Several people have suggested that Primer works under some version of multiple dimension theory. Arguably multiple dimension theory is not time travel, but if we are asking whether Abe and Aaron travel to other dimensions thinking it time travel, that's moot. Is it possible for these events to occur under multiple dimension theory?
There are several theories of time involving multiple dimensions, at least two of parallel dimension theory and some distinct concepts of divergent dimensions. It is this latter that is usually presented as explaining Primer. Yet it is the more problematic.
We discussed what someone dubbed the disappearing Abe, that doppelganger who enters the storage facility while his duplicate is explaining everything to Aaron. On nearly any theory of time he must exist, and since Abe has not interfered with him, he should make the same trip the first Abe made.
Given divergent dimension theory, Abe traveled to that morning and created a new dimension, which we are now seeing. In his own universe, he entered the box and never emerged; he exited in another universe. That there is a mysterious disappearance in that world possibly involving a criminal investigation is immaterial to this Abe, who doesn't know that. He emerged, unaware that he had created a new dimension.
Now as his counterpart heads to the past, he, too, will create a new dimension, based on whatever the situation was at the exact moment in his own past of his arrival, the past of this universe. Yet he will be arriving in the past at exactly the same time and place as the Abe who departed from the original universe. Since the arrival of that other Abe is already part of the history of his world, when he gets there, that other Abe will also be arriving, and there will be two of them coming out of the time machine. Further, unless they stop him, at the end of that day yet another Abe will get into the box and create a new universe, in which three Abes will climb out of that box that morning.
The only way to prevent this, given divergent dimension theory, is to prevent the Abe from this universe from getting into that box; but if we do, he remains in this universe alongside his duplicate (or more likely duplicates--Abe will not realize what has happened until there are at least two of him emerging from the box) for the rest of their lives. (This seems to be the claim in Tim Sham's The Primer Universe, in which he says that the only way to prevent yourself from being duplicated is to turn off the box when you exit.)
It might be argued that the story we see is possible, given that it follows a very specific one of the vast number of variant Abes being created. What happens in the next universe is of no consequence. Yet if we turn our attention to the watch experiments, that that answer will not hold.
When a running stopwatch is put into the box activated for one minute, it emerges from the box having measured thirteen hundred forty-seven minutes. The explanation given is that it has traveled between past and future that many times; this explanation must be close, since on this basis Abe determines he has a time machine. That means, though, that this watch traveled to the past six hundred seventy-three times, returning to the future end between them, creating six hundred seventy-three universes. Since in the original universe it was there in the past (reading zero), then in the second it must have encountered itself already there, and in the third it encountered itself encountering itself. By the time the box is opened there must be six hundred seventy-four watches in the box. In this case, we cannot claim that this happens not to be the watch that made all those trips, because the time on the watch itself demonstrates that it is. If this watch has created six hundred seventy-three diverging dimensions, it created that many watches, each different by two minutes on their counters.
Some will argue that the new universe diverges not from the present history but from the original history. However, since the watch was in the box before it was activated, there still must be at least two watches in the box--the one that was there originally plus the one that traveled through time to get here. The absence of a duplicate watch is fatal to a divergent dimension explanation of the film.
Perhaps pure parallel dimension theory explains this film. That, though, is a problem for another article.
Comments
The part about turning off the box when you exit, is to maintain control. Just as Aaron 2 can exit and interfere with Aaron 1 (because he knows his own past), he becomes susceptible to a 'future' version of himself doing the same to him. I have always maintained that Primer is not multiple dimension theory.
Wait, wait, wait. If a number 3 version exits the box, then the number 2 version should disappear when he enters the same box that version 3 exited from. Right?
As to the main article, there are never multiple versions of any watch, nor are there multiple people together in the same box. That is just plain silly or are you saying silly things on purpose to prove that multiple universes is impossible? It sounds like you are unsure of how time travel works.
Fred--how time travel "works" is hotly debated; if you find my theory articles (the comments do not support links) you'll find several theories discussed in detail. I am not sure how time travel is supposed to work in Primer; I think that it is inconsistent. The point of this particular article is to say that if Primer were following divergent dimension theory, these (absurd) results would follow--and since they do not, divergent dimension theory (at least in this form) does not explain the film.
Replacement theory comes close, but as you observe when version 3 exits the box, version 2 should vanish when he entered it. Replacement theory has a single person exiting, as long as you don't invoke Niven's Law.
I hope this helps.
--M. J. Young
Tim--I apologize for being unclear. I am still attempting to grasp what you believe happens in connection with travelers entering and exiting the box, as the book seems to make conflicting statements about that (or else I am failing to understand how they fit together). To my mind, if Aaron 2 shuts off the box, then he cannot arrive in the past himself, and he creates a paradox. If that is not so, then if he does not shut off the box he must create a duplicate--you seem to be caught between two options, both of which you reject.
--M. J. Young
Mark: "The absence of a duplicate watch is fatal to a divergent dimension explanation of the film."
This seems to be a misunderstanding of how divergent dimensions may work in this film. The paradox is in your interpretation.
Originial Timeline (TL0): Abe0 turns on the box at 9AM, no one exits. Abe0 turns off the box at 3PM, enters the box and after 6 hrs in the box exits it in the newly created TL1 at 9AM.
Everything in TL1 before 9AM is identical to TL0 before 9AM. After 9AM the timelines are different.
After 3PM in TL0 there is no Abe. After 9AM in TL1 there is travelerAbe0 and "TL1 original" Abe1.
If Abe1 does not turn off the Box in TL1 (Box1), at 3PM in TL1 Abe1 can enter it and after 6 hrs exit a box in TL2. Only Abe0 remains in TL1
Again, everything in TL2 before 9AM is identical to both TL0 and TL1 before 9AM. After 9AM all 3 timelines are different.
Each one enters a different box so 2 people can't exit it.
Mark: "The point of this particular article is to say that if Primer were following divergent dimension theory, these (absurd) results would follow--and since they do not, divergent dimension theory (at least in this form) does not explain the film."
I think the operative phrase is "in this form". Your form of "divergent dimension theory" has the hole. As I mentioned in earlier article, there are better "forms" which can reduce down to the other theories
Mark: "Replacement theory comes close"
How can replacement theory work in Primer? The film shows us in one timeline 3 avatars of Aaron. WIth replacement you should ONLY be able to have 2: the one that traveled and the one formed in that timeline. That explains the narrator and the Aaron he drugs. Where does the Aaron with the earpiece come from?
Mark: "That means, though, that this watch traveled to the past six hundred seventy-three times, returning to the future end between them, creating six hundred seventy-three universes."
Using he ideas suggested in the film, I see the objects as being in a separate "miniverse" untethered to the universe in the timeline. A new timeline is not created until the object enters the universe from either the ON or OFF point of the box.
(Fred)...You are exactly correct. However, there is an exception to the rule. Try to follow what we are told in the three Aaron scene. Aaron2 drugs Aaron1 and puts him in the attic. Thus Aaron2 has detached himself from Aaron1 because this did not occur in his(Aaron2) past. This is what Carruth refers to as untethered. When Aaron1 later escapes the attic, he enters the box but becomes Aaron2b (if you will)and Aaron2 is a seeming paradox with his past self no longer existing.
.
When one interferes with his own past, a paradox evolves. Since Aaron2 exists, Carruth figured the universe or time will not destruct, but the person may suffer in some way. This is a different paradox than the Granger one because Aaron2 knows all about the boxes and how they work whereas Granger did not.
You are also correct about this article. Hopefully the next one will have less unsubstantiated speculation.
For a full explanation, please read the book: The Primer Universe
Fred:"If a number 3 version exits the box, then the number 2 version should disappear when he enters the same box that version 3 exited from. Right?"
This would be expected in replacement theory, but would not be the case in a divergent dimension theory as each time traveler goes into a new dimension.
Tim: "Aaron2 drugs Aaron1 and puts him in the attic. Thus Aaron2 has detached himself from Aaron1 because this did not occur in his(Aaron2) past."
This also detaches Aaron3 (the man with the earpiece) since he was not drugged in his past either.
Tim: "When Aaron1 later escapes the attic, he enters the box"
The film never shows the drugged Aaron entering any of the boxes. When he escapes from the attic is the last we see of him and at this point he knows nothing about the boxes, as he was drugged before Abe could tell him.
Tim: "This is what Carruth refers to as untethered."
Carruth refers to the paradox as "recursion". The term "tethered" (or "ungrounded") is used by Carruth in Abe's dialog in the film to refer to what happens to things within the box: "Everything we're putting in that box comes ungrounded. And I don't mean grounded to the earth, I mean not tethered. We're blocking whatever keeps it moving forward [in time]"
Mark,
Excellent articles, thank you very much.
Just a correction for you. The blog of the Primer Universe you listed does not list a full name of the author, it is just given as Tim S. Our local library has a copy of the actual bound book The Primer Universe. The author's name is Timothy Schamberger, not Tim Sham.
I don't know who Tim Sham is, but he is not the author of the work that answers all of the questions in Primer. He is probably a hoax as we can see from the last name he chose.
I just wanted to give credit where credit was due and not have someone else stealing the credit of fine author.
Keep up the great work!
There are a lot of comments here, and it's going to take me more than one box to reply, and even then my respose is going to be of necessity limited. I will attempt to address things in sequence.
Steve, I admit that there are multiple versions of multiiple universe theory, and particularly with divergent universes. My argument is in essence that the traveler from what you call TL1 (the second history) must be creating a universe which diverges from TL1, not from TL0; and in TL1, a traveler arrived from TL0....
--M. J. Young
To clarify this, what would have happened had Abe traveled from TL0 to TL1, but somehow Aaron had discovered the box in TL1 and traveled from TL1 to TL2? Would Aaron have emerged instead of Abe, or would Aaron have emerged as well as Abe? What if Aaron left an hour before Abe left, and arrived an hour after Abe arrived? Logically, Abe0 has to be there, even though Abe1 now cannot depart. But if that's so, then Abe0 must arrive in TL2 on schedule regardless of when or if anyone leaves from TL1.
--M. J. Young
It is not impossible in replacement theory for there to be multiple versions of the same person within a limited time period. If Aaron leaves from Tuesday and arrives on Sunday, the Aaron who was alive on Sunday is still there. If either of them then leaves from Monday night and arrives Monday morning, all three are alive through Monday. As long as the correct duplicates make the correct trips on schedule, there will be one on Tuesday night.
However, I did not say that Primer actually does work under any theory. I said it comes close.
--M. J. Young
Vincent--Thank you for that. Actually, when I published the first installment of the Primer series, I received an e-mail signed by "Tim Sham" claiming to have written the definitive book on Primer, with a (as I recall bad) link to the blog version. He claimed that it was the full text of the book, so I printed it and read it after running the series. He also sent me several more e-mails and posted here. It may be that he uses the shorter names on the Internet. I know that my own work appears under the names Mark Young, Mark J. Young, M. Joseph Young, Mark Joseph Young, and M. J. Young, so I understand how multiple names evolve around an author. Like Schwarzenegger, Schamberger is hard to spell and easily lampooned (it's a fake hamburger?). The posts here and the e-mails are similar in tone and style to the blog, so unless the book and the blog are significantly different, I think this Tim Sham is that Timothy Schamberger.
--M. J. Young
And thanks for the encouragement, Vincent. Butterfly Effect starts tomorrow; I expect that there will be fans of that film who will have problems with my analysis there.
--M. J. Young
Mark:"My argument is in essence that the traveler from what you call TL1 (the second history) must be creating a universe which diverges from TL1, not from TL0; and in TL1, a traveler arrived from TL0...."
But the Pre Timetravel of TL0 and TL1 are identical (before 9AM). The traveler from TL0 arriving and whose existence essentially creates TL1 comes After 9AM (even if it is only an instant afterwards. The traveler from TL1 creates TL2 from TL at 9AM.
The "rules" in this time travel story prevent them from exiting pre-9AM. If they exit at EXACTLY the instant of 9AM then I could see your argument. They films shows us that they do NOT exit with a duplicate, thus they must be exiting some instant after 9AM and the alternate timeline is thus created.
The travelers are also all in different boxes. Abe0 enters Box0 and exits Box1, Abe1 enters Box1 and exits Box2, etc
Mark: what would have happened had Abe traveled from TL0 to TL1, but somehow Aaron had discovered the box in TL1 and traveled from TL1 to TL2? Would Aaron have emerged instead of Abe, or would Aaron have emerged as well as Abe?
Once Aaron turned off the box to use it to travel into the past. Abe could not use to travel to the same point since the box would be off or had a later on point.
Mark:What if Aaron left an hour before Abe left, and arrived an hour after Abe arrived? Logically, Abe0 has to be there, even though Abe1 now cannot depart.
They would have to use different boxes to achieve this. If Aaron enters a box and at the ON point, an Abe avatar exists in the past before it, there will always be an Abe-avatar, since it is part of the pre-BoxOn history.
Mark:But if that's so, then Abe0 must arrive in TL2 on schedule regardless of when or if anyone leaves from TL1
Again I don't follow your point exactly. Could your clarify?
Mark: As long as the correct duplicates make the correct trips on schedule, there will be one on Tuesday night.
In a limited capacity as you indicate. But this is not the scenario we see in Primer.
Mark:However, I did not say that Primer actually does work under any theory. I said it comes close.
I don't see how replacement theory can explain the 3 Aarons we see in the film and their relative ages to one another. Once the narrator comes out and replaces the previous timelines, where does the Aaron with the recording come from. He is NOT a future version of the narrator nor is a future version of the drugged Aaron. He is from an alternate timeline.
Mark,
You may be right about Sham and Schamberger, but if I learned anything from the Primer Universe it was to look into the meanings of the names as the most important part of analyzing something.
BTW, while you can lampoon fake hamburger from Schamberger (at least a sham burger is better than sham poo[smile]), but if I remember my High School German and body parts the Schamberg is the pubic mound.
So I guess I can see him wanting to shed his real name since he encourages people to analyze the meanings of names (but to me it raises the questions of why choose a name that means "hoax")
PS. I look forward to your thoughts on Butterfly Effect (don't forget the plot hole with his cellmate seeing his hands change...)
Mark,
It seems to be a little synchronicity with Butterfly Effect and the holidays. The film reminded me a lot of "It's a Wonderful Life" (only a "bizarro version"). Everyone's life was worse withOUT George Bailey, but everyone's life was worse WITH Evan Treborn (it could have been called "It's a Terrible Life")
Steve--the part about "exiting from different boxes" is difficult; it means that at some point the traveler moves from one box to another, or else the other box is created. Applied to the watch problem, it is inconsistent--the watch, too, must move to a different box each time it travels to the past. As to each traveler exiting infinitessimally later, that's convenient but improbable; given an infinite number of travelers, eventually they will be exiting before they enter.
--M. J. Young
Steve--As to the point about Abe0 arriving, we have TL0 Abe0 enters box at 6, TL1 Abe 0 exits box at 9, TL1 Aaron1 enters box at 5, shutting it down so that Abe1 cannot enter it at 6, TL2 Aaron1 exits at 10, an hour after Abe1 arrived. Abe0 is duplicated in TL2 because he arrived first. But if Abe1 is duplicated in TL2 without departing from TL1, then the time of his arrival ought to be irrelevant--he must arrive on schedule in the duplicated world, even if he cannot depart from it. When that happens relative to any other time travel is thus irrelevant; he must be duplicated in the new world.
That, though, means that if it was Abe1 that entered the box at 5 instead of 6 and exited at 10 instead of 9, then Abe0 and Abe1 must both exist in TL2 with Abe2, even though Abe0 cannot leave TL1.
--M. J. Young
Vincent wrote, "don't forget the plot hole with his cellmate seeing his hands change..."
And here I thought I was so clever to have caught that. On the bright side, it means that my readers should be able to follow the explanation of the problem when I get there--but there are a lot of problems to examine, and we're just getting started.
(An outline of the anticipated articles is posted on the Temporal Anomalies site, Examiner Connection page, but it is subject to change as I progress through the series.)
--M. J. Young
Thanks for this forum. I read the page on Granger and it made a lot of sense. I have to print out the whole book blog and read it from start to finish. I still have two questions for Tim. One is that it seems to me that Aaron has traveled before the box was built. And two is where did the two main actors talk about the book? I found a snippet from the actor "Bradshaw" but that was all.
Steve, isn't Primer time travel? Will there be any more blogs here about Primer?
Mark: the part about "exiting from different boxes" is difficult; it means that at some point the traveler moves from one box to another, or else the other box is created.
I see the newbox being created when the new timeline is created.
When Abe0 enters Box0 the contents of the box gets untethered to the timeflow of TL0, it is essentially its own miniverse separate from the universe of TL0. Unlike timetravel devices in other stories, the miniverse in Primer is tethered to 2 points in space/time the BoxOn and the BoxOff point of TL0. It thus travels from the BoxOff point to the BoxOn point and at this stage the person can leave the miniverse and try to re-enter TL0. The transition into the timeline creates the new universe since the "future" in TL0 has already been written thus a "divergent dimension" aka a new parallel dimension we lable as TL1. TL1 is identical to TL0 before the BoxOn point, but is different after the BoxOn Point due to the presence of Abe0.
Mark:Applied to the watch problem, it is inconsistent--the watch, too, must move to a different box each time it travels to the past.
And the principle is the same. It is not that the object is moving, it is the miniverse that moves carrying the object within it.
Mark:As to each traveler exiting infinitessimally later, that's convenient but improbable; given an infinite number of travelers, eventually they will be exiting before they enter.
I never made a claim of "exiting infinitessimally later". They come out hours later from the perspective of the travelers: to Abe0, 9AM in TL1 is 12 hours later than 9AM in TL0, making Abe0 12 hours older than Abe1. Abe0, Abe1, Abe2, etc all exit the respectives timelines TL1, TL2, TL3, etc at the same moment and location in Space/time in that timeline, but they are all exiting from different locations of the multiverse (in different dimensions) and at different times in a more "multiversal" frame of reference. From 1 frame of reference all the 9AMs occur at some node with many branches, from another perspective they occur simultaneously, but offset in dimension and from still another perspective each one is 12 hours separated in time since each Abe is older than the last one.
Mark: As to the point about Abe0 arriving, we have TL0 Abe0 enters box at 6, TL1 Abe 0 exits box at 9, TL1 Aaron1 enters box at 5, shutting it down so that Abe1 cannot enter it at 6, TL2 Aaron1 exits at 10, an hour after Abe1 arrived.
But based on the premises in the film, Aaron1 can not exit at 10, he must exit at 9 the BoxOn point. The movie gives no indication of what would happen if they tried to exit at any other point in the trip. The interpretation I have in the process is that the trip from BoxOff to BoxOn is direct based on the time difference. The trip from BoxON to BoxOff takes 1300x that time difference.
Mark: Abe0 is duplicated in TL2 because he arrived first.
I don't see Abe0 being duplicated in the scenario you raise since the creation of TL2 is a duplicate of TL1 up to 9AM which is before Abe0 exited. Thus in TL2, Aaron1 would exit at 9AM and there is no Abe duplicate from any timeline.
Are you going more for a scenario: we have in TL0, Abe0 enters box at 6PM, TL1: Abe0 exits box at 9AM, turns off the box and starts it back up at 10AM. TL1 Aaron1 enters box at 5PM. In TL2 Aaron1 exits at 10AM, an hour after an Abe arrived in TL2.
In this scenario, TL2 is duplicated before 10AM which includes an Abe. But this is not Abe1 nor Abe0, since both of them are still in TL1), but it is a copy of Abe0 (we can call him Abe0a) that is created and who came from a copy of TL0 we can label TL0a.
FastFred: "Steve, isn't Primer time travel? Will there be any more blogs here about Primer?"
I think the question should go to Mark and not myself. I can answer that Primer is about time travel, but Mark will have to give his thoughts on doing any more articles on Primer as opposed to other movies or stories...
I read your post, Fast Fred, and I put up a picture on my book site at theprimeruniverse.blogspot(dot)com. (I can't post the link here as the post gets blocked.) Also, I will try to answer your question on Shane's site if the book doesn't answer it for you. Hint: Think of the perspective from Abe1 and Aaron1 at the end of the film. Thanks too to Vincent for your thoughts on my book. I feel Primer will always be the best and most discussed time travel film ever.
FF, Did you get to see the new book page?
Vincent, Sham or Scham means neither mound nor fake. Its real meaning (not that it really matters) is Royal one with shame or shameful royal citizen. Funny, that Steve said the exact same thing once. My uncle in Denver says that any son born from a king's courtesan was named such, but I don't know how true that is. I am glad to hear how much you enjoyed the book, The Primer Universe. What library was that? Was the copy autographed?
Tim, I am not trying to start a fight, but the word "Sham" in English does mean false, fake, or hoax. You can look it up in any dictionary.
As to Schamberg, you might not have a German dictionary and so I will quote this website: anepitalia.blogspot.com/2008/04/dispelling-disempowering-birth<dot>html
"In German Scham (i.e. shame) is the first component of many words related to the genitalia and the pubic region: Schamhaare (pubic hair), Schamlippe (labia majoris), Schamhaft (genitalia), Schamberg (mons pubis), Schamfuge(pubic symphysis), Schambein (pubic bone) etc. "
It is not meant to embarass you, I was only stating a fact. And if someone else had pointed it out to you before, I see no reason to be called a liar.
I don't remember if the book was signed or not. But, my parents always told me never to provide personal information online so I am not about to give out the location, especially to someone who is eiter using a false name or is a liar.
I apologize for not being atop the posts here; we had a death in the near family, and arrangements continue to be a nightmare. I will have to be brief, as I am several days behind on everything everywhere.
Fred, the sheer volume of comments and questions on Primer means that I will probably post more articles. I have at least one more drafted, and a couple in the works. However, I'm obliged to cover time travel movies generally, so the Butterfly Effect series will take center stage for several weeks, and I'm looking at Terminator Salvation after that. I'm pleased that this has helped, though.
Steve, you've written enough in comments to fill one of my articles, and I can't possibly respond to all of it. I will attempt to hit a few points in my next comment.
--M. J. Young
Steve wrote, "I never made a claim of 'exiting infinitessimally later'."
Previously you wrote, "But the Pre Timetravel of TL0 and TL1 are identical (before 9AM). The traveler from TL0 arriving and whose existence essentially creates TL1 comes After 9AM (even if it is only an instant afterwards. The traveler from TL1 creates TL2 from TL at 9AM."
Did I misunderstand? In any case, you must have meant an instant before, because an instant after the previous traveler would already have arrived. The problem remains, though, because the traveler cannot arrive before the box is activated, and must arrive slightly earlier each time an infinite number of times.
My mistake on the exit at 10; however, he could exit slightly after the other, and the result I describe would then hold.
Abe does not have to shut off the box for Aaron to replace him.
--M. J. Young
Tim and Vincent, thanks again for your comments; please let's keep the discussion civil.
Fred, I neglected to say in my previous comment that I take Primer to be a time travel movie, but I do not believe that divergent or parallel dimension theory is time travel. You can find articles discussing these concepts under the theory topic here at The Examiner, and in the theory section of my personal site, linked from my bio here.
--M. J. Young
Mark,
Don't write about the insipid Primer book in your succesion of time travel articles. The whole book is a sham. It is a big pubic lie from a pubic mound. He is not a real writer. He never spoke to anyone in the motion picture. His analyzing is just pretending to have some divergence of knowledge without any substance. He even tried to get me to devulge my parent's residence. He will probably deny it because he is a liar.
Tim, My parents ask that you not have any more contact with me.They think you may try to rape me. Not that you really would. This is just a statement that they made. Honestly.
Mark: "Did I misunderstand?" [about a claim of 'exiting infinitessimally later']
Yes you seem to have misunderstood what I am stating. I imagine a person exiting "infinitessimally later" than the BoxON point but I don't see each traveler arriving later than the previous one. They all arrive at the same instant of time and in the same location within that timeline. But each of the timelines is located in a different dimension on an axis perpendicular to the other axes (length, width, height, time, etc) in essentially a different box. So there is no overlap. All the timelines share the identical history before the travelers exit (pre-9AM), it is the futures that are different.
As discussed earlier, from an overhead view of this axis the timelines can appear to form branches, but from a "sideways view" they all look parallel and never cross.
Mark: "I do not believe that divergent or parallel dimension theory is time travel"
I agree that traveling between parallel dimensions is not time travel, but the divergent dimenstion theory is needed to explain some time travels stories. As mentioned before it is he most general and also can explain stories that seem to be fixed time, parallel dimensions and ones that seem to be replacement.
The movie "Primer" and the novel "The man who folded himself" by David Gerrold can not be explained by replacment theory, they both require the idea of "divergent dimension".
It seems to me (based on the quetions you are asking) that you have a limited perspective of "divergent dimension" believing the "overhead view" where all literally branch from some node (which would give the paradoxes you seem to be describing). I see divergent theory as diverging, creating entire parallel dimensions not just branches from a node.
Thanks Mark and Tim
Yeah, I mixed up Mark and Steve. I agree with Primer being time travel and that other dimensions is not time travel in some stories. I did mean I agree with Tim on Granger, not the part written here by Mark. Cool picture of Abe though he looks different on your web site. I started reading the whole book. Thanks
Also, LOL vincent is the gayest fan ever. His dad must be a catamite.
First, I should not have to say this to mature responsible adults, but it appears that I must address everyone on the matter because some seem not to get it: stick to the issues and do not get personally offensive. Some of these posts have crossed the line, and I ought to delete them (because I lack the ability to edit them). It is possible to criticize a person's position without being insulting to the person, and if you have not learned that skill, learn it quickly. Take your personal disputes elsewhere.
--M. J. Young
Honestly, Steve, I do get what you're saying about divergent dimensions. The problem is that they have to diverge from some original, and thus must copy that original. It appears to me that in your thinking, universe 3 copies universe 2 up to the moment the traveler from 2 reaches 3, but thereafter copies universe 1. I do not think this is what the traveler would anticipate.
For example, suppose that T1 goes from 1 to 2, leaving 1 at 5:00 and going to 2 at 10:00, seven hours earlier. Then suppose that at 6:00 T2 (who did not leave at 5:00) decides that T1 has done something wrong, and wants to stop him. If T2 travels to 11:00, T1 is there and may already have done whatever he did; but if T2 travels to 9:00, T1 will never arrive. That is not the history of the universe known to T2, and the difference between these two versions throws me.
--M. J. Young
Mark: It appears to me that in your thinking, universe 3 copies universe 2 up to the moment the traveler from 2 reaches 3, but thereafter copies universe 1.
No I see the "diverging" (in some ways I see this as a misnomer, I see it as the creation of an entire parallel universe, that is the same up until that point, the diverging aspect only a perspective issue) being created at the instant. But it is an instant BEFORE the traveler enters into it. Thus pre-9AM (for example) at TL2 is the same as pre-9AM of TL1. And pre-9AM of TL3 is the same as pre-9AM of the other ones. No matter what iteration of Aaron uses the failsafe in "Primer", the events, before the failsafe are all identical. It is just like rolling a die: the events before the number comes to rest are all identical. The never dimensions are created when the number is revealed.
Mark: if T2 travels to 9:00, T1 will never arrive. That is not the history of the universe known to T2, and the difference between these two versions throws me.
It is the history up up until 9:00. He can affect the history from 9 to 10, since it has not yet been written. Depending on what iteration he may be, he may encounter someone at 10, he may not. While the traveler will have to accept to some degree that the pre-9AMs are identical (he can look for differences, but nnot finding any is not proof), he can prove that post 9AM is NOT his past.
A traveler can prove he is not in his past by doing something that he knows did not occur in his past. If before he time traveled he never met a duplicate of himself, the traveler could talk to the avatar in this TL. Since the traveler never met an avatar, he KNOWS that he is NOT in his past, since in his past he never met an avatar. He is in the avatar's past and it is different than his own past.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!