I need someone familiar with MANY forms of time travel

doomdragon6 · Jun 1, 2012

I'm taking over a certain project, which is going fine except for one thing: time travel is involved. And it's time travel that as far as I can tell doesn't make any sense at all.

It's all a bit convoluted, so I'm going to give as few relevant details as possible:

1) Character A is killed in the course of the story's events.
2) Characters B and C are sad, and want A back, so they team up with Character D to create a time machine.
3) B, C, and D try to test the time machine by sending a mop back in time, but it catches fire, so they know it's wrong and start making tweaks.
4) Later on, B, C, and D, having learned from their mistakes, believe they have completed the time machine properly. So, this time they test it by sending a note back in time to earlier in the evening, that says, "Do not try to send the mop back in time. It will ust catch fire."
5) They send the note back in time, the time machine flashes and emites a "wave", and the mop pops back into existence, leaning on the wall.
6) C notes that this is impossible, because they wouldn't have been able to fix the time machine if they hadn't sent the mop back in time first.
7) D says that the time machine avoids paradoxes by emitting the wave that it does. He says that they are NOT in an alternate universe, and they are NOT in an aternate timeline, because that is impossible. He says, "We're not in an alternate universe. The time machine has emitted a wave that reconfigures 'our' time to reflect the changes made by the time machine in the past. We're not creating a new timeline here. That is impossible. We're attempting to FIX our time, and the realignment wave helps us do that."
8) The characters note that they have memories of burning the mop, but no memories of receiving a note or -not- burning the mop. So their original memories are intact.

Unfortunately, no more questions are asked and no more explanations given, and I have to figure out how the hell this thing works.

To me, it sounds completely implausible (as implausible as time machines get, anyway), and I can't figure out how it could work.

They're selectively changing the past-- not burning the mop made it reappear, but not burning it did not make any changes. So they changed event 1, but did not change event 2.

And this doesn't help with CHARACTERS going back in time at all. There's no telling how a cognitive person going back in time, actively changing things, and existing, would affect the "present". Could he waltz back up to the time machine "camp" and meet himself? One side of the argument says yes, because they sent a note back and interacted with the world, but the other side says no, because they don't have memories of the event and thus never met him, and all that "could" happen is a copy of the character could pop into existence. BUT, then at what point does time "catch up"? At what point does the machine say, "this is a change" and reflect it in the "present"?

I can't wrap my head around it, but I know there are plenty of complicated time travel mechanics out there, so surely someone can think of something.

Also, inb4 Futurama doomed copies and paradox-correcting time machine, etc.

Adam · Jun 1, 2012

HCGLNS · Jun 1, 2012

General Specific · Jun 1, 2012

I kinda agree with you. It's tough to understand how one change is affected, but not the other. Simply hand waving it with a "correction wave" doesn't cut it. Either all of the changes happened and should be remembered by the characters or an alternate timeline occurs. Another question is how does the one character know it isn't an alternate timeline?

Anyway, it seems to me that what should happen is that during construction of the time machine, they should get a note that instructs them not to use the mop. They then could decide to go ahead and try the mop or not, then correct the error, and send themselves the note (with the caveat that if they didn't try the mop, then they make the leap to trust the note, check their calculations or whatever, and discover the error). The machine sending out a wave to correct the timeline could still happen.

That is orderly and logical. Having one change happen, but not other changes makes no sense.

Maybe the machine can't change memories? They remember the original events because they were around and saw the mop get burned. They don't remember getting the note because it wasn't part of the original timeline, but possibly have the note show up somewhere as proof it was sent. This would only cause problems with the stated goal, however. They want to bring back a dead friend. Anyone who knew him would presumably remember him dying, the funeral, etc. and then suddenly be confronted with him living again. Everyone remembers the original timeline, but that's not what happened anymore in the new timeline. It could lead to some awkward situations and I'm not sure how drastically that would change your story.

The only way around that I can see would be for the time machine to not alter the memories of anyone using the machine to alter events or at least those that are aware the machine was being used to do so. That would be a bit of a stretch, though, as the machine would need a lot of selective mumbo-jumbo happening to make it work.

SeraRelm · Jun 1, 2012

OK. Quick break down of causality and how a change in the past would effect your current future/present.

If you did something which would negate the actions done to provide that "something" a paradox would occur, since doing so would cancel the necessity for those actions, thus removing them from existence, however, an alternate timeline would occur in which those actions took place This is the problem with single time-line conceptualization.
You can't see time as a singular line. It's more like a constantly and infinitely branching line in which each and every moment, regardless of how infinitesimally small, creates an equally infinite change in outcome*. In this, whatever actions you take which change whatever past you recall, will divert the current frame of existence in which you find yourself. This "wave" could be explained as a shifting from one instance of resultant causality to another. The memories of the previous reality would remain for those who shifted within that spectrum of divergent decisions, but not for anyone else who was not effected by the events... but that's just my take on it.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

*(My biggest gripe with Sliders)
(and I know you said no alternate timelines, but then this just ignores causality. That's "magic science" territory)

Bowielee · Jun 2, 2012

It took me a second to realize what you meant about Sliders, but yeah, they have the whole "1 thing is changed in the past, but everything else moves on like the main timeline" thing.

I still like Sliders, though, mostly for Jon Rhys Davies.

Anywhoo, to the topic at hand, I agree with Sera. If you ignore causality and quantum realities of some kind, it becomes "Doctor Who" science, which isn't science at all. That would be cool if that's what the author is going for, but it doesn't sound like that's the case.

SeraRelm · Jun 2, 2012

No no, my biggest gripe is that they could EASILY find any number of infinitesimally small in variance realities in which they left to "come home to" yet they wrote it as if there were only one. DC does the same shit in Crisis on Two Earths.

Bowielee · Jun 2, 2012

Yeah, that makes sense.

checkeredhat · Jun 2, 2012

I believe Futurama: Bender's Big Score explained paradox free time travel.

You are forgetting about the doom field.

doomdragon6 · Jun 2, 2012

Thanks for the inputs. so far "checking the calculations" is all that makes sense, but then how do less simple things work?

by the way, this is a fairly goofy story, so if Doctor Who logic could work, please explain it, as I haven't seen the show.

SeraRelm · Jun 2, 2012

Easy mode Doctor Who trick. Use my explanation then have B or C ask "Is that how it works?" and have D reply with "Nothing of the sort" then continue on with no more mention of the "magic science" behind it.

@Li3n · Jun 2, 2012

The only time travel that makes sense is the one where you don't change anything... and that's always boring (and kinda depressing seeing how it implies no free will).

Well that and the way Marvel does it, where going back causes another universe to appear where you change stuff, but your future is still there, and thus for you changing stuff is pointless, but it works out for the guys in the present who we are reading about...

But the obvious solution here is figuring out an explanation for having the time machine builders memories to be immune to the time machine's time altering wave... good luck with that making any sense.

Covar · Jun 2, 2012

doomdragon6 said:
Thanks for the inputs. so far "checking the calculations" is all that makes sense, but then how do less simple things work?

by the way, this is a fairly goofy story, so if Doctor Who logic could work, please explain it, as I haven't seen the show.

Doctor Who cheats because with very few exceptions (fathers day) the events in Doctor Who are always supposed to take place, they just wind up not recorded by history due to how unusual everything is.

FnordBear · Jun 2, 2012

As mentioned and well put by others the time travel presented violates basic causality. If it is established that chronol theory in the setting of the story precludes multiple/divergent timelines then they have effectively created a "God Machine". That is, a machine capable of violate the fundamental cause and effect of the universe.

While it doesn't make much sense that could actually be the catalyst for a very interesting story that explores the nature of reality, human responsibility when handed great power, and the implications of virtually unlimited ability to manipulate history.

If I was handed such a plot device to write with I would hand wave the science a bit and just write about how they use the time machine. Perhaps they can't send living matter back and can only send notes, objects, and whatnot? Perhaps they are the source of the Nostradamus prophecies. Maybe they catch the attention of higher order beings, gods, angels, what have you, that come in and say "You are too young for this power." Hell they could even succeed in bringing their friend back only to find them furious "I WAS IN A BETTER PLACE!"

Now jumping back to the mention of this "wave" that makes them avoid paradoxes perhaps the explanation is that the wave avoids (to a degree) violation of causality by rebooting the universe each time it is used and altering the progression of time to the desired outcome. The protagonists memories remain intact since they are at the "ground zero" so to speak of the causality waveform being altered and somehow have their memories of events shielded.

Ok I'm rambling and probably you didn't want this kind of advice. Hey what was that flash of light and this note here?

fade · Jun 2, 2012

Is it important for the story to explain it?

In real theory, I always dislike it when theoretical physicists resort to "alternative timelines" or "dimensions" to explain time travel paradoxes. There's really nothing "alternative" about those timelines. They exist already as part of you. The non-mop timeline is already there. Saying you "created" an alternative timeline is like saying you created the back of your hand just because you brought it into view (though some metaphysicists would argue that's true, too). You're like a cube. All you did was flip another side around to the observable universe, which consists of a bunch of cubes that all have only one side visible to a point observer at a time.

This, by the way, forms the basis of magic in Fade, so I've given it quite a bit of thought.

Hailey Knight · Jun 2, 2012

I think Fnord makes a good point. Explaining the technobabble and logistics is really aside of the story, i.e. the part that matters.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Fade.

Jax · Jun 2, 2012

Wow, that is one messed up time travel story. And I think it's even harder to come up with a logical explanation of things, since it doesn't follow any 'conventional' time travel theories.

The real question however, is: How much explanation is really needed in the story itself? Let's accept the premise of B, C and D actually creating a time machine. And that it works in some strange way that when they work with it, the machine 'fixes' something in their current time and adjusts reality to fit that change. (Now that I think about it, this does seem to resemble the time traveling in The Butterfly Effect, minus the backlash of 'new/alternate' memories gushing in). Without peoples memory changing to account for the changes in the past, it would just seem like an abstract form of magic.

In any case, if that's the way time traveling is presented and explained, then just go with it. Now, as for the actual going with it, I'd say there are a few posibilities of continuing with this story:

1. Sending someone back would mean that that person (in his current state) is probably just gone. The changes happen in an instant, since the machine adjusts everything in a single wave. The person going to the past might do all kinds of things to change the past, but it all just changes at once in that wave. Let's say B goes back 20 years and then decides to camp out at the time machine. After the wave he would just pop up in front op C and D, B would probably remember what had happened, but C & D (and the rest of the world) would not. So B would be the only one knowing what the changes actually are (and having aged 20 years), the rest would just be confronted with them. Same goes for A if he's been prevented from being killed.

2. This depends on how much the story is already set. To make it a little easier with all the memory mumbo jumbo, why not make it so only inamimate objects can be sent back. Just like how the machine changes everything in one instant wave, the object sent back will change things at once, and not continously. In this scenario, the time machine would be more like a computer that changes reality based on the input, and not focus on people doing any time traveling at all.

tegid · Jun 2, 2012

FnordBear said:
Now jumping back to the mention of this "wave" that makes them avoid paradoxes perhaps the explanation is that the wave avoids (to a degree) violation of causality by rebooting the universe each time it is used and altering the progression of time to the desired outcome. The protagonists memories remain intact since they are at the "ground zero" so to speak of the causality waveform being altered and somehow have their memories of events shielded.

I'd say this is exactly what doom needs. A simple explanation that more or less makes sense in its context.

Hailey Knight · Jun 2, 2012

There's also the fact of unreliable narrator. How much do the characters really know? How much should even be explained to the reader?

fade · Jun 2, 2012

Also, if it makes you feel any better, there are plenty of famous fudged time travel theories. Examples:

No laser guns, only organic material can be sent. Although wrapping it in meat somehow works. Why didn't we just put the laser gun in a hamburger?
Going back in time changes the world around you leaving everyone unaware of the change.... unless its convenient for your cellmate to see it happen.

FnordBear · Jun 2, 2012

Maybe it has something to do with getting the machine up to 88mph ?

ElJuski · Jun 2, 2012

don't forget you need to rev the machine u

OH COME ON I LITERALLY JUST THOUGHT OF THAT JOKE

FnordBear · Jun 2, 2012

If you want to get really mindfucky consider the concept of the Cycle of Time (used in works such as Battlestar Galactica, The Wheel of Time, the ancient Mayans, etc). The basic concept being "All of this has happened before and all of this will happen again." From that standpoint anything they send back or change isn't being reset or rebooted but brought in from the next or previous cycle.

LittleSin · Jun 2, 2012

Aside: I remember there was Dean Koontz book called Lightening about a time travelling nazi. In the book it was impossible to go back in time but you could go forward. The Nazi finds out they lose the war and falls in love with a crippled novelist..so he spends his 'time' going back and fixing things in her life.

However, now That I'm thinking about it, he shouldn't have been able to do that because you can't go back to any time before you appeared either (only your own timeline). You can only go further forward.

So how was he able to go and fix her?

Damn it! I just ruined the story for me!

Hailey Knight · Jun 2, 2012

LittleSin said:
Aside: I remember there was Dean Koontz book called Lightening about a time travelling nazi. In the book it was impossible to go back in time but you could go forward. The Nazi finds out they lose the war and falls in love with a crippled novelist..so he spends his 'time' going back and fixing things in her life.

However, now That I'm thinking about it, he shouldn't have been able to do that because you can't go back to any time before you appeared either (only your own timeline). You can only go further forward.

So how was he able to go and fix her?

Damn it! I just ruined the story for me!

He went forward to when she's crippled, then back to the night she was born (and I'm guessing the drunk doctor's future since he was able to warn him about committing suicide if he didn't kick the alcohol). He did it again when that janitor attacked her, and then... more when she has a kid. He does it so often that it can't just be a slip or plothole; I'm guessing that so long as he's not traveling back before the initial time travel moment, he's okay to weave around. I mean...

The main character and her son die at one point and he fixes that too.

It's not like it just happened once; he's doing it from the beginning to the end.

LittleSin · Jun 2, 2012

True. It's been a while since I read it. Now that you mention it, though, I think I recall there being something about a time limitation? Like you can't go back with in a ten minute time frame of where you were or if you were already there when the event went down you can't be there again.

Sound right?

SeraRelm · Jun 2, 2012

SeraRelm · Jun 2, 2012

I mean I'm sure you remember it right, but it's magic science.

MindDetective · Jun 2, 2012

SeraRelm said:
No no, my biggest gripe is that they could EASILY find any number of infinitesimally small in variance realities in which they left to "come home to" yet they wrote it as if there were only one. DC does the same shit in Crisis on Two Earths.

That's not necessarily true (or even probably true!). You can have an infinite number of numbers but only one of them is the number 1. You might say, but 2 is close enough! But you could create an infinite array of numbers that are a million apart from each other (1, 1,000,001, 2,000,001, etc. to infinity) Thus, you can create an infinite set but you do NOT need to have every possibility, nor even any possibility that is close in number. This can be extended to alternative universes as well. Infinity does not equal all possibilities. (And if I recall in Sliders, they did not even posit that there were infinite universes...)

SeraRelm · Jun 2, 2012

Infinity does imply all possibilities. You're talking about parsing the infinite, which will still make an infinite number of variances (imposing a fraction upon an infinite is paradoxical in and of itself). The infinite array of numbers (1,000,001, 2,000,001,) is used to give an example of infinite infinites. If anything, you're just backing me up on this

Also, I was griping about their writing. I realize the chance of finding the exact time branch they left is no less improbable due to infinite divergences since there are infinite other divergences. I was pointing out their flaw in ridiculously oversimplifying the point by saying there was only one at all. My other gripe was "where is the alternate time branch in which the earth was destroyed, or in a different locations, or any number of events in which it would make their "slide" a dead end trip?" but then I realized it would be a very short series... and that was a long time ago.

MindDetective · Jun 2, 2012

SeraRelm said:
Infinity does imply all possibilities. You're talking about parsing the infinite, which will still make an infinite number of variances (imposing a fraction upon an infinite is paradoxical in and of itself). The infinite array of numbers (1,000,001, 2,000,001,) is used to give an example of infinite infinites. If anything, you're just backing me up on this

You can only argue that is true if you add infinities together. But we aren't talking about infinite infinities. We are talking about one infinity. I can have an infinite number of even numbers and NEVER encounter an odd number in that one infinity. This means it is possibility for an infinity that does not contain all possibilities, which is my point.

Also:

The Opening Credits to Sliders said:
What if you found a portal to a parallel universe? What if you could Slide into a thousand different worlds? Where its the same year, and you're the same person, but everything else is different. And what if you can't find your way home?

Hailey Knight · Jun 2, 2012

LittleSin said:
True. It's been a while since I read it. Now that you mention it, though, I think I recall there being something about a time limitation? Like you can't go back with in a ten minute time frame of where you were or if you were already there when the event went down you can't be there again.

Sound right?

The last time I read that book, I was 11. So I have no idea

.

FnordBear · Jun 2, 2012

WANTED: Somebody to go back in time with me. This is not a joke. You'll get paid after we get back. Must bring your own weapons. Safety not guaranteed. I have only done this once before.

Hailey Knight · Jun 2, 2012

I was wondering when someone would do that.

Also surprised no one came in here responding to the title and ignoring the contents. "I happen to be experienced in all kinds of time travel!"

SeraRelm · Jun 2, 2012

MindDetective said:
You can only argue that is true if you add infinities together. But we aren't talking about infinite infinities. We are talking about one infinity. I can have an infinite number of even numbers and NEVER encounter an odd number in that one infinity. This means it is possibility for an infinity that does not contain all possibilities, which is my point.

And I was pointing that the self imposed restriction was ridiculously improbable. The infinite infinites in question are time and space, from the largest of changes to the smallest.

But yeah, if it's only a thousand different worlds and you're alive in all of them, finding home should have taken about... one year, tops.