Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!cbosgd!ihnp4!mmm!cipher
From: cipher@mmm.UUCP (Andre Guirard)
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.sci,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Re: Re: A Sane Man Proposes A Time Travel Experiment
Message-ID: <1044@mmm.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 8-Aug-86 13:37:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: mmm.1044
Posted: Fri Aug  8 13:37:00 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 10-Aug-86 06:02:23 EDT
References: <289@axiom.UUCP> <5723@lanl.ARPA> <720@riccb.UUCP> <1037@mmm.UUCP> <722@riccb.UUCP>
Reply-To: cipher@mmm.UUCP (Andre Guirard)
Organization: 3M Company, St. Paul, Minn.
Lines: 62
Xref: watmath net.physics:4790 net.sci:1484 net.philosophy:6497

In article <722@riccb.UUCP> jmc@riccb.UUCP (Jeff McQuinn ) writes:
>>>My concept of having this time
>>>trip would have to unhappen.  So here I somehow am an hour before with no
>>>concept of having gotten here, and no idea of whats going to happen.  Since
>>>my time trip unhappened I didn't do it and since I don't know I
>>>didn't do it I couldn't prove that I didn't (-: do it.  I would
>>>expect a short circuit on the attempt and see no results...
>> 
>> But you _could_ prove it!  You need a non-deterministic random-number
>> generator, one based on atomic decay for instance.  Use this device to
>> generate a random number in the range 0 to 99.  Then, if the number is
>> not 42, use your experimental time-machine to reset time to just before
>> the number was generated.  Repeat this procedure 10,000 times.  If the
>> time-machine works, you will observe that the random-number generator
>> generated the same number, 42, 10,000 times.
>
>No, I can't prove it, if backing up in time causes things to
>"unhappen".  If I can back up without short circuiting time I would
>lose knowledge of the fact that I did it.

But if you back up to a time after you _decided_ to back up you will
still remember _deciding_ to do it.  Your subsequent inability to
activate the time-machine should tell you something.  Incidentally,
deciding to activate the time machine no matter what is very dangerous,
since in order to get past that point in time something catasrophic has
to happen to either you or the machine.

> Granted it would look like I
>hit 42 every time but I will never know I tried to back up in time and
>thus would not be able to prove that time travel was responsible for
>the random number generator getting stuck.

Not if you mean with 100% certainty, but with a much higher degree of
certainty than most other scientific "facts" are known.  You want to
try to eliminate other factors (such as a malfunction in the RNG) by
repeating the experiment and running control experiments with no time
machine.

>In fact since every attempt
>to back up in time "unhappens" it could be argued that successful
>attempts at time travel were never made.  But they were never made
>because they were successful!

If that's true, there would appear to be two "levels" of time.  The
"base level" which we are accustomed to, and the "meta-level" in which
the base level may appear to change as time-travel takes place.  The
event of a successful experiment never appears in the final
configuration of base level, but a meta-level observer could remember
the experiment taking place.

>Since the events of the future have not yet happened, their time has not been
>created, there is no future "time" to travel to.

Is there experimental evidence that would tend to confirm or refute
this position?  Anyone?  I think it's silly to believe things without
evidence.
-- 

 /''`\   500cr REWARD!!!                                Andre Guirard
([]-[])  For information leading to the capture         ihnp4!mmm!cipher
 \ ) /   of Silas Thornby, alias the Line Eater.        la plej bela ^sultro
  `-'    Contact: Vid. Arthune, 09DART-447243 Terra