If you had a machine that created a window through which you could see the future, and in the future you wrote down the winning lottery numbers and relayed that information to your present self before that lottery number was drawn.
However, in your present selfs excitement, you turn off the machine before your future self wrote the winning lottery numbers into it for your past self.
What would happen?
You must log in or register to comment.
I don’t think you’ve thought through your question. The machine was open in both time periods. The machine was turned off after the information was given. There’s nothing more to happen.
I get what you’re trying to say, but it doesn’t really apply to the scenario you are describing.
I saw a better version of what you are attempting to present: a scientist has a button that transports an object back in time by 5 seconds. An apple is tested successfully, it appears 5 seconds before he pushes the button and when he pushes the button the original disappears. They try it with a live mouse but something goes wrong; when it appears it’s horribly disfigured and this scares the scientist who pulls away from pushing the button. The mouse has already appeared but he will not press the button. Now what happens?
First of all this is not a paradox, unless you’re not explaining something, there are two yous past and future, if past self turns off the machine before seeing the numbers nothing happened, if he turns it off afterwards the information has already been transferred so nothing happens either.
I have a feeling you might have recently watched Primer and are thinking of a similar working tome machine, where the machine needs to be powered on from past until future. But if this situation happened in Primer it wouldn’t be a problem either because you’re not in the box after you leave it. It’s a bit weird, but if you imagine time as horizontal lines, the box allows you to travel diagonally, so you only exist inside the box in that timeline at the moment of exiting, before that you were in a different timeline, so if you exit the box, wait a while and turn it off you’re only preventing yourself from using the box again. In fact that’s one of the big reveals of the movie, except it’s said in passing by mentioning that the boxes are multi-use.
What would happen is entirely your responsibility as the author of the scenario.
Some options may be more “realistic” than others, but since the existence of a working time machine is already beyond what seems to be feasible physics (requiring ridiculous amounts and density of negative energy for example, where not even any has been shown to be possible to make) the scenario becomes soft sci-fi, or in other words magic, and that means it’s up to the writer to make up the rules.
Here is a post I found with many of the options you can choose from.
This is fundamentally a variation on the question of a Temporal Paradox, also known as a Grandfather Paradox (“You go back in time and kill your grandfather. What happens?”). Although no killing happens in this variation, the basic idea is the same: Information is transmitted to the past from the future, but results in a situation where it cannot be transmitted in the first place.
Accordingly, there are several hypotheses to cover this. This isn’t even all of them:
- The closed loop theory: To maintain the loop, you will in the future build a time machine which will allow you to activate the machine in the past, maintaining the loop. Past you may even be unaware it was activated from the future.
- The Parallel Universe theory: When future-you sent information into the past, they did not send it into their own past but rather into a universe in which you do not send the information back in the first place.
- The Timelike Curve theory: Because there is no common reference frame for “time”, each quanta of “you” is experiencing a different reference frame. The historic light cone of your future self sending the information back exists, and if you could follow those photons backwards you would find him doing this. But future you, in your frame of reference, will never see the machine activate.
- The Emergent Time theory: Time is not a linear path, but a function of entropy. By inverting entropy, you have caused a reconfiguration of the universe into a version in which the machine is inactive.
I don’t get it. Where’s the paradox here? He gets to see the future but turns off the machine before getting any information from it so nothing changes. What I’m missing?
His future self showed his past self the lottery numbers through the open window, but he closes the window, so his future self can’t show them to his past self.
I think the idea of parallel universes solves time travel paradoxes in a pretty clean way.
Except for the fact it makes every decision, every moment of tension and every event that occurs irrelevant, because an infinite number of universe exist in which the events occurred and in which they didn’t occur.
I don’t see that as a problem. Every possibility co-exists, and every reality is equally real. Every moment and decision forks the universe in infinite ways, but you get to choose the one where you go.
You can save a drowning person, or let them die, but in the big picture, it won’t matter. That person will drown infinitely many ways anyway, but there are also infinitely many universes where they get saved. Don’t worry about the big picture. What matters, is how you act and how the world acts on you in this universe.
Apologies, I copied and pasted the answer below from another reply I made elsewhere in this thread
==
I’m not talking about about the possibility of real infinite dimensions. I’m talking about sci fi, and stories, which is the context of the OPs question.
In a “real” scenario, the experience that matters is the one I’m having, not the one other versions of me might be having.
But in a story, there is no “true” timeline, or a more “real” timeline. They’re all being retold to us indirectly, and the choice of the version of the person retelling those experiences is arbitrary by the author. It doesn’t matter what perspective the author chooses, because every other outcome also happened, the author just didn’t tell us those stories.
Even knowing that everything happens every way in some other branch of the wave function (other universes) doesn’t really affect our own little section of it. There’s no communications or travel, so other universes if they exist have the same meaning to us as if they don’t. Except in time travel stories like this.
Besides, the same “irrelevance” of decisions and events comes free with even one single universe given that it’s deterministic - as physics seems to be. (Yeah there’s quantum randomness, but random doesn’t help either)
That said I still believe in free will and the importance of decisions. I just think it has to be defined so weakly that it still works in a deterministic universe. (So I have free will, but so do dice and pocket calculators.)
I’m not talking about about the possibility of real infinite dimensions. I’m talking about sci fi, and stories, which is the context of the OPs question.
In a “real” scenario, the experience that matters is the one I’m having, not the one other versions of me might be having.
But in a story, there is no “true” timeline, or a more “real” timeline. They’re all being retold to us indirectly, and the choice of the version of the person retelling those experiences is arbitrary by the author. It doesn’t matter what perspective the author chooses, because every other outcome also happened, the author just didn’t tell us those stories.
I’d say that the one that’s written is the ‘true’ timeline in the story the same way that the reality we experience is the only one that matters.
The reality I experience is the only one that matters to me. To an outside observer, all of them are as equally real and there is no true timeline.
In a story, there is no real, there is only outside observers…
It is no paradoxon.
Only your story is a bit unclear at the point where it matters. Let me ask a question to clarify = to destroy what appears a paradoxon, but isn’t.
Question:
Who controls the transmission of the information - the past self or the future self?If the past self controls the transmission, then he receives no information. Case closed. It does not matter what the future self is doing.
If the future self controls the transmission, then he knows when the past self turns off the device. He can send it just a minute further into the past, before the past self turns off the device, and so the past self receives it “in time”.
You’d still be poor.
Fml
Time to watch Déjà Vu I guess
I was thinking about primer when I thought of this question.
Meticulous, yes. Methodical. Educated. They were these things. Nothing extreme. Like anyone, they varied. There were days of mistakes and laziness and infighting. And there were days, good days, when by anyone’s judgment, they would have to be considered clever. No one would say that what they were doing was complicated. It wouldn’t even be considered new. Except maybe in the geological sense. They took from their surroundings what was needed, and made of it something more.
You can kinda see this play out in the short story by Ted Chiang called The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate.
