Time Travel discussion
This topic is about
Isabelle's Locket
Official Group Giveaways
>
JUNE - "Isabelle's Locket" by Colleen Mitchell
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
If time travel was possible then a time traveller will always be able to change the history to any fate. Why? because the whole action of travelling back in time is already making a change to the past. But in doing so, that change would be creating a seperate universe, a seperate timeline. The existing timeline/universe will still exist. Sounds implausible but not if you think about the world of quantum mechanics where particles and photons behave so bizarrely, that they appear to be co-existing in different dimensions which leads to some theories that there are multiple universes being created for every state possible. A convenient theory for the timetraveller who wants to travel back and make different choices.
That would be my "choice" of belief. However, I so also like the less scientific fanciful theory of the elastic timeline where you can travel back an make changes but the time stream will always try to compensate and retain its main structure. I think most novels favour this.
Then there is the fate/loop theory which never ever makes sense to me. Yes they are neat. But its nonsense as there is no beginning to the loop. The time traveller of course cant ever make changes but the loop was a change in itself. It makes no sense. Hence why I "believe" a timetraveller can change the past. Having said that, I will admit Time loops make for great entertainment at the movies
Been a while since I last came on here, sorry guys, been so busy (holiday, marathon run training, extra summer work) but what a nice way to get back into the swing by posting in a sweet thought provoking book giveaway ;)
John, the power is always in the present, that's the only time frame that can be altered.The past is fixed & the furure not yet here & so they can't be changed.
But if you go to the past, then that will become your present & of course you can alter that & perhaps you could not help doing so, just by being there.
My initial thought is along the course of what I think of as "cyclical time travel" where one believes that "Of course someone traveling back in time could change history". Then I read Howard's comment and remembered the alternate realities "branching time travel" version and the answer is different if you subscribe to that theory. The timeline for one reality is always the same, but if you travel back in time and change something then you start down a new reality, so things will be different. In the strict sense, you haven't changed history, you have only changed from your known history to an alternate history.I generally find books and movies based on the cyclical theory to be more interesting since they allow for paradoxes and waging conflicts "across time" (a la Terminator).
Nels, not to pitch, but check out my 2nd Epic Fable, 'Piercing the Elastic Limit' as the storyline is right on point to this discussion.
Well, all of Tej's theories have merit. I'm not going to pretend to know. But I'll nab Nels' strategy and spin to ask myself 'what makes for more interesting stories?' Imo, the idea of a resilient time line makes for a more interesting exploration of time travel. I don't particularly like paradoxes and conflicts. I generally enjoy TT stories that put characters in unfamiliar environments, for example The Ugly Little Boy or the books by Jack Finney (iirc).
Interesting discussion. I suppose if one subscribes to the parallel universes concept, then you aren't changing a timeline as much as creating additional branches (sort of like Sliders...), but going the opposite route - that there are not multiple universes, I'll sign up for being able to change the course of history and that fate would not win out.
I believe that if time travel were possible than history would have already been changed.
Is this also applicable internationally? i live in the Philippines.
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "I'll nab Nels' strategy and spin to ask myself 'what makes for more interesting stories?' Imo, the idea of a resilient time line makes for a more interesting exploration of time travel. I don't particularly like paradoxes and conflicts. I generally enjoy TT stories that put characters in unfamiliar environments..."
I do know that a lot of people like the TT stories like that, but they're not my style because it seems like it wouldn't have to be a time travel story when you're just putting someone in a different time period. To me personally, it usually comes off like an excuse for the writer to write a contemporary character in a past (or future) time.
Mod
Yes. Colleen said she is willing to ship the book to anywhere. Just answer the question above to be entered in our drawing.
Fair enough, Nels. To each his own...Glynn, good point.
If events could be changed in this way, there would be so many parallel universes around that there'd hardly be space in the master universe for one more by now!However, it could be that there is only one universe, and a time traveller could tweak history right now (then) and we would never know because it already happened, or didn't, as the case may be.
What fun!
I absolutely believe that history could be changed through time travel, however if time travel became "common-place", how messed up would life be? Anything you accomplished could be undone, every crime could be prevented, every victory could be lost, every loss could be reclaimed. Oh-it makes my head hurt!
In reality, time travel is possible, but only back to the point where the first time machine is invented... and that hasn't happened yet. So no worries for the time being!
I think that the universive would be powerful enough to stop anyone from changing the past drastically. She will do what ever she can to "correct" the change and even take her time in doing so. Like the way it worked in To Say Nothing of the Dog!
Mirvan wrote: "Is this also applicable internationally? i live in the Philippines."The offer is available worlwide.
I live in New Zealand and will post anywhere :)
The question of whether the past can be altered is indeed a perplexing one, and it is one of the reasons why I wrote Isabelle's Locket. I wanted to explore the possibility of trying to alter past events for good reasons, but risking a detrimental change to the known future. (For if the known past was changed then surely the known future would alter too....or would it?)
This is the situation faced by Erin when she is given the chance to prevent a tragedy that had occured 100 years ago
She can see that doing so may threaten the very existence of someone she loved dearly in her own time, but to do nothing to save young lovers Isabelle and Flynn, is unthinkable...or is it?
A perplexing conundrum indeed!
Conundrums make for interesting stories, indeed - I'm def. putting this book on my list. :)
I can't claim this theory, as I read it in a book long ago. But, I like it and it makes sense to me, so I will embrace it.By going back in time, you create an alternate reality in which you are free to make any changes you wish. (Free in the sense that the universe won't stop you.) The universe is indifferent to the activities of individual beings.
But, in the overall "story" of your planet (for example), there is a single, main existing timestream and most of the alternate realities that branch off eventually blend back into the main timestream because, while the alternate realities were different for a while, ultimately, those differences had no lasting impact.
In the book in which I read this, once civilization discovered time travel, people time traveled for vacation and often permanently relocated to more pleasing (to them) time periods. However, historians had worked out specific critical time periods where it was possible that someone could change history in such a way that the familiar main timestream would be changed (e.g. the cure to some devastating disease might not be discovered in time to avoid a mass extinction). Those critical time periods were off limits and no one could go there.
I have only a vague idea what book this was, it was a long time ago. Possibly some Star Trek book?
Mod
As others have mentioned, the universe would probably have to split. Does anyone here think time travel is possible though? If the answer is yes, then obviously the universe would have to split. Otherwise our history would be changing constantly. I guarantee many attempts would be made to stop one Mr. Booth.
Space, hate to be a stickler here, but if TT were possible & you went to the past & changed things, then your future (which hasn't occurred yet) would not change per se, but unfold from that point on.In other words, once the past changes are in effect, then that becomes the time flow & it would simply continue without you ever knowing the difference.
Howard wrote: "Space, hate to be a stickler here, but ..."I'm talking about if other people went back and changed it. If we stay in the present and someone else goes back and kills John Wilkes Booth, then suddenly our history books would be errant. Therefore the universe would have to split.
Not so Space.Lincoln is killed by Booth, an act that is recalled in books, which were written after the fact.
Next, you go back & stop the killing & the books are now NEVER written.
As I said before, no one who comes after would ever know the difference (besides you, of course).
See my second Epic Fable, 'Piercing the Elastic Limit' for greater detail.
It includes a storyline on Caesar, another on Christopher Marlow & one on master musician Robert Schumann.
Their originial timeframes are changed & what we now know of them has become their 'true' history.
They however, never knew the difference, as their time flow was altered before the lives of each of them naturally occurred.
Nothing splits, time flows on (a continiuum), it's just altered now.
By the way, this has happened often, but as I've said, no one knows, given the changes were always in the past.
I understand what you're saying, but you're not looking from the perspective of those who don't travel back in time. This timeline we're on right now continues to flow while someone goes back in time.As of right now, we're all in a timeline that involves Lincoln being assassinated. But tomorrow when we wake up, you're saying our history books are changed to accommodate someone's overnight time trip. This is where we must agree to disagree. I'm saying they're not changing our timeline. They're splitting it off and creating a new one in which he was not assassinated.
My evidence to support this is that if time travel were possible, you know as well as I do that someone would try to stop that event from happening. It's been a hundred and fifty years and it's still in our history books. Sorry, but I must rest my case here.
Space, you seem to think that the power to travel in time would be used only for good, not a valid point, given human history, I think.Also, you are incorrect when you assert the 'timeline we're on right now continues' for it clearly would not.
If changes occure in the past, then subsequent events would unfold from that point & just saying Lincoln's still dead does not refute that.
The books would change, many things would, for the line is altered & as I said, as it happened in the past, on one would even know the difference, time flows on, a continuum as I said.
Yet I see your point, but you fail to see mine.
Your profile states that you enjoy mystery & adventure tales, so read my books & then we'll talk.
Who knows what the future holds?
Hey Cheryl, just responding, but I agree w/ you, just a difference in opinion.I have mine & write about them, that's all.
Mod
Mod
Our next book giveaway will start July 1, and will feature the book Dark Tidings by Ken Magee.
I understand what you're saying, Space, and agree that time travel, if possible, would most likely result in the splitting off of an alternate reality. However, I disagree with this comment that you made:"My evidence to support this is that if time travel were possible, you know as well as I do that someone would try to stop that event from happening. It's been a hundred and fifty years and it's still in our history books. Sorry, but I must rest my case here."
As Howard said (at least my interpretation of what he said), IF there were no alternate realities and someone could go back in time and change things in our reality (which we seem to agree can't happen, so let's call it hypothetical), you would never know it in the current time frame because whatever happened back then would simply become our history today and you would have no memory of it ever being anything different. Lincoln might have been assassinated and saved 50 times over by 50 different time travelers, but we would never know it because whatever the current iteration of our past is at this moment, that is all we have ever known of our history.
Just because you think that Lincoln's assassination has remained unchanged in the history books for 150 years doesn't mean that it really has. If tomorrow someone went back in time and saved Lincoln (in the hypothetical universe in which the timeline can be changed and no alternate realities are split off), then you would be saying, "My evidence to support this is that if time travel were possible, you know as well as I do that someone would try to go back and assassinate Lincoln. But, it's been a hundred and fifty years and the fact that Lincoln was never assassinated is still in our history books."
I love time travel. Thinking about the phenomenon and how it might work out - or not work out - is great exercise for the brain. :-)
Mod
Another good thought provoking BOM with some head splitting discussions going on here,lol.
Okay, one more try. Let's say the two or three of us are sitting there talking and eating pizza, and looking at a history book. Jack, our fourth friend, says he's gonna pop out for a bit. He walks away, then comes back a second later.Jack has just time-traveled. He went back and saved Lincoln. The page we're staring at in the history book - the one about Lincoln's assassination - you're saying it's magically changed and we have no memory of its other state. Right?
See I think you guys are looking at it from the perspective of the time-traveler instead of those of us who don't actually do the trip.
Pretending it is possible and it happens all the time, I'm saying I believe someone has saved Lincoln by now. Come on, guys.
Tej wrote: "congratulations Glynn! Lucky you :) Another good thought provoking BOM with some head splitting discussions going on here,lol."
Wow. I don't usually win stuff. Will definitely post a "review" once I read it. :)
Ok Space, one more try, as you said & sorry if this discussion has now become boring to the others involved.If your friend went back & changed history then, by definition, FROM THAT POINT ON history would be changed & because the change happened in the past, there would now BE NO BOOK on Lincoln's death for you or your friends to discuss.
Yet from the perspective of those who didn't make the trip nothing would change & they wouldn't know the difference, as I said.
Time would flow from the point of change, not the other way around, so using your example, Jack wouldn't just walk back into a discussion of Lincoln's death, as the death had now never occurred, hence no book written.
The book would not disappear, or even remain, only now historically incorrect, THERE WOULD BE NO BOOK.
The whole scenario, again by definition, would have been altered & the circumstance of your pizza discussion changed & no book would now be there to view or discuss.
In other words, now only Jack would be aware of the altered timeline, not your friends, as the change happened in their past.
Again, not to pitch, but all of this is covered by my books concerning the Elastic Limit of Time.
Space, it's not that I don't *understand* what you are saying. I understand *exactly* what you are saying. I simply don't agree with it. On this subject, I just see it one way, while you see it another.tomaytoe tomahtoe
Mod
Amy wrote: "I'm looking forward to reading Glynn's review since there seems to only be one on GoodReads and one on amazon.com so far. Glynn, come back here later and let us all know what you think!"I'll certainly try. Not a great "reviewer" of things but will let you know what I think of it! :)
Hello. I finally got around to reading the book I won and pretty much liked it. Here is my review. Be warned that I am not such a great reviewer of stuff! :)
Mod
Glynn, I agree with Tej, your review was good, heartfelt & honest with nice insight that showed you'd finished it.But would you have, if a review wasn't part of the deal?
Just wondering.
Howard wrote: "Glynn, I agree with Tej, your review was good, heartfelt & honest with nice insight that showed you'd finished it.But would you have, if a review wasn't part of the deal?
Just wondering."
I definitely would have finished it. It was a pretty quick read and kept me interested enough to get to the end! :)
Time Travel
Books mentioned in this topic
Dark Tidings (other topics)The Ugly Little Boy (other topics)
Isabelle's Locket (other topics)
"If time travel was possible, do you think a time traveler would have the ability to change history or would fate prevail and protect the time-space continuum?"
NOTE: The author will be providing the winner with an autographed paperback. There is no ebook option for the winner of this month's giveaway.
Anyone who posts an answer to the above question will automatically be entered in our drawing. The winner will be selected at random. Because I'm a little late in announcing this month's giveaway, we will give everyone a full week to enter. So the winner will be selected and announced on June 10. Once the winner is announced, the author will contact that person to arrange for delivery of their free book.
I will invite Colleen to post some additional info about her book. And please feel free to ask her any questions you might have. Also remember that the winner of this giveaway is encouraged to write an honest and thoughtful review of the book once they have a chance to read it. Good luck all, and "may the odds be ever in your favor."