Jump to content

Alternate timelines, an idea


Recommended Posts

ok, i need someone with a really big brain to help me with this one...


lets say that titor was right, there are alternate timelines. with that being said, when excactly, did the timelines diverge? at the big bang? if so, that would mean that every big bang was different, and almost ensuring that there would only be one earth in one timeline. am i correct?


AND if they did not start to diverge at the big bang, then is that proof of divine intervention?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

AND if they did not start to diverge at the big bang, then is that proof of divine intervention?

Nope, sorry is the proof of Military intervention, playing to be gods!!!


-link added


a hint:




They looked for antigravity and found Time Travel... LOL






Apollo 20 Alien Spaceship on The Moon CSM Flyover


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_He2EGu7pKk :yum:



Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes an interesting question to look at for my first post.


Alternate Time-lines. Tracks. Lines. Pathways. These are dangerous contradictions to comtemplate for most people if you're digging below the surface, as they provide some very conflicting moral arguments that would make people squirm and not wish to think about it.


Allow me to explain, by demostrating in either the existance or non-existance of alternate time-lines.


If there wasn't alternate time-lines, everything would be linear, which would also mean everything would be predictable, which ironically could allow for information of the future to be gleaned. It would also give rise to the moral question of 'fate'. You can't escape it as there is no alternate (since, obviously, we're discussing linear).


However, this is where the contradiction starts (I've already worked these ideas through several times already). If it IS linear, then you can predict, so you can foresee what happens and change it, which then means it's not linear... unless the changes were part of the linear process all along and it's a 'false choice'. But then you would argue what if I predicted myself predicting my prediction and knew it was linear and stopped it all from occuring?


The next contradiction lies here. If there are alternate time-lines, then prediction will be rendered impossible as any one time-line could be used, so the predictable becomes the unpredictable, thus rendering it linear again in an even further and interesting twist. I dubbed it the 'Central Nexus Theory' for an easier referrence. Basically, if you have more than one possible prediction, it proves the uncertainty remains and the predictions are worthless.


So, I thought, and I thought. What theory would allow the contradictions to be removed, but both linear and non-linear time to exist? Easy. Switch points.


Imagine time like a train track rather than like a million different tree-branches. For the most part it is linear *until* you reach a switch point, which, depending on the operator's decision (you, me, anyone), the track can either switch to another time-line, or remain on course.


Here's the twist - since all the tracks remain linear (no matter which one you choose, the track has already been laid down), you can predict what happens on every one, as in, every single possible alternative has already been mapped out. What can't be predicted is your path along these tracks. A bit of track A. A bit of track B.


And I know what you're thinking (linear track thinking, bah). If every one is already mapped out, then surely so is the path you will choose. Not true. Since every single alternate possibility has already been mapped out, the Central Nexus Theory applies - the unpredictable remains in the predictable since there are so many alternatives.


And, if every track can be predicted, so can the future, so you know where the switch points are so you can make your track changes even more unusual! Living in a track where you're about to die? Switch over to a track where you steal a car and drive to safety!



Link to comment
Share on other sites



lets say that titor was right, there are alternate timelines. with that being said, when excactly, did the timelines diverge? at the big bang? if so, that would mean that every big bang was different, and almost ensuring that there would only be one earth in one timeline. am i correct?

We're mixing two seperate sets of physical theories together in your post. The two theories are related in the general scheme of physics but are very different.


The first set of theories relate to the Big Bang. There are several cosmologies predicted by the Big Bang theorists that state that more than one seperate, independent universe could evolve from a single Big Bang event. The histories of those universes don't diverge. They are totally unrelated to each other because they have no contact with each other. Those theories arise from general relativity.


The other set of theories are generally called the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. Those theories relate to how the wave function of an "event" resolves itself when acted upon by an "observer". In this set of theories alternate resolutions of the event play themseles out in new, seperate and independent universes created by the observation. The divergence begins immediately due to, at a minimum, the Principle of Uncertainty and Chaos Theory. At the subatomic level particles' paths cannot be predicted. The particles appear to move about by taking unpredictable random paths through spacetime.


If, according to the general class of MWI theories, you take the temperature of an 8 oz. glass of water the world splits into as many different worlds as the range of temperatures allowed (its infinite but limited to the range of temperatures allowed - you won't have one glass of water at 75 degrees and another at 200 degrees - the range might be 69-71 degrees). If you could somehow map the location of every water particle in the glass (without causing the splitting of worlds...which isn't possible according to thetheory), took the temperature and then was further able to "see" all the glasses an again map the water particles you'd see that the individual particles in each glass were no longer moving in parallel paths relative to the other glasses in the set. Instant divergence. And it only gets worse over time.


In the real world we have a huge problem predicting the paths of three objects that are interacting in ways that cause them to change positions over time (the Three Body Problem). It's impossible for us to map the molecules in an eyedropper of water let alone an 8 oz glass of water.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

" At the subatomic level particles' paths cannot be predicted. The particles appear to move about by taking unpredictable random paths through spacetime."


i understand that. i was wondering if it is kind of like an old video game. when you played a level, and then played it again. it would seem very random at first, but after playing it 1000 times you have it memorized and perfected. i thought that maybe the beggining of every universe starts in the same fashion, this is just our first time through.



Link to comment
Share on other sites



Good question.


The answer is - cosmologists don't know what the initial state of the uiverse was during the Plank's Time era - the first ~5.4 * 10^-44 seconds after the initial Big Bang event. So we don't know what the initial state of the other universes would be. They should be similar but we also know that the initial state of the universe(s) had to be somewhat "grainy" or lumpy. If the initial state was perfectly smoothe we shouldn't have any planets or stars because there wouldn't be enough currents and eddies in the original plasma to form atoms and then stars and galaxies. The Uncertainty Principle is a very good idea that our Creator decided to build into the fabric of spacetime. ;)



Link to comment
Share on other sites

We might not know what the path is, but it's there, already laid before us.


If you open up a fridge for a drink, what might you find? Milk? Apple Juice? Maybe even your favourite chilled Cok Cola (bah, sounds like shameless advertising). Your choices of what you can actually choose for a drink is incredibly limited even if all three are availible. You can already imagine what the paths for those would be like...


Open fridge




(Switch Point)


To take apple


To take milk


To take coke


Close Fridge Door and not have a drink.


You pour <x> out into the glass.


(switch point)


You either...


Get it all in


Spill some of it


Knock the glass over and spill it over the floor


Curse as you realised you picked the wrong drink


You can start to see how it forms. It would be time consuming to consider every possibility, but I bet, if you were to just casually map it out into your mind - you can already see what kind of reaction and action you would take to each situation. I've saved myself a lot of time by mapping out what is most likely to happen next. I also use such methods in combat games to predict and outwit opponents.


Imagine you're the enemy. Your aim is to kill me. If I run away, I will look like I am scared or losing, and you will give chase (given with the original aim as an enemy). This can be abused in several ways - you can lead your enemy into a team ambush, you can lead your enemy into an area that better suits yourself and ambush him or you could run and hide. For the first two, you know the enemy will be surprised - they thought you were losing! For the last one, they can react in two ways - follow in and wonder where you have gone, thus starting a search for you, or run in and think you have continued onwards and give chase.


In either situation it still works to your advantage - you can come out of hiding when he searches the wrong spot and gun him, or, you can sneak out of the area completely so he has no idea where you are even if he searches that area thourghly. After failing to find you the enemy then becomes paranoid fearing an attack - this slows them down, buying you time.


Now imagine you're a wounded enemy, and try to map out how they would act and react to different situations. It gets fairly easy. Like finding out each card in a shuffled deck slowly.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...



lemme rephrase my question.


darby, would it be possible to take all the information that is known, and use it to make a very educated guess on what is not known, and then reverse engineer that educated guess into a fact?

Actually that's a pretty good layman's description of theoretical science.


Scientific theories are built upon the structure of what came before. A valid prior standing theory is one that correctly describes the world around us. Its usually backed up with experimental verification. Its valid to the limit of its domain.


Along comes another scientist. A theoretical scientist, in fact. That scientist takes what is known, looks at a new situation and attempts to apply the old theory to it. Lo and behold s/he has run up against the limit of the domain of the old theory. So s/he makes some educated guesses based on the older theory(s), applies some new approaches and over time comes up with a newer theory (or discovers that the new theory is wrong).


Next comes the experimentalists. The experimental scientists take the new theory to task and formulate, well, some experiments. If the experiments prove fruitful you have a new and more general theory - one that extends the limit of the old domain. It becomes a fact that the new theory is the more correct one.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Sorry if i miss something because being lazy reading all these posts.


Well, first of all, you are asking something that the answer of a physicist would be that it isn't comprobated so there's still no answer.


Well, that's the answer. Maybe parallel timelines aren't real.


So you're imagining. I could give you any imaginary answer.


But if your question would be real, the answer may depend of the exact theory of multiple timelines.


Pzzt, plot twist: String theory says that because dimension #99999999 (okno just kidding, i think it is the 9 or 10 or so), the answer to this question should be that convergence is always. Because, physicist love to make stupid theories. if you ask me, well man, that's the devil, just don't ask.


Anyways, physicists since like 999 years are having trouble with the quantum theory, specially with the string theory. String theory is this: Random is in seen in the minimal quantum scale. But, what if we are in a minimal scale of something else, and that else is in a minimaler scale? Omg, omgomg im a genius *makes 99999999999999 maths*. Well, now gimme da nobel.


In few words, string theory wants to put every probability existent, so, including the probability of multiple time-convergence. And, all others you could think of.


(In the internet there are very fews explanations of the string theory because physicist only write'em on numbers an weird simbols. I think that's because it isn't comprobated, because the theory could be discarded overnight with one more great discovery..)



Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok, i need someone with a really big brain to help me with this one...

lets say that titor was right, there are alternate timelines. with that being said, when excactly, did the timelines diverge? at the big bang? if so, that would mean that every big bang was different, and almost ensuring that there would only be one earth in one timeline. am i correct?


AND if they did not start to diverge at the big bang, then is that proof of divine intervention?

After issues started to cool down a bit after the primary big bang.Time lines were only formed after a certain frwequency resonace value had been attained.In order for those timelines to have formed, cooler temperatures must have prevailed, as with the cooler temprautres also came the differing divisions of time.


As time went along, in similar fashion to a segmented four lane highway to where each highway was barriered in from the other, then the timelines formed.Issues became more interesting as time went along as there were happenings in reference to creatures within those time-lanes that began to form.Pinter



Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a fairly new line of thought, (at least new for me), that consciousness plays a huge role in time travel.


"Paula, supply your proof and scientific papers". I don't have them. Someone else may and you are certainly free to look for them, but during my conversations with other people consciousness has come up in the conversations. If decisions you make create different timelines, then wouldn't individual consciousness play a role? It comes right back to a question I already posed on my website - Is the universe itself a consciousness?


Think about it. YOU time travel by yourself. Only YOU experience the change. That would be YOUR consciousness, would it not? Why didn't it change EVERYONE'S reality? Consciousness.


The universe and consciousness are related, IMHO. There is even proof of a global consciousness on Earth.


"Paula, where's your proof?". You can Google it. It's there. It's your choice to believe or disbelieve. Again, just a coversation here. Speculation. Thinking out loud. Sharing of ideas. No claims of being right or wrong. Relax. Zen.





Link to comment
Share on other sites

If one takes a black velvet cloth about a yard square and carefully places three bee bees so that they are spaced one foot apart, then this is a collection of similar universes which are also multiverses, however each universe is its own.Now if someone, maybe an I destroys all three universes, why did they do that?


They may have done this because of the monotony of universes being sphere shaped.I think that this is what some of you are after.Say one day the office of festive creation calls both Rainman Time and Ceego and tells them,"You must both report to the Los Angles City Civic Center, as your'e both on order to create two new kinds of universes that are not sphere based", this is the out-product that you might derive.


They both report, take their childlike and happy creative pills, with an official nurse supervising them doing so.RMT has cotton candy, to where when some of the candy is pulled apart, a camera photographs this and this information is put to database.Ceego' might expressively throw gelatinous green and blue blobs of clear gel onto the rapid prototype.The two might work for hours till they come up with universe prototypes which are not spheres.


The question now does arise, how does this form of non-sphere shaped account for itself based in its time along with actions?


The answer out of the void is that you must turn what you know upside down and go into the blue area, which is known as the accounting room.


This postulate occurs as you can't have a collection of sphere based universes, without something, or some process accounting for them.


If one looks at this as a mathematics process for quite some time, you always reduce the beginning of the equation back to where it started, which is man here.But know that this is just one point of view.The question might be, what will be the end result if one builds four new universes shaped like this?Then what would be the accounting upstairs?


This looks as if to be really really weird, but know this is a very valid question.I feel that many of you may secretly be asking this to yourselves.


*A synchronicity similarity proof is given in the Police recording We're Spirits In The Material World.Sometimes when the lead vocal sings spirits, it sound similar to the phrase upstairs.Pinter


Know that the character Ceego is a created alternative and is in no way affiliated with Sego, the diet plan drink.-Sego was a US meal replacement diet drink formally marketed by Pet, Inc. (at the time Pet Milk) as Sego Liquid Diet Food. Introduced in 1961[1] and selling for approximately US25¢ each,[2] Sego sales registered US$22 million to the company's Milk Products Division by 1965.



  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I got the whole thing right about Many Worlds Theory and quantum mechanics, things are even more insane than what people seem to describe here...


One element of quantum theory is the random nature of sub-atomic particles. The explanation of MWT I have mainly encountered is that for every optional outcome of a subatomic event, a seperate universe is split out. Yes, that means a constant splitting of universes for EVERY SINGLE SUB-ATOMIC PARTICLE IN THE UNIVERSE. Of course, unless we assume that even the slightest of those outcomes has major implications down the line, most of these universes would seem identical to many others. Assuming a lack of conscious beings present at The Big Bang, this would be the only source of splitting timelines.


My understanding of splitting timelines in the field of time travel is that the event that creates an alternate timeline is a change to events in a timeline *that has already had a future*, caused by the influence of time travellers, would be the springboard for the new timeline to form.


In both these cases, there would presumably be only one OBB (Original Big Bang. There really ought to be a 90s synthpop group of that name). Either the MWT is right and things just went splitting all over at that point, or new timelines would require active time travel to create.


As for the idea of premonition and fate, I guess that depends on how that premonition works. Your run-of-the-mill 'spidey-sense' would not do anything timeline-wise, because it merely dictates the course of the existing timeline; there was no timeline where the sense did not go off and result in whatever happened. For premonition to be a timeline splitter, it would need to first create the original timeline (let history run its course), then double back and inform the premonition viewer of it. Sort of like the movie Next, with Nic Cage (just imagine doing the timeline implication math for that one!). Fate, on the other hand, requires ignorance or set determination. If you are given the option of changing an outcome, fate by definition cannot exist.


I may have gone a bit off-topic, but I hope it all makes sense :-)



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much then, I can, based on this MWT idea, answer all the questions in the Universe and the "reason WE exist".


Someone farted in another Universe and this one was forced into existance as a result.


Problem solved. Answers achived. Why did it take me so long to figure it out?:)



  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Create New...