1
  1. There is a large philosophical literature on the first two paradoxes (and others), see, e.g., the entry on time travel, Wasserman (2018), and Effingham (2020), but very little on the easy knowledge paradox (emphasized by Deutsch 1991, discussed further below). Our approach differs from the literature surveyed in these two books by focusing on the physical—rather than metaphysical—possibility of time travel.

  2. Multiple collisions are handled in the obvious way by continuity considerations: just continue straight lines through the collision point and identify which particle is which by their ordering in space.

  3. The dynamics here is radically non-time-reversible. Indeed, the dynamics is deterministic in the future direction but not in the past direction.

[the rest won’t paste properly]

Interesting discussion by Christopher Smeenk.

no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Time Traveller Guide

10 readers
1 users here now

A guide to time travel.
This community is serious; not intended for fan fiction or parody.
What we normally think of as time travel isn't yet possible, but discussions of the physics, rules, constants, and possibilities will be productive as we work out ways to make time travel a reality.
Discussions of science fiction, imaginings, myths, and hoaxes are not productive and don't belong here.
This community is dedicated to the pursuit of time travel as a science, not chasing down myths and hoaxes. Please constrain your posts to the realm of physics, mathematics, ethics, practicality, and related subjects.

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS