Munthon - Post a comment

Un ja mees varam celjot laikaa, vai mees varam noveerst kaadu notikumu un taadejaadi radiit jaunu tagadni?
Vai arii taa buus taa pati tagadne, kuraa jau ir njemtas veeraa muusu veiktaas izmainjas?
Un ja jau tagadnee ir njemtas veeraa izmainjas kuras tiks veiktas naakotnee celjojot uz pagaatni, tad kur ir cilveekos tik cieniitaa briivaa griba? Jo tas tachu noziimee ka ir obligaati jaaceljo uz pagaatni lai ieguutu tagadeejo tagadni.
Bet varbuut ir vairaakas tagadnes un jebkursh muusu solis pagriezh muusu celju pa labi vai kreisi kaadaas laika krustcelees? Bet tad rodas jautaajums - vai citaas tagadnees es arii esu? Un vai visaas tagadnees es esu?
Vai visu tomeer izskaidro haosa teorija un viss jau ir "ieprieksh" nolemts? Vaardu "ieprieksh" liku peedinjaas jo shajaa gadijumaa Laiku piit iekshaa nebuutu praatiigi.

Dazhi puishi to skaidro ar kvantu mehaanikas paliidziibu (Lai gan iisti skaidraaks nekas nepalika):
The most interesting case is the one that corresponds to the classical paradox where you shoot your father before he has met your mother, so that you can never be born. This case has a rather fascinating quantum-mechanical resolution.
[...]
According to our model, if you travel into the past quantum mechanically, you would only see those alternatives consistent with the world you left behind you. In other words, while you are aware of the past, you cannot change it. No matter how unlikely the events are that could have led to your present circumstances, once they have actually occurred, they cannot be changed. Your trip would set up resonances that are consistent with the future that has already unfolded. This also has enormous consequences on the paradoxes of free will. It shows that it is perfectly logical to assume that one has many choices and that one is free to take any one of them. Until a choice is taken, the future is not determined. However, once a choice is taken, and it leads to a particular future, it was inevitable. It could not have been otherwise. The boundary conditions that the future events happen as they already have, guarantees that they must have been prepared for in the past. So, looking backwards, the world is deterministic. However, looking forwards, the future is probabilistic. This completely explains the classical paradox. In fact, it serves as a kind of indirect evidence that such feedback must actually take place in nature, in the sense that without it, a paradox exists, while with it, the paradox is resolved. (Of course, there is an equally likely explanation, namely that going backward in time is impossible. This also solves the paradox by avoiding it.)

Quantum Theory Looks at Time Travel (PDF)

Chaos Theory: A Brief Introduction