Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Temporal paradox

A temporal paradox, also known as a time paradox or time travel paradox, refers to a logical contradiction or apparent inconsistency that arises from the hypothetical scenarios involving , closed timelike curves, or other forms of temporal manipulation, challenging the principles of and consistency in both and physics. The most prominent example is the grandfather paradox, in which a time traveler journeys to the past and kills their own grandfather before their parent is conceived, thereby preventing their own existence and creating a self-contradictory causal loop. Another key type is the bootstrap paradox, involving or objects that exist in a closed causal loop without an identifiable origin, such as a time traveler providing a future inventor with the blueprint for a that enables the travel in the first place. Philosophically, temporal paradoxes raise fundamental questions about the nature of time, , and ; for instance, presentist views of time, which hold that only the present exists, render backward inherently paradoxical, while eternalist perspectives, where past, present, and future coexist, allow for potential resolutions through or improbable coincidences preventing contradictions. In physics, permits structures like closed timelike curves (CTCs) via wormholes or rotating black holes, which could enable but risk paradoxes; however, Stephen Hawking's posits that quantum effects would prevent such curves from forming to safeguard . Recent theoretical work has proposed paradox-free models of time travel; for example, Germain Tobar and Fabio Costa's 2020 analysis demonstrates that events on CTCs remain self-consistent, allowing free choice without logical contradictions by adjusting subsequent timelines dynamically. Similarly, Lorenzo Gavassino's 2024 study integrates and to show that quantum fluctuations along CTCs enforce by reversing , thus resolving paradoxes like the grandfather without violating physical laws. In 2025, proposed a model suggesting that is self-suppressing, explaining the absence of observed time travelers through the instability of timelines enabling such travel. These advancements suggest that while practical remains unfeasible, temporal paradoxes may not preclude its theoretical possibility.

Fundamental Concepts

Definition of Temporal Paradox

A temporal paradox refers to an apparent or actual in that emerges from the possibility of , where events in the future can influence or alter their own past, leading to logical inconsistencies within the . This arises particularly in scenarios involving backward causation, where an action taken after an event could prevent or modify the conditions that enabled that action in the first place. Key characteristics of temporal paradoxes include the involvement of closed timelike curves (CTCs) in geometry, as permitted by solutions to Einstein's general , which allow a worldline to loop back on itself and intersect its earlier points. Such curves enable backward , potentially resulting in inconsistencies like an event causing its own non-occurrence, thereby challenging the unidirectional flow of cause and effect. For instance, causal loops represent a primary example where information or objects circulate without an originating cause, though these are explored in greater detail elsewhere. The concept of temporal paradoxes originated in science fiction and philosophical discussions, with early literary explorations of time travel appearing in H.G. Wells' The Time Machine (1895), which introduced the idea of traversing time as a dimension akin to space. It gained formalization in 20th-century physics through analyses of general relativity, notably Kurt Gödel's 1949 model of a rotating universe containing CTCs, which highlighted the potential for causal violations. Unlike spatial paradoxes, which involve puzzles of infinity or division in three-dimensional space without disrupting sequence (such as of motion), temporal paradoxes specifically exploit the and relativistic effects, where the introduces possibilities of absent in purely spatial contexts.

Time Travel Frameworks in Physics

In , the theoretical framework for emerges from solutions to Einstein's field equations that permit closed timelike curves (CTCs), which are worldlines in allowing a particle to return to its own past. These curves arise in certain exact solutions where the geometry of spacetime twists in a way that can be violated. A seminal example is Kurt Gödel's rotating universe solution, which describes a homogeneous, rotating filled with dust matter, where every point in space has associated CTCs encircling the of . In this model, the rotation induces a global dragging of inertial , enabling paths that loop without singularities or horizons. Wormholes provide another pathway for constructing time machines within , particularly traversable wormholes that connect distant regions of and can be manipulated to form CTCs. In , Michael Morris and proposed a class of spherically symmetric, static wormholes characterized by a metric with a throat of finite radius, requiring "exotic matter" with density to keep the throat open against . If one mouth of such a is accelerated relative to the other or placed in a strong , the between mouths can create a time shift, allowing traversable paths that lead to the past upon re-emergence. To address the paradoxes potentially arising from CTCs, proposed the in 1992, suggesting that quantum effects in curved would prevent the formation of such curves by rendering the required conditions physically unrealizable. Specifically, attempts to create CTCs, such as through stabilization, would amplify vacuum fluctuations near the chronology-violating regions, leading to infinite energy densities that collapse the structure via the backreaction on the geometry.

Types of Temporal Paradoxes

Causal Loops

A causal loop, also known as a closed causal curve, arises in time travel scenarios where an event in the future influences a past event, which in turn causes the future event, forming a self-sustaining cycle without an external origin. This mechanism challenges linear by allowing information, objects, or actions to propagate backward in time along closed timelike curves (CTCs) in , as permitted in certain solutions to . In such loops, the chain of causation is circular, meaning no initial cause exists outside the loop itself, leading to scenarios where effects precede their apparent causes. The bootstrap paradox represents a specific variant of the causal loop, named after the idiom of "pulling oneself up by one's bootstraps," which implies an impossible self-origin. In this paradox, an object or piece of information is sent back in time and becomes the source of its own existence; for instance, a time traveler from the future delivers an unwritten play to , who then publishes it, inspiring the traveler in their original timeline to retrieve and deliver it. This creates an acausal origin, as the play has no true creator or starting point, raising profound questions about the emergence of novelty in a deterministic . The term was popularized in discussions of paradoxes, highlighting how such loops evade traditional notions of information conservation. Physically, causal loops are theoretically permissible in spacetimes containing CTCs, such as those described in Gödel's rotating universe or traversable wormholes, without violating conservation laws like or , as the loop maintains overall . However, they pose challenges to linear and the second law of , as information appears to originate ex nihilo, potentially destabilizing predictability in physical systems. Analyses in suggest that while no net energy violation occurs, the loops question the foundational , with stability depending on self-consistent configurations. For example, in the scenario from the film Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, where the protagonists deliver a history book to their past selves to pass an exam, the loop sustains itself without contradiction, though it exemplifies originless ; such cases have been examined in physics literature for their implications on loop stability in relativistic spacetimes. The posits that only stable loops can form, ensuring no paradoxical divergences.

Consistency Paradoxes

Consistency paradoxes emerge from scenarios in which a time traveler seeks to modify past events, resulting in logical contradictions that undermine the coherence of a single, fixed . These paradoxes highlight the tension between the act of intervention and the necessity of historical consistency, where any change propagates forward to negate the conditions enabling the change itself. The core example is the grandfather paradox, where a er journeys to the past and assassinates their grandfather prior to the conception of their parent. This action would prevent the traveler's own existence, rendering the —and the assassination—impossible, thereby creating an irresolvable contradiction. This formulation assumes a linear in which and remain invariant, such that altering an ancestral event disrupts the causal chain leading to the present. Variants of the grandfather paradox extend this inconsistency to other self-negating interventions. In the retro-suicide paradox, also known as autoinfanticide, the traveler attempts to kill their own younger self, which would preclude their survival to undertake the journey, mirroring the logical impasse of the original scenario. Another variant involves historical inconsistency, such as a traveler trying to avert a well-documented event like the outbreak of a major war; success would rewrite known history, contradicting the traveler's origin in a timeline where the event occurred. Logically, these paradoxes are structured around a single and can be formalized in terms of self-contradiction: if an action P (e.g., killing the grandfather) causally entails its own ~P (e.g., the traveler's non-existence), then the scenario leads to inconsistency, as P cannot both occur and be impossible. This reasoning draws on principles, where the possibility of pastward implies compossible events that violate consistency constraints. The grandfather paradox was first described in science fiction in the early , with prominent early examples in Nathaniel Schachner's 1933 short story "Ancestral Voices" and René Barjavel's 1943 novel Le Voyageur Imprudent. Such paradoxes also raise brief challenges to , as the fixed past appears to constrain intentional actions across time.

Predestination Paradoxes

A arises in time travel scenarios where a traveler's actions, informed by of events, inadvertently cause or reinforce those very events, creating a self-fulfilling loop that upholds the original timeline. Unlike attempts to alter history that lead to outright contradictions, this paradox maintains by ensuring that interventions become integral to the causal chain they aimed to disrupt. For instance, a traveler seeking to prevent a disaster might unknowingly set the conditions for it to occur, rendering their foreknowledge prophetic in a circular manner. The mechanism relies on the interplay between personal time—experienced by the traveler—and external time in the , where future-derived information prompts behaviors that close the loop without external origin. David Lewis describes this as a situation where "the parts of the loop are explicable, the whole of it is not," emphasizing that such paradoxes pose no logical impossibility but challenge intuitive notions of linear causation. This preserves integrity, as any deviation would violate self-consistency principles, forcing outcomes to align with predestined events regardless of intent. A prominent example appears in the film series, where John Connor sends Kyle Reese back in time to protect his mother, Sarah Connor, from a terminator sent by ; Reese's mission not only ensures Sarah's survival and John's conception but also provides the chip that enables Skynet's rise, the very threat Connor sought to avert. This illustrates how reinforces destiny, with the travelers' efforts embedding them within the events they know from the future. Philosophically, paradoxes echo ancient , as seen in tragedies where characters' attempts to evade prophesied fates precipitate them, and analyzes them as compatible with , where fixed timelines allow for within constrained possibilities.

Philosophical Implications

Free Will and Determinism

Temporal paradoxes, particularly those involving travel to a fixed , pose a profound challenge to the notion of by suggesting a deterministic in which individual choices are illusory. In such scenarios, the past is unalterable, implying that any attempt to change events—such as in the grandfather paradox, where a time traveler seeks to kill their own ancestor—must fail to maintain consistency, thereby rendering apparent decisions predetermined outcomes rather than genuine acts of . This core conflict pits a deterministic interpretation of , where timelines are rigidly fixed, against the possibility of branching paths that could preserve libertarian , allowing for alternative choices without . Compatibilist philosophers argue that free will can coexist with , even in the context of immutable pasts, by redefining as the to act in accordance with one's motivations and reasons without external compulsion. , in his 1984 work Elbow Room, contends that is valuable precisely because it emerges from complex, evolved processes within a determined framework, where individuals control their actions relative to their desires and environment, rather than possessing absolute . Similarly, David Lewis addresses the grandfather paradox by distinguishing between local abilities (e.g., a traveler has the physical means to perform an action) and global constraints (e.g., logical impossibility of altering fixed history), preserving a form of responsible without requiring the power to do otherwise in an absolute sense. Under this view, time travelers retain insofar as their behaviors align with their intentional states, even if the overall timeline is causally closed. In contrast, incompatibilists critique these positions by asserting that temporal paradoxes like the grandfather scenario demonstrate the impossibility of in a unchangeable , as any to deviate from historical facts leads to contradiction, effectively eliminating alternative possibilities essential for true . Theodore Sider highlights this tension, noting that the paradox forces a reevaluation of : if a traveler is inevitably prevented from acting on their intentions due to consistency, it suggests an external compulsion akin to , undermining . paradoxes, where future knowledge predetermines actions, further illustrate this critique by reinforcing the illusion of choice in a looped . This debate traces historical roots to Pierre-Simon Laplace's 1814 formulation of the "demon" thought experiment, which posits a superintelligence capable of predicting all future events from initial conditions in a deterministic universe, leaving no room for uncaused volition. Extending this to temporal loops, the entire sequence of events becomes eternally fixed, amplifying deterministic implications for agency and echoing longstanding philosophical concerns about whether human decisions can ever transcend causal necessity.

Ontological and Logical Challenges

The ontological paradox in time travel arises from causal loops where objects, , or individuals appear without a discernible , challenging fundamental notions of and . For instance, a time traveler might receive of a from themselves, using it to create the invention in the present, forming a closed loop with no initial cause. This creates an ontological issue because the 's lacks a foundational source, raising questions about how entities can persist or originate in such self-sustaining cycles. These loops exacerbate problems of over time, particularly when produces duplicate selves that coexist at the same external moment but differ in experiences or states. Philosopher David Lewis addresses this in his analysis of a traveler meeting their younger self: the two instances are stages of the same person connected by personal time—a subjective sequence of experiences like aging and memory—rather than external time, which measures objective duration. This distinction preserves identity continuity, treating the self as a "zig-zag" path through , but it invites scrutiny similar to the paradox, where an entity's sameness is questioned amid replacement or duplication of parts; here, temporal stages replace or overlap, potentially fragmenting the unified self. Logical challenges emerge from self-referential statements temporalized, akin to the ("this sentence is false"), but involving future-past dependencies that yield undecidable truth values. Consider the claim: "I will invent after receiving instructions from my future self." If the invention occurs, the instructions must have been sent, but their origin traces back indefinitely, creating a where the statement's truth presupposes its own fulfillment without resolution. Such propositions resist assignment of stable truth values, as their verification depends on circular causation. To model these, philosophers employ , as developed by Arthur N. Prior, which introduces operators for past (P) and future (F) to formalize tense and modality, revealing paradoxes as undecidable within linear time frameworks. Prior's system treats self-referential temporal claims as potentially inconsistent or incomplete, much like Gödelian undecidability in formal systems, without requiring alterations to . Lewis further distinguishes external consistency (alignment with objective ) from (coherence within personal timelines), arguing that while external paradoxes appear contradictory, they dissolve internally, allowing time travel's logical possibility despite oddities.

Physical and Theoretical Resolutions

Novikov Self-Consistency Principle

The , formulated by Russian physicist in collaboration with others during the late 1980s, asserts that in spacetimes permitting closed timelike curves (CTCs), the laws of physics allow only globally self-consistent solutions to occur. Paradoxical events, which would alter the past in a way that prevents their own occurrence, are forbidden and assigned a probability of zero. This principle emerged from analyses of the in , demonstrating that initial data leading to inconsistencies cannot propagate through CTCs without violating the . The mechanism underlying self-consistency relies on constraints that eliminate inconsistent trajectories. In classical models, such as the billiard ball paradox, a particle attempting to collide with its past self in a manner that changes its results in no valid solution to the dynamical equations, as the motion must satisfy boundary conditions imposed by the CTC. Quantum extensions, developed by in 1991, incorporate destructive interference: inconsistent paths, treated as superpositions, cancel out due to phase differences, leaving only self-consistent outcomes with non-zero . This aligns with the principle's core idea that the enforces consistency to avoid logical contradictions. In a quantum mechanical framework inspired by Richard Feynman's , the probability P(E) of an event E in a CTC is determined solely by contributions from consistent paths: P(E) = \frac{\left| \sum_{\substack{\text{paths} \\ \text{consistent with } E}} A_{\text{path}} \right|^2}{\sum_{\text{all paths}} |A_{\text{path}}|^2}, where A_{\text{path}} represents the complex associated with each path. Inconsistent paths, which would lead to paradoxes, do not contribute coherently to the numerator, effectively yielding P(E) = 0 for such events. This probabilistic constraint ensures that the timeline remains unaltered by . A key application of the principle is its resolution of the grandfather paradox, where a time traveler's attempt to assassinate their own grandfather fails due to improbable but enforced consistency—such as the weapon malfunctioning or an unforeseen obstacle intervening—rendering the paradoxical action impossible with probability zero. This framework supports the existence of stable causal loops, where events form self-reinforcing cycles, as long as they maintain overall integrity.

Parallel Universes Hypothesis

The parallel universes hypothesis, rooted in the of , proposes a resolution to temporal paradoxes by positing that time travel induces branching into distinct, non-interacting timelines. This framework originates from Hugh Everett III's 1957 formulation, which describes the universe's as evolving unitarily without collapse, resulting in a superposition of all possible outcomes that manifest as parallel branches of reality. When extended to scenarios involving closed timelike curves (CTCs) in , this interpretation allows interventions in the past—such as those leading to consistency paradoxes—to spawn new universes rather than altering the original timeline, thereby preserving causal integrity across the . In this mechanism, each quantum event or deliberate action by a time traveler effectively decoheres the wave function, creating divergent histories where contradictory outcomes coexist without interaction. For instance, in the grandfather paradox, the traveler's attempt to prevent their own birth would succeed in a newly branched , leaving the original intact and the traveler originating from an unaltered history. This branching avoids single-timeline contradictions by distributing possibilities across an ever-expanding ensemble of worlds, ensuring that all logically consistent outcomes occur somewhere in the . formalized this approach in , demonstrating through quantum computation models in CTCs that parallel histories can maintain global consistency, as quantum states from different branches contribute to resolving apparent paradoxes without violating unitarity. Criticisms of the parallel universes hypothesis within this context highlight the conceptual and physical challenges of infinite branching, particularly the implied ontological extravagance and potential strain on laws. Max Tegmark's 2003 classification of the many-worlds as a Level III underscores these issues, noting that the proliferation of branches raises questions about the resources required to sustain an infinite array of coexisting realities, including apparent violations of in the superposition of outcomes. Despite such concerns, the hypothesis remains influential for its alignment with unitary quantum evolution and avoidance of measurement postulates.

Impossibility and Alternative Time Models

One prominent argument against the possibility of posits that it leads to logical impossibilities, such as violations of the second law of thermodynamics or requirements for infinite causal regress, rendering backward causation inherently improbable. Philosopher Paul Horwich, in his 1987 analysis, adopts an "impossibilist" stance, contending that into the past would necessitate a series of highly improbable coincidences to avoid paradoxes, which strains the explanatory framework of physics and . For instance, any attempt to alter past events would require the to align in extraordinarily specific ways, effectively making such travel not just unlikely but explanatorily untenable without invoking mechanisms. In theories, time itself may emerge as an illusion from a more fundamental timeless structure, thereby obviating the paradoxes associated with . The Wheeler-DeWitt equation, developed in the 1960s, encapsulates this view by describing the of the without an explicit time parameter, suggesting that time arises approximately from the dynamics of a static wavefunction. The equation takes the form: \hat{H} \psi = 0 where \hat{H} is the constraint operator and \psi is the wavefunction of the , implying a timeless from which temporal evolution emerges relationally rather than intrinsically. This framework, rooted in , portrays the as a fixed configuration space where apparent change results from correlations among , eliminating the basis for backward . Building on such ideas, physicist proposes a fully timeless in which change is purely relational, further undermining the concept of temporal paradoxes by denying the objective flow of time altogether. In his 1999 work, Barbour argues that the consists of a static "Nows"—instantaneous configurations of —linked only by their relational similarities, creating the illusion of passage without any underlying temporal dimension. This relational view, inspired by Machian principles, renders backward impossible because there is no linear to traverse; instead, all possible configurations coexist eternally, and our perception of history emerges from the of these relations.

Modern Developments and Criticisms

Quantum Mechanics Interpretations

In , temporal paradoxes associated with closed timelike curves (CTCs) can be mitigated through models that incorporate processing, allowing for consistent resolutions without classical contradictions. David Deutsch's 1991 framework proposes simulating CTCs using quantum computers, where a interacts with its future self via post-selection on consistent outcomes, ensuring that only paradox-free evolutions occur. This approach leverages and measurement to enforce self-consistency, demonstrating that can "resolve" paradoxes by selecting timelines where information loops do not lead to inconsistencies, such as the grandfather paradox. John Archibald 's 1978 delayed-choice illustrates how quantum measurements can exhibit apparent retrocausal features in interpretation, where the choice of observation apparatus after a has traversed a double-slit setup determines its wave or particle behavior as analyzed. This highlights quantum non-locality and the role of measurement in outcomes but does not imply actual influencing past physical events. Experimental realizations, such as those using entangled , have confirmed these effects without invoking actual , providing insights into quantum correlations that may inform but not directly resolve macroscopic temporal paradoxes. Building on these ideas, experimental simulations of CTCs have advanced in , with Ringbauer et al. in 2014 demonstrating a photonic setup where a interacts unitarily with a simulated future version of itself, achieving nonlinear evolution while preserving consistency. Extensions in the , including simulations using continuous-variable systems and weak measurements, have shown computational advantages like enhanced state discrimination, all without creating real temporal loops or paradoxes. These experiments highlight ' ability to model scenarios probabilistically, yielding practical benefits in tasks. Recent theoretical advancements further explore paradox-free time travel. In 2020, Germain Tobar and Fabio Costa demonstrated that events on CTCs remain self-consistent, allowing free choice without logical contradictions by dynamically adjusting subsequent timelines. Similarly, Lorenzo Gavassino's 2024 study integrates and , showing that quantum fluctuations along CTCs enforce consistency by reversing , thus resolving paradoxes like the grandfather scenario without violating physical laws. Despite these insights, quantum interpretations do not enable macroscopic time travel, as decoherence rapidly collapses superpositions in larger systems, restoring classical paradoxes. At classical scales, inconsistencies persist, underscoring that while quantum models resolve microscopic temporal issues, they do not extend to everyday objects or human-scale interventions.

Criticisms of Time Travel Viability

One prominent empirical critique of time travel viability stems from the complete absence of observed time travelers or closed timelike curves (CTCs) in the universe, echoing the Fermi paradox's "Where is everybody?" query adapted to temporal contexts. In 2009, physicist conducted an experiment by hosting a party open exclusively to time travelers, publicizing the event's details only after it occurred; no attendees appeared, bolstering arguments that if backward time travel were possible, evidence from future visitors would be ubiquitous. This lack of empirical support aligns with Hawking's , which posits that physical laws prevent CTC formation to safeguard , though no direct violations have been detected despite extensive astronomical observations. Theoretical challenges from further undermine models, particularly at Planck scales where breaks down. In , mechanisms like the enhancon and Hagedorn prevent CTCs by causing instabilities in geometries that would otherwise permit time loops, as demonstrated in analyses of solutions where winding strings condense near potential chronology horizons. Similarly, (LQG) formulations suggest that quantum discreteness enforces chronology protection by resolving singularities, with studies indicating that no stable CTCs emerge in quantized geometries. These post-2000 developments highlight how theories inherently block traversable without invoking prohibitions. Critiques also target the outdated foundations of many 1990s proposals, such as -based models, which overlooked resolutions to the and their implications for spacetime stability. Leonard Susskind's early (1995) argued that information is preserved on horizons, but subsequent 2020s advancements, including replica calculations in AdS/CFT correspondence, have shown how restores unitarity in evaporating black holes, rendering classical traversability untenable due to emergent firewalls or . These updates expose flaws in pre-2000 models that assumed lossless through CTCs, now contradicted by quantum corrections that prioritize over paradoxical loops. Although primarily theoretical, ethical concerns amplify viability critiques by highlighting risks of weaponized time travel, such as targeted historical interventions that could destabilize societies or enable infinite-loop escalations in conflicts. Philosophers argue that even hypothetical access to such raises moral imperatives against its development, given the potential for irreversible causal disruptions akin to deploying an uncontrollable superweapon, though these remain speculative absent empirical feasibility.

References

  1. [1]
    Time Travel - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Nov 14, 2013 · Time travel is impossible, improbable and inexplicable. Here's an argument to the conclusion that backwards time travel simply will not occur.2. The Grandfather Paradox · 3. Causation · 4. Time And Change
  2. [2]
    Time Travel | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    One standard definition is that of David Lewis's: an object time travels iff the difference between its departure and arrival times in the surrounding world ...4. Time In Physics · D. Quantum Interpretations · 5. CausationMissing: scholarly | Show results with:scholarly
  3. [3]
    Time Travel and Modern Physics
    Feb 17, 2000 · The most famous paradox is the grandfather paradox: you travel back in time and kill your grandfather, thereby preventing your own existence. To ...Missing: scholarly | Show results with:scholarly
  4. [4]
    Reversible dynamics with closed time-like curves and freedom of ...
    The main problem arising when abandoning ordinary causality is the so called 'grand father paradox' [40]: a time traveller could kill her own grandfather and ...
  5. [5]
    Life on a closed timelike curve - IOPscience
    On a closed timelike curve, a spaceship's energy levels must discretize, memories are erased, and entropy returns to its initial value after a roundtrip.
  6. [6]
    [1008.1127] Closed timelike curves and causality violation - arXiv
    Aug 6, 2010 · A closed timelike curve (CTC) allows time travel, enabling an observer to return to an event before their departure, which violates causality.Missing: temporal | Show results with:temporal
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Time-Travel Paradoxes and Multiple Histories - arXiv
    Sep 24, 2020 · Information in a bootstrap paradox has no clear origin and does not appear to be conserved, and events can occur which are impossible to predict ...
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Time Travel Paradoxes and Entangled Timelines - arXiv
    The bootstrap paradox can also easily be resolved using parallel timelines. In timeline 0, Bob works hard and eventually finishes writing his book. He then ...
  9. [9]
    [quant-ph/0506141] Quantum mechanics and the time travel paradox
    Jun 17, 2005 · Abstract: The closed causal chains arising from backward time travel do not lead to paradoxes if they are self consistent.
  10. [10]
    Time loops may not be forbidden by physics after all | New Scientist
    Jul 5, 2022 · Physicists find that causal loops, where two events separated in time influence each other in paradoxical ways, are allowed in many theoretical universes.
  11. [11]
    [PDF] CAN I KILL MY YOUNGER SELF? TIME TRAVEL AND THE RETRO ...
    Jun 3, 2003 · Two ver- sions of RSP can be distinguished: an easier version according to which I cannot commit retro- suicide because I cannot change the ...
  12. [12]
    [PDF] Notes on The Grandfather Paradox - MIT
    The last few scenes in the movie depict Marty's dad as extremely cool throughout the very same stretch of time. If there is just one time line in this story. ( ...
  13. [13]
    [PDF] Dissecting The Grandfather Paradox - Scholarship @ Claremont
    Apr 12, 2017 · A possible objection to Lewis' grandfather paradox is based on rejecting the fact that an individual traveling back in time truly has the ...
  14. [14]
    None
    ### Summary of David Lewis's Discussion on Predestination Paradoxes in Time Travel
  15. [15]
    [PDF] Paradoxes of Human Will in the Time Travel Film - HARVEST (uSask)
    This study discusses how the literary device of time travel can limit or empower protagonists. ... “Some Paradoxes of Time Travel in The Terminator and 12 Monkeys ...
  16. [16]
    Foreknowledge and Free Will - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Jul 6, 2004 · Theological fatalism argues that infallible foreknowledge of a human act makes it necessary and unfree, implying no free will.
  17. [17]
    [PDF] A New Grandfather Paradox? | Ted Sider
    The argument that. Tim cannot kill Grandfather is not simply the old argument that determinism is incompatible with free will—its motivation is quite different.
  18. [18]
    a philosophical essay on probabilities. - Project Gutenberg
    A PHILOSOPHICAL ESSAY ON PROBABILITIES. BY PIERRE SIMON, Marquis de LAPLACE. TRANSLATED FROM THE SIXTH FRENCH EDITION
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Paradoxes and Hypodoxes of Time Travel © Peter Eldridge-Smith ...
    involving a time travel paradox is a story about the impossible, involving mutually exclusive events. A Liar paradox entails a contradiction; so a Liar ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  20. [20]
    Temporal Logic - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Nov 29, 1999 · Zeno's famous flying arrow paradox refers to the nature of time and challenges the notion of change.
  21. [21]
    Past, Present and Future - Arthur N. Prior - Oxford University Press
    Free delivery 25-day returns... Past, Present and Future Remove. $135.00. Hardcover. Published: 31 December 1967. 228 Pages. ISBN: 9780198243113. Access for individuals in subscribing ...
  22. [22]
    Cauchy problem in spacetimes with closed timelike curves
    Sep 15, 1990 · Cauchy problem in spacetimes with closed timelike curves. John Friedman and Michael S. Morris · Igor D. Novikov · Fernando Echeverria, Gunnar ...
  23. [23]
    [gr-qc/0410035] Time travel paradoxes, path integrals, and the many ...
    Oct 7, 2004 · Time travel paradoxes, path integrals, and the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Authors:Allen Everett (Tufts University).Missing: primary | Show results with:primary
  24. [24]
    Asymmetries In Time - MIT Press
    In this intriguing book, Paul Horwich makes precise and explicit the interrelationships between time and a large number of philosophically important notions.Asymmetries In Time · Paperback · $50.00Missing: impossibility | Show results with:impossibility
  25. [25]
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/multiverse-the-case-for-parallel-universe/
  26. [26]
    [PDF] The "Past" and the - "Delayed-Choice" Double-Slit Experiment
    More than any other design feature, the delayed-choice double-slit experiment calls for beams directed from the two slits towards the plane of interference and ...
  27. [27]
    Why Did No One Come To Stephen Hawking's Time Traveler Party?
    Jul 27, 2022 · On June 28, 2009, Stephen Hawking sat alone in a college at the University of Cambridge and waited patiently for party guests to arrive, ...Missing: banquet | Show results with:banquet
  28. [28]
    When Stephen Hawking Threw a Cocktail Party for Time Travelers
    Mar 14, 2018 · Hawking's party was actually an experiment on the possibility of time travel. (Invitations were sent only after the party was over.)Missing: banquet | Show results with:banquet
  29. [29]
    [hep-th/0302052] Chronology Protection in String Theory - arXiv
    Aug 16, 2003 · The agent of chronology protection for the geometries studied here mirrors the enhancon mechanism, a mechanism string theory employs to resolve ...
  30. [30]
    Hagedorn transition and chronology protection in string theory
    Nov 14, 2005 · We conjecture chronology is protected in string theory due to the condensation of light winding strings near closed null curves. This ...
  31. [31]
    [2104.04394] A Short Review of Loop Quantum Gravity - arXiv
    Apr 9, 2021 · Loop quantum gravity (LQG) is a leading approach toward this goal. At its heart is the central lesson of GR: Gravity is a manifestation of spacetime geometry.