TED Conversations

kai okena

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

is there a way to overcome time travel paradoxes? is there a possible way to travel in time?

possible ideas to overcome time travel paradoxes or screwing up history and the present.

Related Talks:

Sort By:

George QT
- 0
Nov 1 2012: As far as I know time travel is indeed possible at least in theory, however it would imply engineering challenges far beyond our current technology and incredibly huge amounts of energy... Personally I seriously doubt someone would ever find a practical way to time travel, I think maybe in the far far future someone could invent a machine to time travel subatomic particles, but I doubt someone will ever build a power plant powerful enough to supply with energy a time machine capable of sending any thing bigger than an atom... And if ever, there will be a technical limitation in time travel to the past, you can only go back to the point in which the machine was turned on by the first time, and believe me, keeping the machine running won't be cheap at all.
Dan Gillgren
- 0
Oct 7 2012: Time travel did once exist, because a soldier from the distant future told me the story personally. It was invented in the year 2152 by a Swiss inventor. Unfortunately it was quickly militarized, and was ultimately the cause of a massive global war that lasted the next 50 years, taking humanity to the brink of existence. So in order to save mankind, special forces were sent back in time to kill the parents of the inventor, therefore saving the world from a catastrophic war. Time travel was then never invented, and because it had never been invented, no one has any recollection of it ever existing.
natasha nikulina 50+
- 0
TED Translator

Oct 6 2012: You don't need to go anywhere.
Past is here between your ears and nowhere else :)
- Mwenjew Wewngwa
  - 0
  Oct 9 2012: Excellent Natasha !
  
  You dont need to go anywhere because the past and the future are here between your ears ! Nowhere !...
  NOW - HERE ! :-)
  - natasha nikulina 50+
    
    0
    TED Translator
    
    Oct 9 2012: Hi, Mwenjew !
    The problem with ' now' is that it is unlanguagable. It goes beyond duality hence beyond mind.
    What i am trying to say is that it is not ' between our two ears ' or is it ? But if one has this kind of experience even momentarily , it makes 'recognition' possible.
    Maybe i have had such spontaneous openings to 'now ', they are real, but i can't understand / explain what is that what I've got.
    Could you ? :)
kai okena
- 0
Oct 5 2012: haha.
Barry Palmer 50+
- 0
Oct 5 2012: I will join those here who believe in what they want with no particular evidence to support that belief.

I believe time does not exist in the natural world. Time is a human concept, and that is all it is. We will never travel through time in any direction. Only the present exists, perpetually.
kai okena
- 0
Oct 4 2012: i think that the universe overcomes paradoxes by way of creating an alternate universe every time something is changed.
Christophe Cop 500+
- 0
TED Attendee TEDx Organizer Associate

Oct 4 2012: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR1vyqM4KkY
Explanation of time paradoxes...

The basic idea is: the time loop always existed anyway, so there cannot be a paradox. (it cannot be changed)

Other ideas can be found in the anime/manga Steins Gate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steins;Gate
Here, the idea of parallel universes are explored, where time travel is seen as shifting through parallel worlds.
Ken brown 30+
- 0
Oct 4 2012: Do you really believe there is complexity beyond 13.7 billion years in the past? Based on what? slight temp variances of the cmbr? Fields and sub fields? Buckaroo Banzai? You're a prediction inference machine that's always pointed forward but if we were to discover a possible way back it would be through your own eye's and the emotional importance you set for that time.
John Dunbar 10+
- 0
Oct 3 2012: I would think if there was a way to travel in time we would have already done it. What I mean is couldn't someone from the future already travelled back in time and if so how could we ever know? Maybe time travel already exists fully but every time someone does this another reality is created thus leaving you unaware of time travel until you actually travel in time yourself.
kai okena
- +1
Oct 3 2012: i agree with the quatum mechanics multiverse theory
kai okena
- 0
Oct 3 2012: thanks for the video Fritzie Reisner.
Gail . 50+
- 0
Oct 3 2012: I'll go with quantum mechanic's multiverse theory (extrapolated). All probable times exist now, and I can travel to any of them (as soon as I figure out how). When I return, I return to the probable present that awaits my return, whether it is the same one that I left or an alternate one. I see reality as a more organic thing.
- Andres Aullet 10+
  - 0
  Oct 3 2012: I think the minute i learn how to travel in time, i will go back one minute just in time to prevent myself from traveling in the first place :)
  - Gerald O'brian 50+
    
    +1
    Oct 3 2012: Well, in multiverse theory, you can go see yourself in the past but whatever you do won't affect you since it'b be another universe.
    - Andres Aullet 10+
      
      +1
      
      Oct 3 2012: darn!
    - Gail . 50+
      
      +1
      
      Oct 4 2012: Quantum physics is now providing evidence that we create our pasts in our presents, and our past is not as fixed as our minds tell us it is. Time as we know it is a thought construct that has little to do with how life really works.
    - Casey Christofaris 10+
      
      0
      
      Oct 6 2012: Good day Gerald,
      
      I believe I can explain that the multi-verse is happening here on earth, as what we call life.
- Gerald O'brian 50+
  - 0
  Oct 4 2012: What do you mean when you say we create our past in our present?
  Who's "we"?
  And what does "create the past mean"?
  - Gail . 50+
    
    0
    Oct 5 2012: The following video isn't the best, but it's the quickest overview.
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A6ageOaS-E&list=FL23ULzV7ik5lQQo51yOnJ0g&index=7&feature=plpp_video
    
    the idea of creating your past in the present has been around since the 60s when people began learning how to manifest things and events into their realities. It might have been around longer, but that was the first that I know of. The idea is that "mind" selects a probable past that supports the present moment.
    - John Smith 30+
      
      0
      
      Oct 5 2012: The idea that the mind is something special and is necessary for an observation is prepostorous and rejected by every physicist I know. Wave function collapse is thought to be the result of strongly coupling some microscopic effect to something macroscopic. The wave function of a particle in a slit experiment collapses when the measuring device takes its measurement, regardless of whether someone is looking at the display.
    - Gerald O'brian 50+
      
      0
      
      Oct 5 2012: Hey! I thought you said you went with the multiverse interpretation of quantum mechanics. This link points to a Copenhagen interpretation!
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation
  - Gail . 50+
    
    0
    Oct 5 2012: Not really. All alternative probable realities exist. We choose the route we take through them. Time doesn't flow like a river. All times are static.
    
    Yes, the video does point to the Copenhagen interpretation, but it also addresses evidence that shows that we can choose our past. I am not in favor of the Copenhagen Interpretation that is part of the video. But just because a certain interpretation's evidence can be used in a different context doesn't nullify the evidence.
    
    I don't think that the wave function collapses in the twin slit experiment. I think that we can see into future alternative probable moments, and from that information, choose which moment of "now" that we will next inhabit.
    - John Smith 30+
      
      +1
      
      Oct 5 2012: You have the right to believe that but it's not what quantum mechanics shows us. Your idea is really metaphysical because it assumes the mind is special.
    - Gerald O'brian 50+
      
      +1
      
      Oct 5 2012: Well, you're still not going with Many Worlds Interpretation. If you were, you'd just see that the surprising results of the double slit experiment are all explained by interference (between particles from different universes)... and have nothing to do with the future affecting the past.
    - Casey Christofaris 10+
      
      0
      
      Oct 6 2012: John,
      
      The mind is no more special then you are and I would say you are probably a special and unique man. The mind creates whatever you deem to be true. It's not ironic that it takes the "mind" to decide if it is special or not. For what exist, outside the mind can only be interpreted by the mind.
  - Gail . 50+
    
    0
    Oct 5 2012: The "interpretation" (meaning the theory of why you see what you see) is only an "interpretation of evidence". My "interpretation" is different. Think Schroedinger's Cat. Two people walk down a sidewalk and they come upon a box. They look inside and see a cat. One says, oh, look, a dead cat. The other says (at the same time) "oh look a sleeping cat". He then kicks the box gently. At that moment, the universe splits. In one universe, the cat really was dead. In the other, it jumps out of the box and runs away. Both of the original observers continue on in each reality.
    
    I understand about the theorized interference pattern. But the particles might just as well be heading to different probable futures. There might be an infinite amount of probable futures for you right now; It's just that some are more probable than others.
    
    Each band of light in the interference pattern is a different probable future for the original photons. But once you observe which slit the photon passed through, the probable future is thus determined, so probable futures are closed.
    - Gerald O'brian 50+
      
      0
      
      Oct 5 2012: Right... right...
      But... Didn't you write something about the video providing "evidence that we can choose our past"?
      How does that fit into multiverse theory? It seems you're trying to go with both theories... Or something mystical that's somewhere in the middle.
  - Gail . 50+
    
    0
    Oct 6 2012: The video showed a theoretical person looking at a distant galaxy and choosing whether to see the interference pattern or the particle, thus making a determination millions of light years in the past. It also showed how removing a detector screen at some point after the photon passed through one of the slits changes the results, so that the future is determined after the photon's future was determined according to standard quantum mechanics..
    
    I don't see a mystical middle, but neither do I see a mechanical middle.
    - John Smith 30+
      
      +1
      
      Oct 6 2012: "The video showed a theoretical person looking at a distant galaxy and choosing whether to see the interference pattern or the particle, thus making a determination millions of light years in the past."
      
      The photon is separate from the distant galaxy, even if your theory was correct the person would only choose the past of the photon in the past few nanoseconds, not the past of something in the distant galaxy. Quantum effects on macroscopic objects are too weak to observe.
    - Gerald O'brian 50+
      
      +1
      
      Oct 6 2012: And we're back to the Copenhagen school...
      
      "changes the results"
      This is definitely not what Many World Interpretation says!
  - Gail . 50+
    
    0
    Oct 6 2012: Can you explain what the split universe theory (Many worlds interpretation) means to you? I learned it as "According to the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics, the universe is constantly splitting every time a decision or choice is made"
    
    We're certainly no where near the copenhagen interpretation.
    - Gerald O'brian 50+
      
      0
      
      Oct 6 2012: (The multiverse is constantly splitting, not the universes.)
      But you got that right. However, the observer effect has no place in Many Worlds Interpretation.
      Observation doesn't change anything in the past or whatever. What happens is that when you observe you only observe a single universe.
      When you open the box, the cat is dead in some universes and alive in others. But that multiplicity is not available to you anymore. You're in either one of these universes in which the cat is 100% dead or 100% alive.
  - Gail . 50+
    
    0
    Oct 7 2012: Have no idea where you're going with your idea. I, as observer, determine which of the probable realities I move into. Time isn't moving. I am. As I look back (as observer) I see the past that sustains my present moment. You view the word "universe" differently than I do. If you exchange it for the word "reality", must more may come into focus. Realities are also multi-dimensional just as an hour is also 20 5-minute segments or 60 1-minute segments.
    - Gerald O'brian 50+
      
      0
      
      Oct 7 2012: If you think you're moving in time, then you really don't understand the Multiverse explanation. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, it's just that you can't be saying that your concepts come from Many World Interpretation if they just don't. (None of it is "my idea", by the way)
      String theory with its multidimensions is yet another theory.
Xavier Belvemont 30+
- 0
Oct 2 2012: You can't really prevent a paradox when you can't be sure that a paradox even exists.
We don't know what (if any) repercussions time travel would bring, because theres no way to test or experience it.

Its almost like wondering what happens when a certain fruit is dropped from a certain height..
and we don't know if the fruit exists or if we can get it to the height needed.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
- 0
Host

Oct 2 2012: There is a video on this subject by Stephen Hawkings. I believe I saw it within the last couple of years on public television.

You should look for it.

Here is one, but I remember something longer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0cVdPHOIxw
edward long 100+
- +2
Oct 2 2012: I cannot offer a solution, nor can I, knowing full well I should, resist a comment. You are asking a hypothetical question about potential solutions to non-existent problems in an impossible scenario. The answer must surely involve a tin-foil hat.
John Smith 30+
- 0
Oct 2 2012: I know of two ways that paradoxes can be prevented.

Fixed past: you can't change anything, you may travel back in time and try to shoot your father but the gun will jam and at that moment you suddenly remember when you were a kid looking out of the window and there was a frustrated man with a gun standing outside. Although you can't change things you can still travel back in time and watch the pyramids getting built, so it's not totally useless.

Many-worlds interpretation (originally an idea to somehow make quantum mechanics deterministic): you can travel back in time and you can even change things but when you go back you end up in an alternate version of reality that fits the changes you've made. There is no paradox because the reality you came from still exists and is unchanged. If you don't bother switching realities you can in fact make yourself a Roman Emperor.
kai okena
- 0
Oct 2 2012: if we do invent time travel, how will we stop people from going back in time to change things?
- Roberto Garcia
  - 0
  Oct 3 2012: I am not sure if, when you travel back in time, if possible, you would be able to change anything. Events that are part of the past are part of the past and are not "registered" or recorded anywhere. Unless the past is registered in some sort of "Universal Library" where you can go and tear a page of a book i see no way to alter the past. At this point that is my conclusion but. I am still looking for information

Showing all 50 comments

Sign In

To join or start a conversation, you'll need to sign in. Not a member? Register Now (it's free and fast).

Live Conversations

Live Conversations are hosted by TED speakers and TED Fellows. Ask your questions and participate in the discussions on the following dates and times: