Jump to content

Are we presently caught in a paradox?


PrecursorHwy
 Share

Recommended Posts

How's about our own paradox? Only noticing the forward motion through time we cannot prove creation, we don't see that as universe expands history does also & everything changes beneath & including our own noses, so don't see the need to BE fit information to be able to go back from-time-to-time without a trace to precursors (warnings & influences) in time. Though creation may contribute to evolution, we can't prove it so become anti-creation & won't practice to be truthful, rather believing little lies putting holes in our reasoning. It's not known that who we are as children is a direct result of who we be as adults, so we'll each sit & ask why our creator gave us the lives we lead when it's we who won't contribute to creation.

 

Not sure if this qualifies as a paradox, but it is a darned conundrum. A time traveller species, kept Oblivious as to what to do to Do it, so instead do the ruddy opposite & not guard themselves screaming "there is no God", & building space contraptions to take the species forward, when that we change constantly, reviewed & redescribed back Really should've been made more obvious :-/ . Now why is it that it wasn't, & how did we get caught in this paradox where we not realize we live forever .. so don't? Actually, any paradox we are caught in, would we be oblivious & think it was all natural?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Perhaps history expansion is hidden since a time we had no more to ask & started to know all & each time die but then not, instead being reviewed & redescribed as don't? Then suddenly had everything been created to die from the get go. No trace of death not being normal. Is creation concealed since we die then not many times? Do we die then not many times since creation is concealed? Have they always been the reason for eachother now?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so first, AFAIK means "as far as I know" which I got from a quick 2 second Google search, and second, i read your post 3 times and still have no clue what paradox you're referring to so please do explain it more clearly. And to elaborate on what Kafke said, i think she is referring to modern day theoretical physics and the many worlds theory, which states that there are many parallel universes similar to ours. what this means is that if we were to time travel into the past and kill our grandpa it we would not create a paradox because we time travel into a parallel universe not our own.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please explain what AFAIK is, & why it's logically impossible? Your reply wasn't straight forward at all if you don't mind me saying.

AFAIK = "As far as I know", a common internet acronym. I frequent reddit, so perhaps these acronyms aren't used as often here?

 

As for why it's logically impossible, it's due to the definition of a paradox. See google's definition:

 

"a statement or proposition that, despite sound (or apparently sound) reasoning from acceptable premises, leads to a conclusion that seems senseless, logically unacceptable, or self-contradictory."

 

To clarify, a paradox occurs when you have to simultaneous contradictory states. Such as having your grandfather killed by you, as well as your grandfather being alive. That's a paradox, since both events can't simultaneously be true.

 

Instead, paradoxes need some sort of resolution in order to be held true/existent. You can either follow Novikov's self-consistency principle, where you have a single timeline, but nothing changing (you always miss when shooting your grandfather), or you can follow the many worlds interpretation, where the contradictory "changed" event is simply in another/alternate timeline (Much like John Titor's model). Both of these models will ultimately resolve any and all paradoxes that are able to occur. If something is logically able to take place in one of these two models, it's not a real paradox.

 

As such, paradoxes can't actually occur (in real life), since they will always be resolved in one of those two ways

 

Ok so first, AFAIK means "as far as I know" which I got from a quick 2 second Google search, and second, i read your post 3 times and still have no clue what paradox you're referring to so please do explain it more clearly. And to elaborate on what Kafke said, i think she is referring to modern day theoretical physics and the many worlds theory, which states that there are many parallel universes similar to ours. what this means is that if we were to time travel into the past and kill our grandpa it we would not create a paradox because we time travel into a parallel universe not our own.

That's one resolution. Having a self-consistent single timeline also works. Either interpretation/model may be true. Both resolve paradoxes and both may be used simultaneously. As for which is used IRL (in real life), we can't be sure until further study is done

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take writing in text lingo to be arrogant, but perhaps that's just me.

 

Right well how do i start.

 

To suggest cures for illnesses is commonly found to detect how those illnesses tick & has been paramount to many a scientific discovery. Sometimes suggestions can prove things to be illnesses what we wouldn't have otherwise recognised were. Working with only current knowledge on an illness mightn't be enough, as is to believe things aren't illnesses till we've experimented with them.

 

The illness: I spot we may be in a position where as long as we cannot prove creation (spontaneous generation) we thus aren't inclined to be fit information able to (as truth might) move faster than the speed of light to new precursors back in time, placed as universe expands history does also & everything change beneath & including our own noses. Wandering the earth all this time wondering "who's our missing link" & "we need a gadget to travel through time so let's look at the paradoxes".

 

Why would creation not be evident to a species who should use it to spontaneously generate back to new precursors we've known all our lives up to date? That creation is not evident can humans thus be anti-creation, & be open to introducing holes to their reasonings, being it's the opposite of what we're intended to do, & hangs out like a sore thumb? The only thumb in fact? The other it's opposite been hidden?

 

You will probably ask me to prove life we Know as running in forward motion isn't the only life we lead, to which i'll point out that all we know possibly isn't everything.

 

The Cause: Then i wondered that to spontaneously generate back to new precursors (back to new only-existences complete with again untold futures), one must experience some sort of shock & feel it as far back as a new precursor (remembered warning or influence) is placed. Had we no more to ask once & died, then, found to not, were we put here specifically to again & again know all & each time die upon the earth, feeling pains & anguish in travelling for eternity up & down life (the precursor highway), as long as remain fit information?

 

Cure: There can hardly be a cure for the position we're in, so long as there isn't raised some concern that we're In a position. Since what we'd be better off knowing (if this 'what' actually exists) can't be proven, i wonder is the position we're in an anomaly?

 

I do not speak of the multiverse theory, nor any involving gadgets to move the way we are to any when in time.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google's definition:

 

"a statement or proposition that, despite sound (or apparently sound) reasoning from acceptable premises, leads to a conclusion that seems senseless, logically unacceptable, or self-contradictory."

 

To clarify, a paradox occurs when you have to simultaneous contradictory states. Such as having your grandfather killed by you, as well as your grandfather being alive. That's a paradox, since both events can't simultaneously be true.

 

Instead, paradoxes need some sort of resolution in order to be held true/existent. You can either follow Novikov's self-consistency principle, where you have a single timeline, but nothing changing (you always miss when shooting your grandfather), or you can follow the many worlds interpretation, where the contradictory "changed" event is simply in another/alternate timeline (Much like John Titor's model). Both of these models will ultimately resolve any and all paradoxes that are able to occur. If something is logically able to take place in one of these two models, it's not a real paradox.

 

As such, paradoxes can't actually occur (in real life), since they will always be resolved in one of those two ways

 

That's one resolution. Having a self-consistent single timeline also works. Either interpretation/model may be true. Both resolve paradoxes and both may be used simultaneously. As for which is used IRL (in real life), we can't be sure until further study is done

Ok. Both of your models involve transporting the who you are now As you are now back to the past.

 

Also, if the position we're in (which i'm calling senseless, logically unacceptable & self contradictory), is subsequent to the norm wouldn't that mean it is an anomaly? A resolution of a paradox?

 

You suggest paradoxes occur when we have 2 simultaneous contradicting states, & one dominating the other be the resolution?

 

How do both models resolve paradoxes if both involve needing a gadget to timetravel & don't take creation into account?

 

And that there only be the both, i find laughable.

 

I'm sure they're not paradoxes for one factor. The means to discover them are also senseless, logically unacceptable & self-contradictory. By golly, moving faster than the speed of light to enter our pasts as who we are now would Hurt like no other self-contradiction experienced lol, i can tell you that now :) . I wonder the word paradox is still to be defined. At the moment it's still "nothing based on nothing = nothing" :) .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laughs at the single unchanging self-consistent timeline principle, & the changing of events in alternative timelines :) . Plus i don't think the word "sound" should be anywhere in the definition of the word paradox. It would be like saying that unless you think something's an illness, then it just isn't :) . Who makes this stuff up lol :) . I hope this site isn't just for people looking for what to write their next sci-fi on, i want to see some original ideas :) . Brainstorm a bit. i want to see if someone can change anothers mind in here, & if it's a battlefield to my liking :) .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by creation theory?

Ok. Creationists believe in the theory of creation, what until we find our missing link remains a valid theory, but still only a theory none the less. I'n as weirded out that i'm a creationist as anyone, but finding out i've an uncle who's a quantum physics prof. & close family with the unusual haplogroup R1b1b1 kinda clinched it. There's no two ways about it. And no gadgets :) .

 

What would you say moves faster than the speed of light? Would you say it was truth, or fit information?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose. I know a paradox is the result of an act which contradicts itself, & i wonder that a timetraveller species unable to prove creation so to live here all this time seeing little logic to as fit info spontaneously generate as more fit info, rather to be anti-creation, is a contradiction of our very selves. Thus, are we caught in a paradox where though we may have what we need before we need it, we won't be inclined to?

 

So your talking about intelligent design?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I normally don't give attention to those I view as trolls, especially ones who seem as incoherent and inconsistent as yourself, but this once I will make an exception.

 

Ok. Creationists believe in the theory of creation, what until we find our missing link remains a valid theory, but still only a theory none the less.

You might have your facts mixed up. The theory of creation is based upon the thought that god created humans and the earth within the last 10,000 years as is described in the book of genesis, in the christian holy book. I find it odd that you put a considerable amount of faith in your own beliefs and yet you dare to mock and scoff at those us of who think otherwise. Unless of course you are basing the theory of creation upon your own personal beliefs in science and religion, because as far as I know, Creationist do not believe in any sort of evolution, or "missing link".

 

What would you say moves faster than the speed of light?

Theoretically, any vehicle that is given a substantial amount of energy to fuel it can move faster than the speed of light, yet at the cost of an increase in mass the faster it goes. In true physical practice though, nothing has yet to have been found capable of moving faster than the speed of light, other than information.

 

You have referred to us being in some sort of situation which is a paradox, but you cannot clearly explain what this paradox is. I should remind you that this is a Time Travel forum, and not your personal blog, and I have yet to see how your thread relates to Time Travel.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'n as weirded out that i'm a creationist as anyone, but finding out i've an uncle who's a quantum physics prof. & close family with the unusual haplogroup R1b1b1 kinda clinched it.

o_O

 

I don't understand most of what you are trying to say but, I really have no idea what your uncle's Russian heritage has to do with the price of tea in China. A Russian (R1b-) physicist is not really that uncommon.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually my Ukraine uncle on my mothers side has lately been a quantum physics professor all my life, & not long after i find out that relatives on my fathers side were found with the R1b1b1, the footprint of the ancient celt. R1b1b1 & R1b1b2 were lately found to be the first of us to enter Briton. It's quite rare.

 

These are two examples of spontaneous generation of pastence on top of now. My uncle could be the son i never had eg. Nothing to do with tea, but a tea would be nice :) .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<><><><><><>

 

1. Perhaps i am a little incoherent but i'm not inconsistent. You'll notice this by your "making an exception".

 

2. Rased a Christian, i am a creationist, & it just so happens i do also believe in evolution. I suggest they walk hand in hand. I also give a suggestion as to who & where our missing links be. I give creationism a quantum edge, & because you've never seen it happen before, you say you find my proposition odd? Who are you? The experimentation police :-/ ?

 

It's a bit stereotypical of you to say i wouldn't believe in any sort of evolution, or "missing link", & that i have my "facts mixed up as far as you know". What does that even mean?? Do you suggest that what is as far as you know, is most likely probable? I don't think that's very constructive. I thought that sharing ideas was what this site was for, not going round & round in circles on some geniuses or whoevers firm belief. I do find that rather narrow minded. I came here for a discussion. And what do you mean by calling me a troll :-/ ? Sheesh!)

 

3. Why shouldn't i mock & scoff at them? Though great minds have come up with as-yet seemingly valid theories, they all followed up from the last of them saying "Nup, that's not how it is". I base my beliefs on creationism by the way, not the other way around. I'm a writer with 15 years worth of arsenal & a club of a hundred or so behind me. Try stop me.

 

As a mother of a teen, i don't do AFAIKs, fads & excuses :-/ .

 

4. Thankyou for your answer. Information's the one.

 

5. Re. "You have referred to us being in some sort of situation which is a paradox, but you cannot clearly explain what this paradox is. I should remind you that this is a Time Travel forum, and not your personal blog, and I have yet to see how your thread relates to Time Travel.

 

This thread titled "Are we caught in a paradox" does not suggest i have an explanation to offer. It's a yes or no question weather we're in a paradox or not. So shall i put you down for a flat-out "no" then? This paradox i suggest we're caught in, where who should be timetravel-capable only observe the forward motion through time, be oblivious to that creation contributes to evolution or even exists, & won't see why not lie, believe lies & have holes in their reasoning to be fit information to've lived back from recent precursors (memories) in the past (time-travel in the 1st degree), so guess it would be a "no". And i wonder all of us & i are caught in paradox to that effect. An abnormal state. I am here because i'm curious as to what may've been the cause, & to debate on the topic & if it so be one. I take it you don't think it is one? Ruddy paradox lol :) .

 

Troll? Phhht. Can't believe you insinuate i'm a troll & that i think this is my personal blog. And you call Me inconsistent :-/ . Are you Trying to Sabotage me or something? Unbelievable. Oh wait. Yep, it's believable lol.

 

I normally don't give attention to those I view as trolls, especially ones who seem as incoherent and inconsistent as yourself, but this once I will make an exception.You might have your facts mixed up. The theory of creation is based upon the thought that god created humans and the earth within the last 10,000 years as is described in the book of genesis, in the christian holy book. I find it odd that you put a considerable amount of faith in your own beliefs and yet you dare to mock and scoff at those us of who think otherwise. Unless of course you are basing the theory of creation upon your own personal beliefs in science and religion, because as far as I know, Creationist do not believe in any sort of evolution, or "missing link".

 

Theoretically, any vehicle that is given a substantial amount of energy to fuel it can move faster than the speed of light, yet at the cost of an increase in mass the faster it goes. In true physical practice though, nothing has yet to have been found capable of moving faster than the speed of light, other than information.

 

You have referred to us being in some sort of situation which is a paradox, but you cannot clearly explain what this paradox is. I should remind you that this is a Time Travel forum, and not your personal blog, and I have yet to see how your thread relates to Time Travel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did some posts go missing? I feel like more was on here yesterday. What do you mean by fit Information?

Right. Where was i?

 

What i mean by fit information is, any information what like truth can't be bound by time & space & may materialize anywhere. You yourself could be information.

 

Now I suggest that without creation, there would be no evolution.

 

You agree universe is expanding, correct? So what of history? I suggest it expands aswell & that "everything changes beneath & including our own noses" based on a Quantum theory that questions & answers crystallize simultaneously each at their own times, & on a Christian belief in having what we need before we need it. To evolve day by day for what is known as natural selection, is each time the result of a change in history also?

 

That this (let alone creation at all) can't be proven, does any sort of progress on the idea remain hindered, thus hindering our rate of evolution?

 

How are we all? And wow, there's stuff missing? I'd better check that :-/ .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand a paradox to be an impossible self-contradictory outcome. But what if, of all the luck we are caught in a possible paradox, self-contradictory ourselves & to've lived this way from the get-go without obvious purpose?

 

If a heap can consist of one grain of sand if 1000000 IRL (Sorites' paradox), if motion is impossible while no time lapses when an object is moving (Fletchers paradox), & if as universe expands history does also may we at any given instance have had any number of precursors we'd obliviously gone back to to change in a lifetime, & still be living in the same lifetime? The possible resolution to Sorites' & Fletchers paradoxes not having to do with 'grains' or 'an object in motion' at all, but rather the possibility of timetravel & our being oblivious to it? Are we caught in both of these paradoxes (& funnilly enough we can throw in the boat planks paradox for good measure).

 

They all hint at 1 answer, that's that we might change but still be all we've known all our lives at the same time. Then maybe we can add the epimenides "this statement is false" paradox, which could point out that information (even material information such as us) might exist at every instant however be not information at all & never will be. Statements still, however false.

 

I just blew my own mind :) .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, if I get this at all, here's what I am getting from your posts.

 

We are existing in a "reality" that is constantly being changed by someone...anyone...even ourselves... from a future that keep going back in time to change some event that, then changes the "history" of all of us but, we continue on as if nothing has changed because we can not be aware of the change.

 

Is that close?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...