terminator

Originally Posted by metalangel

I suppose, you could think that Skynet is from an alternate timeline and can't control where its stuff gets sent back in time to... so our timeline would never have had Skynet but another one did... and their Terminator arrived in our timeline hence Skynet was able to be developed.

I think the many worlds stuff above fits in here as you say, so you have a timeline, Skynet sends a terminator back. The minute it starts doing stuff that gets spawned off onto another timeline where the destroyed terminator is used to create Skynet (possibly a different type of Skynet).

But then that timeline has the conundrum you mention still...so what I was saying was something more along the lines of "why think of time as a linear thing, with a past, present and future?" and instead think of time as just "being". Everything "is" at the same time, so maybe from that viewpoint there is no conundrum.

That's the kind of stuff you end up thinking about when you started thinking a lot about infinity, how time never "started" and will never "end". It makes you think of other ways that time could be "viewed"

Originally Posted by muffles

I think the many worlds stuff above fits in here as you say, so you have a timeline, Skynet sends a terminator back. The minute it starts doing stuff that gets spawned off onto another timeline where the destroyed terminator is used to create Skynet (possibly a different type of Skynet).

But then that timeline has the conundrum you mention still...so what I was saying was something more along the lines of "why think of time as a linear thing, with a past, present and future?" and instead think of time as just "being". Everything "is" at the same time, so maybe from that viewpoint there is no conundrum.

That's the kind of stuff you end up thinking about when you started thinking a lot about infinity, how time never "started" and will never "end". It makes you think of other ways that time could be "viewed"

But if we accept that this (many worlds) is true, then we have to assume that the machines don't know about this, because it means there is literally no point at all sending something "back" if it's only going to end up in another timeline. It only serves to prove that you'll have no influence at all on your own. Anything that is ever going to be sent into the past in your own timeline has (of course) already arrived and had whatever influence it's ever going to have.

Originally Posted by sinbad

But if we accept that this (many worlds) is true, then we have to assume that the machines don't know about this, because it means there is literally no point at all sending something "back" if it's only going to end up in another timeline. It only serves to prove that you'll have no influence at all on your own. Anything that is ever going to be sent into the past in your own timeline has (of course) already arrived and had whatever influence it's ever going to have.

I guess I would think that at the point Skynet decides to send a terminator back, then it spawns into a new timeline at that point, where the terminator had already been sent back. I don't suppose one "knows" when the timelines split so you'd likely never think about it in the way you just mentioned...?

Originally Posted by muffles

I guess I would think that at the point Skynet decides to send a terminator back, then it spawns into a new timeline at that point, where the terminator had already been sent back. I don't suppose one "knows" when the timelines split so you'd likely never think about it in the way you just mentioned...?

You'd agree that we live our own lives with conscious knowledge of just one though, of course.

I think splitting of timelines is irrelevant to us. The question is whether something being sent back to our past can make a difference to the life we have already lived. Obviously to make a difference to our own existence (which is what the machines, and indeed the resistance, are trying to do) then whatever we send back has to arrive in our own past.

If (as a 19 year old) you want stop yourself from having an accident which caused you to lose your legs on your 17th birthday, you would hope to encounter yourself, not some identical till that point version who you save, but with no effect at all on your own history.

To my mind if something is sent back 10 years to our past, then 10 years ago it arrived. And nothing can stop that thing being sent back in time, because it arrived.

If what we send arrives in a way or place or dimension that has no effect at all on our own world then we might as well just be destroying whatever it is we send. Seems like a bit of an extreme length to go to just to save a dimension we'll never even know exists.

We come to the question of whether reality can alter itself around us, along with our minds and memories, and to me that's even more absurd.

i pref 1 originals are best

Originally Posted by sinbad

You'd agree that we live our own lives with conscious knowledge of just one though, of course.

I think splitting of timelines is irrelevant to us. The question is whether something being sent back to our past can make a difference to the life we have already lived. Obviously to make a difference to our own existence (which is what the machines, and indeed the resistance, are trying to do) then whatever we send back has to arrive in our own past.

If (as a 19 year old) you want stop yourself from having an accident which caused you to lose your legs on your 17th birthday, you would hope to encounter yourself, not some identical till that point version who you save, but with no effect at all on your own history.

To my mind if something is sent back 10 years to our past, then 10 years ago it arrived. And nothing can stop that thing being sent back in time, because it arrived.

If what we send arrives in a way or place or dimension that has no effect at all on our own world then we might as well just be destroying whatever it is we send. Seems like a bit of an extreme length to go to just to save a dimension we'll never even know exists.

We come to the question of whether reality can alter itself around us, along with our minds and memories, and to me that's even more absurd.

What I was thinking was (hijacking your example) that if you send yourself back to save your legs, at that point a new world spawns, where you go back and did indeed save your legs. The 'old world' where you didn't save yourself is the one where you didn't make the decision to go back and save yourself so everything stays as it was.

But taking the world where you went back and saved yourself, as that's where the interesting stuff lies, I suppose that in this world (which is new) the 19 year old version of yourself would grow up having knowledge that he has to go back and save himself.

I have kinda forgotten exactly what point we were discussing, something about whether you'd realise that you had to go back and do something, I think the above explains what I was thinking...or does it!

Originally Posted by muffles

What I was thinking was (hijacking your example) that if you send yourself back to save your legs, at that point a new world spawns, where you go back and did indeed save your legs. The 'old world' where you didn't save yourself is the one where you didn't make the decision to go back and save yourself so everything stays as it was.

But taking the world where you went back and saved yourself, as that's where the interesting stuff lies, I suppose that in this world (which is new) the 19 year old version of yourself would grow up having knowledge that he has to go back and save himself.

I have kinda forgotten exactly what point we were discussing, something about whether you'd realise that you had to go back and do something, I think the above explains what I was thinking...or does it!

It nearly does. Are you saying you think it's possible to "fix" your own legs or not?

I think I follow the idea that a new timeline is one in which a whole different past can already exist as well as a different future. But, again using the simple example, the reason the question of time travel even arises for this person is that they have lost their legs in an accident and want them back.

I agree that if this idea of multiple parallel dimensions is correct, then you could stop the accident happening in another dimension, but I don't think this person's ever going to magically get their legs back, once lost. So for him, there's no point.

Much more likely is that this person tries, and inevitably fails. He might travel back in time along his own timeline, but he won't stop it happening, because it has happened. He might say "I'll bring back evidence, proof of who I am and what is going to happen, and make sure I'm not in the town where the accident happens on my 17th birthday" but he'll fail, it's certain that he dies trying and never meets his 16 year old self at all. Unless of course he remembers a crazy man in a wheel chair who he was running away from when the truck hit. And that's how it always happens. Round and round it goes.

Originally Posted by sinbad

a crazy man in a wheel chair who he was running away from

Davros?

defintely 2 it was that hair cut that inspried me to go get a grade 2 when i was 13 !!!!!

Originally Posted by sinbad

It nearly does. Are you saying you think it's possible to "fix" your own legs or not?

I think I follow the idea that a new timeline is one in which a whole different past can already exist as well as a different future. But, again using the simple example, the reason the question of time travel even arises for this person is that they have lost their legs in an accident and want them back.

I agree that if this idea of multiple parallel dimensions is correct, then you could stop the accident happening in another dimension, but I don't think this person's ever going to magically get their legs back, once lost. So for him, there's no point.

Much more likely is that this person tries, and inevitably fails. He might travel back in time along his own timeline, but he won't stop it happening, because it has happened. He might say "I'll bring back evidence, proof of who I am and what is going to happen, and make sure I'm not in the town where the accident happens on my 17th birthday" but he'll fail, it's certain that he dies trying and never meets his 16 year old self at all. Unless of course he remembers a crazy man in a wheel chair who he was running away from when the truck hit. And that's how it always happens. Round and round it goes.

Lol - I would say rather than him always failing when he tries to save himself, maybe he would find it impossible to fail to go back in time and save himself, when he is 19? Haha who knows...I have lost myself in the reasoning now