# Will zero divergence ever be possible?

## Recommended Posts

This is extracted from one of the original posts:

"Is it physically possible for you to get back to THIS time line once you leave?"

John Titor: Not with the machine I have now.

---

I understand the implications of the above statement are endless, but I simply cannot fathom that there would never be technology developed that would enable one to go back home to zero divergence. Remember, zero divergence is mathematically possible, so all we need is the technology to do so. Could take 200 years to develop, could take 2 years from 2036, but regardless, I personally believe it will be possible!

Divergence is a mathematical concept (Calculus):

• 1
##### Share on other sites

[ATTACH]93[/ATTACH]

• 1
##### Share on other sites

What if zero divergence is the only possibility? As in; there is only one timeline/universe to time travel within.

##### Share on other sites

What if zero divergence is the only possibility? As in; there is only one timeline/universe to time travel within.

Then based on observations, paradoxes do occur. Dead celebrities that come back alive, buildings that pop into empty fields are but just a couple of examples. And winning the lottery would be a reality that could easily be accomplished.

• 2
##### Share on other sites

What if zero divergence is the only possibility? As in; there is only one timeline/universe to time travel within.

• 2
##### Share on other sites

What if zero divergence is the only possibility? As in; there is only one timeline/universe to time travel within.

We already have proof in math that the universe is multi-dimensional, so there must be more than one timeline. It wouldn't make sense to have multi-dimensional objects but a flat universe.

##### Share on other sites

In my original timeline (pre-Titor), MWI was fringe science at best. Funny how things change.

##### Share on other sites

I like the "Titoriffic" button BTW. One "f" will do though. [DOUBLEPOST=1412247997,1412247434][/DOUBLEPOST]

Correct. After I experienced altervus (changes to my personal timeline) in 2001, MWI suddenly became the de facto theory. Titor claimed to be in contact with many scientists while here, apparently steering them in the direction we are on now.

• 1
##### Share on other sites

I like the "Titoriffic" button BTW. One "f" will do though.

Doh. Fixed!

##### Share on other sites

So, anyway, back to zero divergence...

• 1
##### Share on other sites

Sorry for diverging Paula. Faster than light might attain zero divergence. Some improved version of quantum teleportation could eventually allow information to travel to the direct past. There may be a problem with that though. Time itself may exist in multiple states, even inside of the same universe. Time travel (or time communication) could affect the past, but self-correct to avoid paradoxes and major shifts in reality. What do you think?

• 1
##### Share on other sites

I like the "Titoriffic" button BTW. One "f" will do though.

Doh. Fixed!

Hey, I kind of liked the double f, but I guess it doesn't make sense...

Sorry for diverging Paula.

:thumbsup:

##### Share on other sites

Hey, I kind of liked the double f, but I guess it doesn't make sense...

One of the Fs time traveled back in time and was just hanging out with his double. All good things come to an end.

##### Share on other sites

This is extracted from one of the original posts:"Is it physically possible for you to get back to THIS time line once you leave?"

John Titor: Not with the machine I have now.

---

I understand the implications of the above statement are endless, but I simply cannot fathom that there would never be technology developed that would enable one to go back home to zero divergence. Remember, zero divergence is mathematically possible, so all we need is the technology to do so. Could take 200 years to develop, could take 2 years from 2036, but regardless, I personally believe it will be possible!

Divergence is a mathematical concept (Calculus):

That's all well and good, the calculation of the divergence of a vector field, because you have the graph of the entire field and a single infinitesimal point in the field as a well defined reference. Easy peasy - plug and chug. But if you want to know the divergence associated with two vector fields and you take one of the graphs a billion light years from earth and ask someone who has never seen the other graph to make the calculation...?

That's the implied definition of "Titor's Divergence Techno-Babble". How do you compare one universe (an entire universe!) to another entire universe? They share no common frame of reference therefore what are they diverging from? How do you measure it given that the other universe is not part of your physical reality? You can't measure the physical state of space-time in a single shoebox let alone two entire universes.

• 3
##### Share on other sites

That's the implied definition of "Titor's Divergence Techno-Babble". How do you compare one universe (an entire universe!) to another entire universe? They share no common frame of reference therefore what are they diverging from? How do you measure it given that the other universe is not part of your physical reality? You can't measure the physical state of space-time in a single shoebox let alone two entire universes.

Math is math. It's not going to differ in another universe.

##### Share on other sites

Math is math. It's not going to differ in another universe.

But I think you missed his point. It is not the math he is talking about. It is the physics. Math is merely how the physics is quantified. And the purpose of a divergence is to act as a metric. So Darby's point about how you measure that metric is fundamental. And there has yet to be any quantified definition of any divergence metric in Titor's story. So, as a metric, his metric is a 100% failure. (pun intended)

RMT

##### Share on other sites

Steven Gibbs told me that zero divergence time travel is possible, but that he built the HDR to send you to other timelines to prevent it being used to predict horse races or in casino gaming. Also, that there is no Grandfather Paradox as what happens is that your timeline splits into two - the original timeline and a new one.
• 1
##### Share on other sites

he built the HDR to send you to other timelines to prevent it being used to predict horse races or in casino gaming

The innards of an HDR are pretty simple, from what I understand. What did he do to the design to achieve this?

##### Share on other sites

The innards of an HDR are pretty simple, from what I understand. What did he do to the design to achieve this?

Too bad I can't "double like" a post.

• 1
##### Share on other sites

• 5 months later...
This is extracted from one of the original posts:"Is it physically possible for you to get back to THIS time line once you leave?"

John Titor: Not with the machine I have now.

---

I understand the implications of the above statement are endless, but I simply cannot fathom that there would never be technology developed that would enable one to go back home to zero divergence. Remember, zero divergence is mathematically possible, so all we need is the technology to do so. Could take 200 years to develop, could take 2 years from 2036, but regardless, I personally believe it will be possible!

Divergence is a mathematical concept (Calculus):

Paula,

He was talking about a damned time machine. A TIME machine! WTF was stopping him from zipping a few years into the future to pick up the better technology? He said that they were working on developing the C206 gadget.

But to the central question: why no zero divergence? It's a system that generally unfolds as if governed by the laws of thermodynamics (probably because it is governed by the laws of thermodynamics). Thermodynamics is statistical in nature. You can predict the future evolution of the system in a general way but you can't, never, ever, predict the results of the evolution to an arbitrary degree of accuracy. You'll always have to include error bars. That's how our world works. We don't even have to refer to quantum mechanics to see this issue.

And then, within the Titor Saga, one has to open her eyes and look at what he wrote. Boomer was one of the better writers to come along. But his science stunk it up - big time. Go back and look at his posts. Some of the time he referred to this divergence crap. At other times he referred to Everett-Wheeler and Many Worlds Interpretation, which has nothing to do with what he termed divergence. In fact he said Everett-Wheeler was correct. In reference to that he clearly stated that this is not his world and that, because of Many Worlds, he can't go back to his world. Not because of some ill defined (undefined if the truth be told) notion of divergence but because of multiple universes.

In any case it was a garbled, almost entirely unintelligible mess and an arbitrary kit-bash of several theories tossed together like a salad and served up ad hoc as he responded to different posts. You might notice that his timeline for departure suddenly got moved up a few months when Dave Trott, a PhD in astrophysics candidate at the time, engaged him on the Post-2-Post "I am from 2036" thread. Boomer suddenly decided that his window was open and he had to leave. Dave is now an astronomer in Denver.

##### Share on other sites

Not because of some ill defined (undefined if the truth be told) notion of divergence but because of multiple universes.

Yep. As even someone with high school math skills understands, anything measured as a percentage has base units of measure associated with it. When pressed for those units of measure that define the relative measure of percent divergence, Titor could not answer except for the blindingly obvious answer: "It is an empirical measure." Well, of course it is. But that still does not answer with what units one measures something and compares it to something else with the same measure, from which one derived this divergence percentage.

The formula for percentage is no secret:

(x-y)/x * 100 = Percent divergence between x and y. And the ONLY rule in the use of this equation is that the units of x and y must be consistent. They must be the same. But Titor could never define those physical units. Ostensibly because nothing would truly make sense in a time travel story when in fact one must travel through Space-Time.

RMT

• 2
##### Share on other sites

• 1 year later...

So just to be sure, zero divergence mean John Titors start-worldline, right?

Sent from my ZTE Blade L3 using the TTI Forums mobile app

##### Share on other sites

So just to be sure, zero divergence mean John Titors start-worldline, right?

Sent from my ZTE Blade L3 using the TTI Forums mobile app

Yes, that's what I mean -- home.

##### Share on other sites

With or without Titor, zero divergence is mathematically possible.

Also, error and uncertainty is used in science all the time, but is this merely a human factor?  Could digital math (aka computers) eliminate uncertainty and errors so that with the proper technology, zero divergence could be achieved?