You kill your grandparents, which would stop your mother from being born, and thus stop you from being born. The problem is that if you were never born you could not have traveled back in time and killed your grandparents in the first place, thus everything would continue as it would have.

So my question is what do you think would happen if this were possible and you went back and killed your grandparents?


I think that the notion and reality of time travel goes like this: you can only travel back in time to the point in time where you actually began your journey.

You can go off on a journey at a high percentage of the speed of light and when you return to Earth everyone there will be much older than you. In this case you are traveling into the future or you could say that the Earthlings left behind have traveled into the past. Thus I claim that the paradox you describe cannot occur. You can't go back in time into what is your past. Its kind of like posing the Statement : "Everything I say is a lie" Logic doesn't help you decide if the speaker is lying or not.

A better mind blower is (the twin paradox) the fact that since motion is relative why haven't the Earthlings traveled at the speed of light relative to you. So why have they aged more and not you. The explanation is that it's the space ship that only sees this effect since it was the one that turned around and came back... implying that acceleration has to be taken into account. Very confusing and only fully understandable through some hefty math.

If you were to go back in time would you be there next to your self (Two of you) or would you be yourself at a younger age? I think most people who work on these things say that in any event it is not possible to change the past nor to affect the future. If you tried to, some event would occur to stop you. This to me is sort of like the "Many Worlds Theory' which says that the Universe you live in branches into a new universe each time for each decision that you make or for each event that occurs.

What would you do with your list of stocks or lottery numbers? Would you go and show them to your past self? If you were your past self would you know what the list was and why it came into your possession ? Would you even have the list since it was not part of your past ?

Also, I have never seen a crisp explanation of the Michelson -Morley conclusion that there is no motion relative to the Ether. Length contraction should have shrunk the table of their interferometer to the point where the interference effect was negated.

For sure relativity works --clocks actually run slower when traveling at a high speed --but only when they return to rest is the comparison made with another clock to see this effect. Clocks at the top of a roof also run at a different rate than the identical clock in the basement -due to minute chages in the gravitational "force" on each clock

Profile Mr. Majestic
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 07
Posts: 4752
Credit: 258,845
RAC: 0
United States
Message 734747 - Posted: 5 Apr 2008, 15:30:28 UTC

Thanks for you thoughts William. I personally think that it is not worth spending our time thinking about such trivial matters. We should instead, for the moment at least, concentrate on the larger problems, or in the case of quantum mechanics the smaller problems. A much better thing to concern ourselves with would be a topic such as quantum gravity.


What would you do with your list of stocks or lottery numbers? Would you go and show them to your past self?


This is assuming you can interact with your past self. It is completely possible that you would not be able to interact with anyone at all, thus solving the grandfather paradox; if you can't interact with someone you can't kill them, thus, no paradox!
____________

Profile Norman Copeland
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 593
Credit: 68,282
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 735015 - Posted: 5 Apr 2008, 21:32:25 UTC
Last modified: 5 Apr 2008, 21:34:09 UTC

My first comment is I'm 100 percent agreeing with Williams prognosis.

Ok...

Quantum gravity,

Quantum gravity does not exist at the standard of knowledge you have started to investigate concerning travelling to the past, it is entirley at the whim of the traveller which is when it becomes difficult to maintain equilibrilium for the next virtual observer.

Quantum gravity does exist as a subsiding form of energy which is known as a falling motion. The universe as it is created is falling and the time frames which have been created among it have created a amalgomy of complex physics for the novice to learn and grapple with.

As the novice continues with space exploration and dimension travel the subject is among a myriad of illusion which is the past, present, and future.

Collision occurs upon acknowledgement because the conciousness of the subject is related to the standard of science they have learnt and thus that 'is' their future unravelling among the , past, present and sometimes photonic manifestations {which is why everything you can imagine exists}.


Thus the time frame moves with the subject and knowledge of the time frame and hence the time frames merge and reemerge and phase in and out of one another.

That is the reason I can confirm it is a fact you can talk to yourself in the past and the future but it is not guaranteed you will talk to yourself in the future. Hence you have become a time traveller {when you travel to the past you have gragged your time frame to that destination which is why you will be the same as you observed from the future , but, when you return you will not of one the lottery because you left the future to tell yourself , so , someone else won it. That is when you learn not to play like an idiot, its serious and you as a learner will of eradicated yourself from any time frame}.

Your learning boy.


The laws of time travel = very fragile. The danger moving from one dimension to another is virtual wipe out for others which is why the time traveller must need friends who act as beacons to ensure the typical movement from dimension to dimension.

[Ref: Biological quantum chimistry].

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2591
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 93
United States
Message 735325 - Posted: 6 Apr 2008, 11:54:48 UTC
Last modified: 6 Apr 2008, 12:06:30 UTC

My head is spinning !

Quantum Gravity is the attempt to unify Newtonian gravity with the theory of Quantum Mechanics. Those among theoretical physicists whom are working on this think that string theory will accomplish this. This is called Quantum loop gravity. I believe, like many aspects of string theory they are still wrestling with the math.

I was excited 20 years ago by a presentation i attended at Bell Labs in Holmdel, New Jersey from the guy from Queen Mary's college and others up from Princeton. These were among the first people working on string theory. It was stated that the math was almost worked through at that point and that a Grand Unified Theory (via string notions) would be forthcoming very soon--well --we are still waiting.

Particle physicists postulate that Gravity will have a force carrier called the graviton it will have spin 3 and other properties are predicted. Gravity is an extremely weak force-a half ounce magnet easily overcomes the gravitational pull of the Earth. Some believe that the graviton is the only particle (string?, wave?) that can enter a higher dimension and hence most of it's strength leaks into these other dimensions. Ooooo Kaaaay ?

Gravity waves are surely a fact in my mind -the LIGO interferometer will probably not find one in my own opinion--They can't isolate it from vibrations on Earth and it may not have sufficient sensitivity in the first place (hope I'm wrong on this). When we go up in space and create vast distances for the arms of the interferometer I think we will find gravity waves for sure at that time.

This messianic guy Nasseim Harremin (spelling?) who was touted on some of these threads says that there is no need for the strong and weak force theories it's all just Newtonian gravity operating at extremely small distances. An appealing idea for the ignorant; but quite obviously totally wrong by conventional thinking. It does remind me, though, of the notion by many others that Newtonian gravity MIGHT act differently at very small and very large distances--seems that this might explain some of the effects we see in nature and cosmology. So far There has been no evidence of this. It is very hard to probe down to small lengths that may approach the Planck Limit.

All this makes me wish i was doing advanced work in Physics since I think that--like Einstein--when we have a bunch of crazy results --we really don't understand what is "actually" happening. i. e. we need a better theory.

Profile Norman Copeland
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 593
Credit: 68,282
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 735352 - Posted: 6 Apr 2008, 13:54:40 UTC - in response to Message 735325.
Last modified: 6 Apr 2008, 13:57:17 UTC

My head is spinning !

Quantum Gravity is the attempt to unify Newtonian gravity with the theory of Quantum Mechanics. Those among theoretical physicists whom are working on this think that string theory will accomplish this. This is called Quantum loop gravity. I believe, like many aspects of string theory they are still wrestling with the math.

I was excited 20 years ago by a presentation i attended at Bell Labs in Holmdel, New Jersey from the guy from Queen Mary's college and others up from Princeton. These were among the first people working on string theory. It was stated that the math was almost worked through at that point and that a Grand Unified Theory (via string notions) would be forthcoming very soon--well --we are still waiting.

Particle physicists postulate that Gravity will have a force carrier called the graviton it will have spin 3 and other properties are predicted. Gravity is an extremely weak force-a half ounce magnet easily overcomes the gravitational pull of the Earth. Some believe that the graviton is the only particle (string?, wave?) that can enter a higher dimension and hence most of it's strength leaks into these other dimensions. Ooooo Kaaaay ?

Gravity waves are surely a fact in my mind -the LIGO interferometer will probably not find one in my own opinion--They can't isolate it from vibrations on Earth and it may not have sufficient sensitivity in the first place (hope I'm wrong on this). When we go up in space and create vast distances for the arms of the interferometer I think we will find gravity waves for sure at that time.

This messianic guy Nasseim Harremin (spelling?) who was touted on some of these threads says that there is no need for the strong and weak force theories it's all just Newtonian gravity operating at extremely small distances. An appealing idea for the ignorant; but quite obviously totally wrong by conventional thinking. It does remind me, though, of the notion by many others that Newtonian gravity MIGHT act differently at very small and very large distances--seems that this might explain some of the effects we see in nature and cosmology. So far There has been no evidence of this. It is very hard to probe down to small lengths that may approach the Planck Limit.

All this makes me wish i was doing advanced work in Physics since I think that--like Einstein--when we have a bunch of crazy results --we really don't understand what is "actually" happening. i. e. we need a better theory.




I perfected the math of 'whats known as grand unified theory [singular dimension to subject]' four years ago.
I abandoned continuing work with the unification of a 'grand unified string theory' because of the threat of spacial displacement accumilating from the gravitons I was creating to measure the 'string' activity.

Though gravitons are very weak, when worked at particular 'techniques' they become very unstable and threaten what will soon be the next '''unified theory''' of space special reletivity.

Because I have ambitions of travelling the universe as I am {36 years of age} threatening the time line varient is not what I wanted to do, so, I had to start work with different activities [While the gravitons returned to me and manifested as stable events].

String theory is the rules of how to do the sums. Each sum is a different sum of rules to every other sum and hence, unified theory is a 'very', perhaps closer to infinate which is not much if the time line of that particular infinate is acheived which must be acheived at every different time line and being sure every different time line has been learnt is the start of a unified theory {which perhaps will not ever be acheived}.

That is why moving from dimension to dimension requires a particular 'time slot' to syncronise events. That is why scientists will not develope knowledge at a rapid rate {because their waiting for someone from somewhere else to send the knowledge}.

I work alone and its much faster than working with a team.

Cooks and the broth.

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2591
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 93
United States
Message 735368 - Posted: 6 Apr 2008, 14:52:03 UTC

Norman,

Can you send me a copy of your work via E-mail or point me to where I can find it ??

Profile Norman Copeland
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 593
Credit: 68,282
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 735375 - Posted: 6 Apr 2008, 15:03:38 UTC

Sorry William I can't do that. Perhaps oneday I could have a discussion with you and a bottle of cognac.

As a fellow scholar I could say that perhaps studying geophysics and 'volcanic' activity could be of use as a medium to compare results of geothermal activity and techtonic displacement.

Taurus
Send message
Joined: 3 Sep 07
Posts: 324
Credit: 114,815
RAC: 0
United States
Message 735823 - Posted: 7 Apr 2008, 16:36:31 UTC - in response to Message 734584.


I think that the notion and reality of time travel goes like this: you can only travel back in time to the point in time where you actually began your journey.


Yep, I think that's where current physics stands on this too.

I personally think that it is not worth spending our time thinking about such trivial matters.


Ummm then why did you post this thread? :P

Taurus
Send message
Joined: 3 Sep 07
Posts: 324
Credit: 114,815
RAC: 0
United States
Message 735827 - Posted: 7 Apr 2008, 16:48:57 UTC - in response to Message 735352.
Last modified: 7 Apr 2008, 16:49:31 UTC


I perfected the math of 'whats known as grand unified theory [singular dimension to subject]' four years ago.


Congratulations Norm! You've accomplished something physicists have been trying to do for decades!

Have you tried publishing your work????

I see a Noble prize in your future!

Profile Norman Copeland
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 593
Credit: 68,282
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 738663 - Posted: 14 Apr 2008, 0:22:25 UTC
Last modified: 14 Apr 2008, 0:23:57 UTC

Page 12 of April 12th Edition 'New Scientist'.

Profile Norman Copeland
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 593
Credit: 68,282
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 742396 - Posted: 21 Apr 2008, 19:07:31 UTC

http://tech.uk.msn.com/features/article.aspx?cp-documentid=7476748

Taurus
Send message
Joined: 3 Sep 07
Posts: 324
Credit: 114,815
RAC: 0
United States
Message 742591 - Posted: 22 Apr 2008, 1:59:10 UTC - in response to Message 742396.
Last modified: 22 Apr 2008, 2:00:53 UTC

http://tech.uk.msn.com/features/article.aspx?cp-documentid=7476748


They're just two overly enthusiastic and slightly eccentric cloistered academics trying to get headlines.

Same as these guys:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23844529/

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=46194

Profile Norman Copeland
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 593
Credit: 68,282
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 742613 - Posted: 22 Apr 2008, 2:57:12 UTC

I doubt they'll let me give them advice, but, I hint ''if they do the experiments at night''.

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : The grandfather paradox

Copyright © 2014 University of California