i guess this topic is done, cause i dont see any more questions to ask, or any more replys :(. everyone thanks for your contribution :D it was great fun. this is the 100th post (really wanted it to reach 100)
if anyone feels like it, get on with the discussion :D ill be happy to see this topic going again, if not, it reached at least 100 replies. cya laters everyone

// IGNORE THIS POST!!!! TOPIC IS GOING AGAIN :D

[Edited by - Red Falcon on October 12, 2004 8:53:06 AM]

Quote: Original post by Agony

Quote: Original post by Red Falcon

Quote: Original post by Spearhawk
The idea of parallel universes says that anything that can happen will happen in at least one of the infinite numbers of worlds. Notice the "can", as in what's possible under the laws of nature.

o know this theory, but i dont think it can ever be true. eery human makes a desision every milisecond or so. do i dont i type this letter for example. all these descisions interact with each other. so, we would created so much paralells, that it would be impossible. and how should they be created? mass is limited, it HAS to come from soewhere.

Actually, this theory in its truest form is probably more mind-boggling than you described. A branch of a universe into multiple universes wouldn't happen every time a human makes a decision, but every time anything that had multiple possibilities picks one, it would in fact pick all of those possibilities. And due to things related to quantum physics, it appears that this happens an incredibly huge number of times, perhaps an infinite number of times, each moment. An electron's movement, for example, is not fixed, but is defined by its probability wave or whatnot. Now I think that scientists consider time to be discrete (Plank time and all that), but there might be an infinite number of locations where an electron could move to at every moment time passes. Which would spawn a new parallel universe for each one. But just because infinity enters into a theory doesn't make the theory invalid. It might be the fundamental way of reality.

And as for not being able to split the universes 'cause you gotta make mass, why do you claim that? It might just be a funcamental process of reality to duplicate everything for every new universe that is spawned. In fact, if the probabilities of everything are deterministic, then multiple [possibly an infinite number of] universes wouldn't have to truly exists. They would all be defined by a mathematical formula that describes a tree structure and the state of each node. (This in an odd way would actually restore determinism back to the way it use to be, mostly.)

What you have described can be viewed as, if you add a probability to each of these "paths" a description of Feynman's "Sum over histories" or "Sum over paths" theory. Basicly it says that the position for every particle (or any other physical atrribute) can be viewed as

Current = Sum (Probability * Path, i=0->inf)

-M

Quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
What you have described can be viewed as, if you add a probability to each of these "paths" a description of Feynman's "Sum over histories" or "Sum over paths" theory. Basicly it says that the position for every particle (or any other physical atrribute) can be viewed as

Current = Sum (Probability * Path, i=0->inf)

hum..... i aint a pro on math, so i cant descide whether ur right or wrong ;) but u have an idea you are actually correct on this

Quote: Original post by Red Falcon
explain then, how the android ever excisted? the technologie for it is never created, i wont begin or no technologie, no android. but how is he made then? did he discide that himself?

Quote: Original post by Red Falcon
yup but now 1 problem again.... he was accused of it, but he didnt steal it. Why did they accuse him if it was never stolen in his time? he got back and stole it then. because of this they accused him in the future. so, eighter 2 timelines or a time paradox :D

Quote: Original post by Red Falcon
time ALWAYS has to flow forward. otherwise you would undo events that have happened. even if that was no point, time wouldnt even excist. time is the contnuesflow of events that come one after another. if it "jumped" back sometime and started to fo in another direction, it woudnt be time anymore.

What I've been trying to explain is that things don't have to work the way your intuition tells you they do. Intuition can be wrong, and in science, it has been wrong numerous times throughout history.

Many of the paradoxes of time travel are basically circular. Event A causes event B causes event C which causes event A, ad nauseam. Each event has a cause. However, as a whole, the cycle has no cause. This is the supposed paradox, but if we assume that an effect does not absolutly require a cause, then there is no real paradox. The paradox only exists if we maintain that every single effect must absolutely have a cause.

As for time going backwards, that's similar. To us it feels right to think that time can't be reversed. My response: So? If evidence says otherwise, then intuition needs to be revised. And if we are never willing to experiment against what our intuition says, then we will likely have a hard to impossible time discovering much more about science. Relativity, Quantum Physics, and the current attempts towards Grand Unification all show how theories that strongly oppose intuition in some way or another can sometimes explain reality much more accurately than previous more intuitively satisfying theories can.

Ya gotta keep an open mind when talking about theoretical physics and related subjects.

Ok Agony.... you got a big point there.
and what you say is totally right. i begin to understand what you mean.
in fact, time is somethings strange. who knows if it can flow backward? we cant notice that. But if science says its possible(and there are grounds for that i guess) its most likely possible.
also i begin to understand the "cause" effect you have been describing with the coin. time is a whole, so we cant have a happends and because of that b happends.

The only problem is the "limitation" of the human mind. we think something must follow each other up. on the one side its basic logic, but is time logic at all? perhaps we take the most logic conclusion and forget the many other posibilities. what u say is true : Ya gotta keep an open mind when talking about theoretical physics and related subjects.
thats whats wrong. when somethings seems true, someone wont change opinion quickly, unless with good arguments.
yo now provided some arguments i cant deny. they are near my own opinion. so, u can say my opinion is now "updated" to be more logical.

congracts, i dont change opinion that soon, unless with REALLY good arguments :D

Quote: Original post by Red Falcon
Ok Agony.... you got a big point there.
and what you say is totally right. i begin to understand what you mean.
in fact, time is somethings strange. who knows if it can flow backward? we cant notice that. But if science says its possible(and there are grounds for that i guess) its most likely possible.
also i begin to understand the "cause" effect you have been describing with the coin. time is a whole, so we cant have a happends and because of that b happends.

The only problem is the "limitation" of the human mind. we think something must follow each other up. on the one side its basic logic, but is time logic at all? perhaps we take the most logic conclusion and forget the many other posibilities. what u say is true : Ya gotta keep an open mind when talking about theoretical physics and related subjects.
thats whats wrong. when somethings seems true, someone wont change opinion quickly, unless with good arguments.
yo now provided some arguments i cant deny. they are near my own opinion. so, u can say my opinion is now "updated" to be more logical.

congracts, i dont change opinion that soon, unless with REALLY good arguments :D

Excellent! I don't wish to think that I "won" or anything, and I will acknowledge my own limitations. [Others here have proved I have them often enough! [smile]] But I'm glad I've been able to convey my own thoughts well enough. Yeah, I used to depend on intuition far too much. Then I read about relativity and quantum physics. That really forced me to reevaluate a lot of things. A really interesting book regarding such things would be The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene. It doesn't deal specifically with time, but it involves time quite a bit. In general, it is about superstring theory, but it starts with the progression of physics from Newtonian to relativity to quantum physics, and how each one was good or not so good at explaining certain phenomena, and how the newer one was [sometimes] better. It then gets into the meat of the book, trying to explain how superstring theory [or its predecessor M-theory] hopes to be better yet. Crazy stuff. Makes your brain hurt sometimes. Gotta love it. [smile]

Quote: Original post by Red Falcon

Quote: Original post by Estok
A gold coin had been stolen, and Doraemon was accused of stealing it. To prove his innocence, Doraemon went back in time to stalk the thief. However, no one ever came to steal the gold coin. So he decided to take the coin back to the future. He went back to the future and realized that he was the one who stole the coin.

yup but now 1 problem again.... he was accused of it, but he didnt steal it. Why did they accuse him if it was never stolen in his time? he got back and stole it then. because of this they accused him in the future. so, either 2 timelines or a time paradox :D

There is no paradox, let me re-tell the story in more details:

Today is May 11, Doraemon and his friend were meeting at a professor's house. The professor said that his gold coin had been stolen the night before (May 10). The coin was put in a very secured room, and there was no evidence that anyone entered the room. Doraemon's friend deduced that Doraemon was the only one that could travel through walls, so he must have stolen it.

That night, May 11, Doraemon used the time machine to travel back to the past, to the night of May 10. He waited near the room, waiting for anyone that was going to steal the coin. But no one ever came.

Based on some stupid logic, Doraemon decided that he would need to bring the coin back to the future to show that the coin was still there.

He got back to the future, May 11, with the coin. He decided to bring the coin back the next morning, to show that no one ever stole the coin, that the coin was there the whole night on May 10.

On the morning of May 12, just as he was walking to the professor's house, he realized he indeed stole the gold coin.

Okay, here are my two cents...

Experiments with elektron beams show that interference is not only possible with light but also with matter. That's because an elektron is not just a particle, but also a wave.

Qunatum physics now says that our universe is just a superposition of many of such wave functions. Consider the experiment of Schödingers cat. While the cat is in its box, it is half dead and half alive. Noone knows but the cat. If you open the box and look for the cat, then the life state of the cat will become fixed.

The many world theory says that there is not just one version of the story, but many. For the cat it would mean that it will survive in one world, but not in the other.

In quantum physics it is said that this is an interpretation of the wave function. That said, it is possible that there are many worlds in just one universe. The energy is needed just once, but there would be infinite worlds laying over each other.

Another interesting point is, why should the worlds just split when going forward in time. Like you can add two numbers and get the same result (2+3=5 and 1+4=5), why should not two worlds become one when going into future ?

For time travel it could mean, that if you go back and time and kill you father, you just switch to another timeline. You would not dissolve suddenly by some magic force, but there would be one story where you were born and later on enter the time machine, and another story where you leave the time machine and kill your father.

Quote: Original post by Estok
On the morning of May 12, just as he was walking to the professor's house, he realized he indeed stole the gold coin.

yes... but it aint a real paradox then right? (sorry, im VERY hard to convince :D) the coin was away and because of that dormeon traveled back. then he stole the coin. the coin was stolen because it was stolen(does it make sense?). the only good explanation is the one agony convinced me of, and thats that time is a whole, and what may happen did happen before if you time travel.

Quote: yes... but it aint a real paradox then right?

what are you smoking? I just said that there is NO paradox.

In the Doraemon example time is linear. You can't change the past. If you put the story in a timeline, it goes like this:

May 10 Evening
The Doraemon from May 11 stole the coin.
The Doraemon from May 10 is sleeping.

May 11 Morning
The Doraemon that have been sleeping is accused of stealing the coin.

May 11 Evening
The accused Doraemon goes into the time machine.
The accused Doraemon comes back with a gold coin as proof of innocence.

May 12 Morning
Doraemon with the gold coin meets the professor again to prove his innocence, just to realize that he in fact stole the gold coin.


If you compare the gold coin to other gold coins, the gold coin in Doraemon's hand is one day younger, so to speak.