Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #451068 > unrolled thread

Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines

Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> - 2016-09-10 15:35 -0700
    Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2016-09-10 22:13 -0400
      Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 21:47 -0500
        Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines David Johnston <Davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-10 21:59 -0600
      Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> - 2016-09-11 04:55 +0000
      Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-09-10 22:37 -0700
        Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-09-11 04:26 -0500
        Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-09-11 21:07 +0000
        Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) - 2016-09-11 21:54 +0000
          Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2016-09-12 00:39 -0400
            Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-09-11 23:07 -0700
              Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2016-09-12 02:35 -0400

#451068 — Re: Examples where authors messed up Timelines

In article <20160804a@crcomp.net>, Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> wrote:

> William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
> > In article <20160606b@crcomp.net>,
> > Don Kuenz <garbage@crcomp.net> said:
> >
> >> Speaking of time travel paradoxes, it seems to me that the
> >> Grandfather Paradox only applies to suicidal travelers. Off the
> >> top of my head, there are at least four stories where travelers
> >> meet young version of themselves: "By His Bootstraps" by RAH, "All
> >> You Zombies" by RAH, "The Man Who Folded Himself" by Gerrold, and
> >> "The Time Travelers Wife" by Niffenegger.
> >
> > L. Neil Smith had a story in which the answer to the Grandfather
> > Paradox was "If you travel back in time and try to kill your
> > grandfather, you will die."  Mostly because the grandfather in this
> > case was way faster on the draw.
> >
> > (Going solely by Smith's (very short) short-story title list in the
> > ISFDB, I'm pretty sure it had to be "Grandfather Clause,"
> > http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?94387)
> 
> Thank you. That's one way to eliminate the paradox.
> 
[snip]

Does it add another one. Is the fact that he has killed his grandchild 
mean the grandfather's life has been changed, flapping butterflywise, so 
that the grandchild won't be born?

-- 
charles

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#451079

In article <ctbishop-2858AE.15355410092016@news.individual.net>,
Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> said:

> Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>> William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>> L. Neil Smith had a story in which the answer to the Grandfather
>>> Paradox was "If you travel back in time and try to kill your
>>> grandfather, you will die."  Mostly because the grandfather in this
>>> case was way faster on the draw.
>>>
>>> (Going solely by Smith's (very short) short-story title list in the
>>> ISFDB, I'm pretty sure it had to be "Grandfather Clause,"
>>> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?94387)
>> 
>> Thank you. That's one way to eliminate the paradox.
>
> Does it add another one. Is the fact that he has killed his
> grandchild mean the grandfather's life has been changed, flapping
> butterflywise, so that the grandchild won't be born?

As I recall, the grandfather was visiting a (mostly empty) museum or
something with his obnoxious spoiled brat six-year-old grandson when
the adult version of the latter appeared and tried to kill him. At
the end of the story, the grandfather was making a promise to
himself to try and make sure that the kid grew up into a better,
less bitter person the second time around.

So yes there's a paradox, assuming that he's successful and that
would-be murderer incarnation of the adult version of the kid will
now never exist.

-- wds

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451081

wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote in news:nr2ejh$s9p$1
@panix3.panix.com:

> In article <ctbishop-2858AE.15355410092016@news.individual.net>,
> Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> said:
> 
>> Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>>> William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> L. Neil Smith had a story in which the answer to the Grandfather
>>>> Paradox was "If you travel back in time and try to kill your
>>>> grandfather, you will die."  Mostly because the grandfather in this
>>>> case was way faster on the draw.
>>>>
>>>> (Going solely by Smith's (very short) short-story title list in the
>>>> ISFDB, I'm pretty sure it had to be "Grandfather Clause,"
>>>> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?94387)
>>> 
>>> Thank you. That's one way to eliminate the paradox.
>>
>> Does it add another one. Is the fact that he has killed his
>> grandchild mean the grandfather's life has been changed, flapping
>> butterflywise, so that the grandchild won't be born?
> 
> As I recall, the grandfather was visiting a (mostly empty) museum or
> something with his obnoxious spoiled brat six-year-old grandson when
> the adult version of the latter appeared and tried to kill him. At
> the end of the story, the grandfather was making a promise to
> himself to try and make sure that the kid grew up into a better,
> less bitter person the second time around.
> 
> So yes there's a paradox, assuming that he's successful and that
> would-be murderer incarnation of the adult version of the kid will
> now never exist.

He may have problems - it sounds like the grandson is so dumb that he
doesn't understand how the 'grandfather paradox' works. 

To do it correctly, he has to go back far enough in time to kill his
grandfather *before* the grandfather fathers a son or daughter, the
grandson's parent. 

Killing the grandfather when his own 6 year old self is already on 
the scene is Doing It Wrong.

pt 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451093

On 9/10/2016 8:47 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
> wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote in news:nr2ejh$s9p$1
> @panix3.panix.com:
>
>> In article <ctbishop-2858AE.15355410092016@news.individual.net>,
>> Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> said:
>>
>>> Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>>>> William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> L. Neil Smith had a story in which the answer to the Grandfather
>>>>> Paradox was "If you travel back in time and try to kill your
>>>>> grandfather, you will die."  Mostly because the grandfather in this
>>>>> case was way faster on the draw.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Going solely by Smith's (very short) short-story title list in the
>>>>> ISFDB, I'm pretty sure it had to be "Grandfather Clause,"
>>>>> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?94387)
>>>>
>>>> Thank you. That's one way to eliminate the paradox.
>>>
>>> Does it add another one. Is the fact that he has killed his
>>> grandchild mean the grandfather's life has been changed, flapping
>>> butterflywise, so that the grandchild won't be born?
>>
>> As I recall, the grandfather was visiting a (mostly empty) museum or
>> something with his obnoxious spoiled brat six-year-old grandson when
>> the adult version of the latter appeared and tried to kill him. At
>> the end of the story, the grandfather was making a promise to
>> himself to try and make sure that the kid grew up into a better,
>> less bitter person the second time around.
>>
>> So yes there's a paradox, assuming that he's successful and that
>> would-be murderer incarnation of the adult version of the kid will
>> now never exist.
>
> He may have problems - it sounds like the grandson is so dumb that he
> doesn't understand how the 'grandfather paradox' works.
>
> To do it correctly, he has to go back far enough in time to kill his
> grandfather *before* the grandfather fathers a son or daughter, the
> grandson's parent.
>
> Killing the grandfather when his own 6 year old self is already on
> the scene is Doing It Wrong.
>

Only of course if you want to create a paradox.  If you just really hate 
your grandfather, killing him after he's done his reproductive duty 
makes a bit of sense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451098

William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
> In article <ctbishop-2858AE.15355410092016@news.individual.net>,
> Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> said:
>
>> Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>>> William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> L. Neil Smith had a story in which the answer to the Grandfather
>>>> Paradox was "If you travel back in time and try to kill your
>>>> grandfather, you will die."  Mostly because the grandfather in this
>>>> case was way faster on the draw.
>>>>
>>>> (Going solely by Smith's (very short) short-story title list in the
>>>> ISFDB, I'm pretty sure it had to be "Grandfather Clause,"
>>>> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?94387)
>>>
>>> Thank you. That's one way to eliminate the paradox.
>>
>> Does it add another one. Is the fact that he has killed his
>> grandchild mean the grandfather's life has been changed, flapping
>> butterflywise, so that the grandchild won't be born?
>
> As I recall, the grandfather was visiting a (mostly empty) museum or
> something with his obnoxious spoiled brat six-year-old grandson when
> the adult version of the latter appeared and tried to kill him. At
> the end of the story, the grandfather was making a promise to
> himself to try and make sure that the kid grew up into a better,
> less bitter person the second time around.
>
> So yes there's a paradox, assuming that he's successful and that
> would-be murderer incarnation of the adult version of the kid will
> now never exist.

It's a different kind of paradox. It's a grandson paradox. The grandson
paradox is potentially one order more tangled up than the grandfather
paradox. You can blame it on engrams. :0)

The grandfather paradox keeps it simple. If a time traveler kills his
grandfather before his grandfather procreates then the traveler and his
timeline cease to exist at that very moment. If a time traveler kills
his grandfather after procreation then the traveler's time line is
altered.

The grandson paradox tangles it all up with engrams. Let's say that the
kid grows up better and less bitter. Now the grandfather potentially
carries around an engram of killing a grandson in a former timeline that
never existed.

The first two Butterfly Effect (BE) movies [1][2] implant new memories
to accommodate new timelines.  It's unclear what exactly happens to the
old engrams. (Implantation of new memories causes brain hemorrhages in
the second movie.)

BE memory implants remind me of Gerrold's _The Man Who Folded Himself_.
Again it's unclear what happens to Daniel's old engrams. Perhaps
Daniel's old engrams cease to exist and that's why Uncle Jim insists
that Daniel keep a diary.

Note.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Butterfly_Effect
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Butterfly_Effect_2
3.

--
Don Kuenz KB7RPU

    The fancy is indeed no other than a mode of memory emancipated from
the order of time and space. - Coleridge

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451101

On Sunday, 11 September 2016 03:13:07 UTC+1, William December Starr  wrote:
> In article <ctbishop-2858AE.15355410092016@news.individual.net>,
> Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> said:
> 
> > Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
> >> William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> L. Neil Smith had a story in which the answer to the Grandfather
> >>> Paradox was "If you travel back in time and try to kill your
> >>> grandfather, you will die."  Mostly because the grandfather in this
> >>> case was way faster on the draw.
> >>>
> >>> (Going solely by Smith's (very short) short-story title list in the
> >>> ISFDB, I'm pretty sure it had to be "Grandfather Clause,"
> >>> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?94387)
> >> 
> >> Thank you. That's one way to eliminate the paradox.
> >
> > Does it add another one. Is the fact that he has killed his
> > grandchild mean the grandfather's life has been changed, flapping
> > butterflywise, so that the grandchild won't be born?
> 
> As I recall, the grandfather was visiting a (mostly empty) museum or
> something with his obnoxious spoiled brat six-year-old grandson when
> the adult version of the latter appeared and tried to kill him. At
> the end of the story, the grandfather was making a promise to
> himself to try and make sure that the kid grew up into a better,
> less bitter person the second time around.

Or maybe just to not take him to boring museums so often??  :-)

> So yes there's a paradox, assuming that he's successful and that
> would-be murderer incarnation of the adult version of the kid will
> now never exist.

Another story - in comics - that you may recognise, or not,
involves a man visited by a series of different troubled future 
versions of his (unborn?) son - as messengers of his imminent
death.  Of course, if you're visited by your descendants from
the future, it may not mean that - but it's worth asking.
On the other hand, if you manage to survive the immediate
danger, then you eliminate their timeline in which you didn't - 
but that must be happening all the time anyway.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451104

On 2016-09-11, Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
> Another story - in comics - that you may recognise, or not,
> involves a man visited by a series of different troubled future 
> versions of his (unborn?) son - as messengers of his imminent
> death.  Of course, if you're visited by your descendants from
> the future, it may not mean that - but it's worth asking.
> On the other hand, if you manage to survive the immediate
> danger, then you eliminate their timeline in which you didn't - 
> but that must be happening all the time anyway.

ObRelatedSF: the Doc Future series of stories at docfuture.tumblr.com .

Dave, exactly what it says on the tin / a purloined letter
-- 
\/David	DeLaney	posting	thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that	grows the flower
It's not the clock that	slows the hour 	The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is	all it takes to	make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE	HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
website on VIC is down,	probably for good - oh well/ I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451132

In article <28b20d55-9c7a-47e5-85af-39a7e49469c8@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie  <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, 11 September 2016 03:13:07 UTC+1, William December Starr  wrote:
>> In article <ctbishop-2858AE.15355410092016@news.individual.net>,
>> Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> said:
>> 
>> > Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>> >> William December Starr <wdstarr@panix.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>> L. Neil Smith had a story in which the answer to the Grandfather
>> >>> Paradox was "If you travel back in time and try to kill your
>> >>> grandfather, you will die."  Mostly because the grandfather in this
>> >>> case was way faster on the draw.
>> >>>
>> >>> (Going solely by Smith's (very short) short-story title list in the
>> >>> ISFDB, I'm pretty sure it had to be "Grandfather Clause,"
>> >>> http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?94387)
>> >> 
>> >> Thank you. That's one way to eliminate the paradox.
>> >
>> > Does it add another one. Is the fact that he has killed his
>> > grandchild mean the grandfather's life has been changed, flapping
>> > butterflywise, so that the grandchild won't be born?
>> 
>> As I recall, the grandfather was visiting a (mostly empty) museum or
>> something with his obnoxious spoiled brat six-year-old grandson when
>> the adult version of the latter appeared and tried to kill him. At
>> the end of the story, the grandfather was making a promise to
>> himself to try and make sure that the kid grew up into a better,
>> less bitter person the second time around.
>
>Or maybe just to not take him to boring museums so often??  :-)
>
>> So yes there's a paradox, assuming that he's successful and that
>> would-be murderer incarnation of the adult version of the kid will
>> now never exist.
>
>Another story - in comics - that you may recognise, or not,
>involves a man visited by a series of different troubled future 
>versions of his (unborn?) son - as messengers of his imminent
>death.  Of course, if you're visited by your descendants from
>the future, it may not mean that - but it's worth asking.
>On the other hand, if you manage to survive the immediate
>danger, then you eliminate their timeline in which you didn't - 
>but that must be happening all the time anyway.


Not quite a grandfather paradox, but something you typed brought
this to mind:

http://www.viruscomix.com/page382.html

And of course, there's the magnificent "Wikihistory":

http://www.tor.com/2011/08/31/wikihistory/

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451140

In article <28b20d55-9c7a-47e5-85af-39a7e49469c8@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie  <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>Another story - in comics - that you may recognise, or not,
>involves a man visited by a series of different troubled future 
>versions of his (unborn?) son - as messengers of his imminent
>death.  

Kurt isn't around here any more, of course.

-- 
   David Goldfarb          |"English cuisine is the cuisine of fear."
goldfarbdj@gmail.com       | 
goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu  |              -- Andrew Conway

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451174

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:54:53 GMT, goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David
Goldfarb) wrote:

>In article <28b20d55-9c7a-47e5-85af-39a7e49469c8@googlegroups.com>,
>Robert Carnegie  <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>>Another story - in comics - that you may recognise, or not,
>>involves a man visited by a series of different troubled future 
>>versions of his (unborn?) son - as messengers of his imminent
>>death.  
>
>Kurt isn't around here any more, of course.

Unfortunately.





-- 
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451180

On Monday, 12 September 2016 05:39:12 UTC+1, Lawrence Watt-Evans  wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:54:53 GMT, goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David
> Goldfarb) wrote:
> 
> >In article <28b20d55-9c7a-47e5-85af-39a7e49469c8@googlegroups.com>,
> >Robert Carnegie  <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
> >>Another story - in comics - that you may recognise, or not,
> >>involves a man visited by a series of different troubled future 
> >>versions of his (unborn?) son - as messengers of his imminent
> >>death.  
> >
> >Kurt isn't around here any more, of course.
> 
> Unfortunately.

He's not dead!

But on Twitter he seems to be looking for a library 
where he can find shelter for the day, so he may 
have fallen on hard times.  :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#451182

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 23:07:41 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Monday, 12 September 2016 05:39:12 UTC+1, Lawrence Watt-Evans  wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:54:53 GMT, goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David
>> Goldfarb) wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <28b20d55-9c7a-47e5-85af-39a7e49469c8@googlegroups.com>,
>> >Robert Carnegie  <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>> >>Another story - in comics - that you may recognise, or not,
>> >>involves a man visited by a series of different troubled future 
>> >>versions of his (unborn?) son - as messengers of his imminent
>> >>death.  
>> >
>> >Kurt isn't around here any more, of course.
>> 
>> Unfortunately.
>
>He's not dead!
>
>But on Twitter he seems to be looking for a library 
>where he can find shelter for the day, so he may 
>have fallen on hard times.  :-)

Naah, he's fine.




-- 
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written

csiph-web