Timeline for Predestination and Bootstrap Paradox?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2015 at 7:34 | vote | accept | Gomes | ||
| Mar 9, 2015 at 7:20 | comment | added | Gomes | @Hypnosifl, yes it was a very interesting thing you raised, hence I opened a new question for it - scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/83124/… | |
| Mar 5, 2015 at 14:16 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | @Gomes - Do you mean the point I made about a bootstrap paradox in Predestination? It occurred to me that this may depend on one's definition of "same object" since technically the human body is constantly replacing its molecules. But there is at least a bootstrap paradox involving the information in his DNA (note that it would have been equally self-consistent if he wasn't a human at all genetically, but some other intelligent being like a Neanderthal or alien, though it would have been harder for him to blend in as an agent in that case). | |
| Mar 5, 2015 at 6:02 | comment | added | Gomes | @Hypnosifl I like the point you make about Predestination, think it's better tackled as a separate question. | |
| Mar 5, 2015 at 5:57 | comment | added | Gomes | Thanks for the answer @MichaelEdenfield and comments Hypnosifl. Would I be correct in understanding that without a predestination paradox, there can not be a bootstrap paradox? | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 17:55 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | (continued) but as long as I make sure to give "antique shop watch" to my younger self, taking the label off first, then he can later put the label "gift watch" on it, and there will be no bootstrap paradox here, yet this scenario will be consistent with the description you gave in the sentence I quoted (which is why I think it needs editing). | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 17:53 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | It would be the same object in my example, just at different points on its timeline. The watch that my future self gives me is an older version of the watch I see at the antique shop, which I then buy and take back in time to give to my younger self. After I buy the watch at the antique shop, I then own two nearly-identical versions of the same watch, which I could label "antique shop watch" and "gift watch" to distinguish them. If I were to go back in time and give "gift watch" to my younger self it would be a bootstrap paradox (and the similarity between the watches would be a coincidence), | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 17:47 | comment | added | KutuluMike | @Hypnosifl that would not be the same object, merely a similar one. To be the same object, you would have to go back in time and give yourself the watch you went back in time and gave yourself. | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 17:27 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | Nothing in that quoted sentence necessarily implies that the object itself forms a closed loop in time--for example, if my future self gave me a watch, and later I spotted an identical-seeming watch in an antique shop, and so I bought it and that gave me the inspiration to go back in time and give the watch I bought in the shop to my younger self, that would fit your description but it wouldn't be a bootstrap paradox, since the watch in the antique shop was presumably manufactured in a conventional way. | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 17:25 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | One more point, I think your explanation here needs a little improvement: "In a bootstrap paradox, an object (which could be a physical object, or a piece of information) is sent to the past, and the receipt of that object triggers a series of cause/effect, which ultimately leads to a future event whereby the same object is sent back in time." This seems more like a description of a predestination paradox, which is not just any old causal loop, but a specific form of causal loop where a person's trip back ends up influencing their younger self to make that very trip. | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 15:34 | comment | added | KutuluMike | (I took out the interstellar bit since I never actually saw the movie, only read about the science/math in it so I'll take your word for it. :) ) | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 15:33 | history | edited | KutuluMike | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 206 characters in body
|
| Mar 4, 2015 at 15:31 | comment | added | KutuluMike | @Hypnosifl Yeah, that counts; there's also a predestination paradox in Terminator -- John Conner sends Kyle Reese back in time so John Conner can be conceived. As mentioned, lots of time travel movies contain examples of both. | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 14:55 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | Also, a clear example of a bootstrap paradox involving an actual physical object (rather than just information, as in your examples) can be found in the movie "Somewhere in Time", there's a watch in the movie that seems to have no origin--see the discussion here. Lastly, I disagree about the implied bootstrap in Interstellar--it would only be a bootstrap if Cooper sent the information back in time after being given it by humanity's descendants, but instead he and TARS actually discovered the information when falling through the black hole. | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 14:54 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | But Predestination is also an example of a bootstrap paradox, since (spoilers!) the main character is a kind of "object" whose life forms a closed loop of sorts (or at least part of his body does--it would be analogous to an amoeba that went back in time, split in two, and then one became the younger version of the same amoeba that would later go back in time, while the other just aged and died). | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 14:47 | history | answered | KutuluMike | CC BY-SA 3.0 |