Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!ucat!epimass!jbuck From: jbuck@epimass.UUCP (Joe Buck) Newsgroups: net.physics,net.sci,net.philosophy,net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: A Sane Man Proposes A Time Travel Experiment Message-ID: <354@epimass.UUCP> Date: Sat, 2-Aug-86 22:36:54 EDT Article-I.D.: epimass.354 Posted: Sat Aug 2 22:36:54 1986 Date-Received: Sun, 3-Aug-86 06:13:01 EDT References: <289@axiom.UUCP> <5723@lanl.ARPA> <7489@tekecs.UUCP> <83@unc.unc.UUCP> <556@sunybcs.UUCP> Reply-To: jbuck@epimass.UUCP (Joe Buck) Organization: Entropic Processing, Inc., Cupertino, CA Lines: 24 Xref: watmath net.physics:4735 net.sci:1447 net.philosophy:6431 net.sf-lovers:15617 In article <556@sunybcs.UUCP> tim@gort.UUCP (Timothy Thomas) writes: >Think about the logic in that. If we have to rely on somebody in the >future to help us, then we will wait forever. If some technology >is 'invented' or 'found' because of somebody in the future sending >it to us, that would be a contradiction. >Ok, fine, we now have some new tecnology. So in the future (since it >has already happened), we send it back to ourselves again. Where did >it originate??? There is no way any new knowledge from the future >can enter into the present or past because of this knowledge must >originate someplace, or be found (found meaning discovered on its >own or invented, not handed to by some future scientist). Why would it be a contradiction? Causal loops are certainly strange, but they can be drawn on a Minkowski space-time diagram easily enough. "Contradiction" means that the statements "A" and "not A" are both true. For example, going back in time and killing my (younger) self cause a contradiction, where A is the statement "I exist at time t". But you're stating "knowledge must originate someplace (and time)?" as a postulate; it's not an axiom of logic. It only contradicts intuition. -- - Joe Buck {ihnp4!pesnta,oliveb,nsc!csi}!epimass!jbuck Entropic Processing, Inc., Cupertino, California