Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
John Titor's Legacy
John Titor
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="temporal recon" data-source="post: 53392" data-attributes="member: 2826"><p>That's not exactly what I said. </p><p>Math is not abstract. As a matter of fact, and I thought I was clear on this, but I will repeat it, mathematics (not necessarily statistics) is quite possibly the furthest thing <em>from </em>abstract that one can get.</p><p> </p><p>Again: MWI is a true phenomena and state of the multiverse. I believe we can agree on this. What we may disagree on is its implications. As long as a potential time traveler or his mission planners decide to maintain a low divergence on their mission (which they must for planning purposes), then the <u>practical</u> problems of MWI fall away and you are left with only a <u>mathematical</u> differences between world lines. </p><p> </p><p>Allow me to explain. </p><p>If I were a time traveler and I decided to go back in time 5 years to the year 2012, let's assume for argument's sake my divergence would be .00004% (And my WL of origin is 0.00000% obviously). Because the divergence is so small, the world lines are so similar that I can barely tell the difference. Even the differences that Titor claimed he noticed (with a 2.5% div) would not even be visible to me on my trip. Why? Because the miniscule div measurement of 2.5% (which resulted in only small/subtle differences in my perceptions) is orders of magnitude <u><strong>larger</strong></u> than my piddley .00004%.</p><p> </p><p>Later, if I decide to go on a second trip to only <u>2 years</u> into the past to 2015, let's pretend my div for such a short trip would be .0000004%. </p><p>Now, I ask you: if I couldn't see any differences in the WL's with a .00004% div (they appear identical) do you think I would notice any differences with an<em> even tighter divergence</em>? Of course not. So, even though the WL's <em>are different</em>, they <em>appear to be the same.</em> The only difference between the two then only arises in the statistical difference between the three World Lines.</p><p> </p><p>This brings me back to my original question: How could John and his bosses and planners even be sure the object of his mission would be on the target world line if they did not have any assurance it had been invented? This question seems to have been, in part here, answered.</p><p> </p><p>Hears one that'll really fry your noodle: Why bother changing a world line at all if the changes you are making only affect the WL you are on? There's an answer for that too. Stay tuned.</p><p>-Temporal Recon</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="temporal recon, post: 53392, member: 2826"] That's not exactly what I said. Math is not abstract. As a matter of fact, and I thought I was clear on this, but I will repeat it, mathematics (not necessarily statistics) is quite possibly the furthest thing [I]from [/I]abstract that one can get. Again: MWI is a true phenomena and state of the multiverse. I believe we can agree on this. What we may disagree on is its implications. As long as a potential time traveler or his mission planners decide to maintain a low divergence on their mission (which they must for planning purposes), then the [U]practical[/U] problems of MWI fall away and you are left with only a [U]mathematical[/U] differences between world lines. Allow me to explain. If I were a time traveler and I decided to go back in time 5 years to the year 2012, let's assume for argument's sake my divergence would be .00004% (And my WL of origin is 0.00000% obviously). Because the divergence is so small, the world lines are so similar that I can barely tell the difference. Even the differences that Titor claimed he noticed (with a 2.5% div) would not even be visible to me on my trip. Why? Because the miniscule div measurement of 2.5% (which resulted in only small/subtle differences in my perceptions) is orders of magnitude [U][B]larger[/B][/U] than my piddley .00004%. Later, if I decide to go on a second trip to only [U]2 years[/U] into the past to 2015, let's pretend my div for such a short trip would be .0000004%. Now, I ask you: if I couldn't see any differences in the WL's with a .00004% div (they appear identical) do you think I would notice any differences with an[I] even tighter divergence[/I]? Of course not. So, even though the WL's [I]are different[/I], they [I]appear to be the same.[/I] The only difference between the two then only arises in the statistical difference between the three World Lines. This brings me back to my original question: How could John and his bosses and planners even be sure the object of his mission would be on the target world line if they did not have any assurance it had been invented? This question seems to have been, in part here, answered. Hears one that'll really fry your noodle: Why bother changing a world line at all if the changes you are making only affect the WL you are on? There's an answer for that too. Stay tuned. -Temporal Recon [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
John Titor's Legacy
John Titor
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top