Be your own father

[Sabu]

Ok, so my sibling and I were debating on the exact nature of the paradox I'm about to describe to you, and I want you to twist your brains around and get the whole gist of the situation.

What if you went back in time and had a child with your mother, and that child turned out to be you.

Right, so we've narrowed down a few things that would have a billion to one chance of actually happening that this condition requires.

 * There is no 'first time'. It was asked who the 'original' father was, but the nature of time travel allows it to be an infinite loop that needs no beginning nor end.
 * The child (you) must have obtained every gene from his father (you) in order to be you.
 * There is no possibility for error. Kunas pointed out that what if, during one of the loops, some of the genetic mumbo jumbo got mixed up. The problem with this argument is what I'm about to describe as the 'kill your own grandfather' paradox.

You cannot go back in time to change something that happened. If you go back to kill your father (before you were born), then you would not have been born. If you were not born, you couldn't possibly have gone back to kill him, so you *would* have been born.

Are you still with me? Good. The entire path had *already happened*, and therefore could not possibly go any differently. If there was an attempt to change it, this paradox would kick in and cancel out its possibility.

So what's the big deal with this paradox? You go back in time to have a child with your mother (no jokes on that please) and that child turns out to be you. There was no 'first' father, because you'd gone back and it was you. You did not change anything, because it had already happened.

I plan to use this argument if anyone ever suggests the possibility going back in time to me.

What do you think? And by the way, have any of you read Oedipus Rex? I'm got some things to say on that, I tell you.

[Sabu]

This is, by the way, only focussing on one of the explanations for how time works. I'm working off a 'singular path' theory.

I know some of you are going to go on that 'multiple futures' idea I've heard so much about, in which you can go back and change your own personal history.

But that's no fun.

[CornishSkankRabbit]

Makes sence.

[Nocte]

I think you'll get a strange situation at the moment of birth. There are two "yous" at that point, one adult and one baby. The baby version is the one that is supposed to go back in time, but the adult version is the one that already did this. Still, they are two separate beings.

Maybe this can be solved by killing yourself before you get born.

[Sabu]

At that particular instance, you may be two separate beings, but in the grand scale of things you could see it as "the kid is you in the future, so therefore still is and you are, in reverse, the kid. Same person. Different timeframe.

This touches on the philosophy that each instance is a separate being because things have changed, ie they are not identical so therefore they must be different.

Killing yourself before you get born? As open as my mind may be at the moment.. that makes no sense or makes any difference. Once you have gone back and had the kid with your mother (which becomes you) it doesn't matter what you (having travelled) then goes and does. Go back to the future, travel off, kill yourself, whatever. The loop still continues.

Using some of the points I've already made, You cannot stop the loop, because it has *already happened*, due to you having grown up and travelled back to start it again.

[Sporty Fox]

*sits and stares at the screen as he ponders Sabu's question...... comes to the one and only conclusion that he can positively conclude. It's WAY to early in the morning to need a beer........*

[beyond the darkness]

You have no idea the number the number of times I have had that discussion, let me know if you come up with any more ideas on it will you?

[Raust Shieldra]

Theres a problem with you becoming your own father, it would be a genetic impossibility, the genes would be yours mixed with your mothers and in the end different than your own. Well shouldn't say imposible, more like improbable for the odds on the correct genes being passed is way beyond my gambling odds. You have reasoned everything else out nicely though, if you were lucky enough to get the right genes this loop would indeed be in place.





Raust Shieldra

[Rowne]

I cannot help but wonder right now if there's some kind of business for this in the future.  My reasoning works something like this; today we have companies that perform odd business intercourse such as selling plots of land on the moon or the belongings of some long dead race.  Let's spin time forward a few thousand years.  One's sitting at home watching the Interholo (Interactive Holographic Generator -- provided by Qube, purveyour of all good interactive holography, coming to a store near you in the 22nd century, probably!'> and some fellow in 22nd century fashion stylings pops up with an advertisement.  Replete with large boots and very strap-biased clothing, if Bill and Ted is to be believed.  "Purify your own heritage," he declares, in a loud advertisementish drawl.  "that's right, it's now possible to track your family line back to the earliest possible point.  You could then mate with your precursor and ensure a more true you!  Not pleased with your genetics?  Our Scientists say that genetic modification still has a 40% chance of graft refusal.  Time travel is proven and safe.  Be your own ancestor, TODAY.  Call 1-800-TIMELINESEX."

In other words, I believe that if this is possible, it's already happening and that my great, great Grandfather is already my great, great, great, great Grandson.  Our timeline must have a really good error-fixing routine, otherwise I'd surmise it'd be well and troly borked by now.

-Edit-

In other words, I believe that the timeline has some kind of algorythm to catch parts of the 'code' of the Universe that simply don't compute and those aspects of the timeline are cut and cast away, as a Doctor would do with a growth.  In other words, we might end up with entire chunks of our history disappearing because the timeline algorythm found them to be erroneous.  I'm not sure how plausible this is but it would explain a lot in my mind if the Universe itself did have some kind of instinctive error-checking scheme that stopped itself from falling apart at the seams.

[KinderStone]

I seem to remember a Red Dwarf episode (series 7 episode 3 'Ouroboros' ) where Lister found out he was his own father.

If you go back in time to be your own father it would mean that you had already done that already (or you wouldn't be there)  so you would always be in a loop - going back to your birth then growing up to go back. And it would always be you who was created because it was you that was created the first time.

[Nocte]

Quote (Sabu @ July 25 2004, 2:20 pm)

This touches on the philosophy that each instance is a separate being because things have changed,ie they are not identical so therefore they must be different.

Yes, there are several ways of looking at this. I'm not sure which one is the "right" one.

Quote (Sabu @ July 25 2004, 2:20 pm)

Killing yourself before you get born? As open as my mind may be at the moment.. that makes no sense or makes any difference.

I know, I wasn't completely serious. '>

Quote (Sporty Fox @ July 25 2004, 2:39 pm)

It's WAY to early in the morning to need a beer........

Hurrah for timezones! *opens another cold one*

Well... There's only two distinct paradoxes involved, although they might be arguable.  The first is the one you've already stated; birth implies the beginning of your own existence and could therefore have not been the result of actions by yourself.  The thing about time travel, however, is that a traveler's actions would have taken effect before the actual time travel, so if taken back to a period before he existed, he could theoretically influence his own creation.

The real paradox would be back in the future; you yourself would have taken influence from your mother/father in order to reach whatever position in life permitted you to time travel, and if you attempted to direct yourself in a different direction as a paternal figure, you would likely make the same mistakes your mother/father did.

[Fox G4]

Raging Gyphon makes a good point. The whole genetic deal, for every time you loop and have a child with your mother, the genetic meterial from you (as an adult) would be used again with some of your mother's, and in a sense you (as a baby) would be a totally different person. And totally different person every time again and again.

What we're getting into here, is an infinite recursion. Where you're taking the result of what has happened and including it into the same equation for the next iteration.

However, for each iteration, the amount of genetic material passed from your mother can become less and less. So looping to the end of infinity, you would essentially become a person with neither a mother or father. You would simply exist without having ever been born or died. Weird, huh?  

All of this assuming of course, your genetic material has dominant traits. There's always that certain recessive gene you know...

[WhiteShepherd]

Well if you look at it from a mathmatics point of view Sabu your paradox is only possible becouse you are breaking the mathmatics of time space.  

Just like following the logic chain of events A:=2+1, then B:=1,  Then say (in your setup) you go back and say Value A=4 you just broke the logic chain.

Here is how it works.  We are here becouse of event A+B+C,ETC with the value of events leading (ie adding up) to the value of our current existence.  Now in theory you CAN go back in time even the mathmatics allow for that.  

I'll try and explain it visualy.  Here is the problem if ALL time is linear which is what creates paradox.  Now imagine each letter 50 years as a letter.  A+=B+=C+=D+  Each half century is a result of everything before it.  If D time event was to affect C time { A+=B+=C+d=D2 } Problem is taking a moment from D and adding those events to C changes the value of D and removes whoever tried to go back and make the change.  Thus pure linear time with normal mass physics would revert back to A+=B+=C+=D+ .  At least in perception.....

But here is where it gets interesting.  There are some things we know that are not affected by our "time" like Photons, and a few other particles of energy.  So if D could in theory could leave a message for C in non time affected energy (how would be a feat in itself) the message would not be affected by the loss "literal shift" in time.  This message acting like a unconnected "new" event in our time/perception would become a part of C's events rolling out D2 at the end of D but starting from the value of C (in our perception).  Think of it like a thread.

<Past---C--------------------------------D---Future>

Where the new value intersects a place in time.  Ie The end of D continues back up at C with whatever transfered.  The fact that there are particles not affected by time says it can be changed at least on some level. So D and D2 both exist as part of the time line.

<Past-----------------<-------------------D--Future> snip-thread hold roll out>
 Â                               |
(paste start thread) -----------------D2

This could works becouse C+=D+ which when a part of D+ added again to C+ continues to roll out in order a new (or more correct a "continuing") chain of events D2.  D does not continue.  This is becouse C continues at the end of D to D2.  D2 and D do not overlap and neither is aware of the other.  The reason for this is in reailty D2 continues where D (ie D2=D/ + C) ends.  But perception inside time will always appear linear to the people there.  So people who are in D2 it will appear to come right after C except whatever clues were left from the message.   Again what makes this theory possible is there are particles that do not exist in the flow of our linear time. This could allow for a changes to be happening on our time line though we may not see it unless "we" transfered.

So back to the original argument.  Yes if genes worked that way and say you could convert yourself into light and move to that time point.  You could go back and sire another you through your mother.  However it would be more like a younger twin than you all over again.  Your father would of sired you in D and then you would of (through odd gene bonding) sire another you who would grow up with the same genetics you did but not the same experiences following down through D2.

Just some idle thoughts on the idea. '>

 Â Woof!  WhiteShepherd

[Jackalman]

Going back in time to change ANYTHING creates a paradox.  

Forget the "Kill your own grandfather routine".  Think of this-

Let's say you broke a vase.  The next day you travel back in time to save the vase from being broken.

Paradox?

With the vase now saved, why would you travel back in time to save it?  And if you didn't, then how would the vase be saved?  

Going back in time to change creates a paradox so there is a theory that travelling back in time creates a sepperate timeline that has no affect whatsoever on the timeline you originated from.  It's like creating an alternate universe, so matter what you alter won't have any effect.  You can kill your own grandfather, you can wipe out half the world.  The timeline you came from goes unchanged but you created a new timeline where your changes exist.  

Now there's a problem with this in sci fi.  It means going back in time cannot change present effects.  That means if you go back in time to change something, from the perspective of the people who saw you leave, you just go away and never come back and whatever changes you make will never happen to them.

So a theme like Back to the Future just wont work, there's no corsality.

[Sabu]

Jackal, they're both the same

If you go back to chnage something, it would not have needed to be changed, so you wouldn't have gone back to change it and it wouldn't have changed.

I specifically noted the whole gene mixup when I began

Quote

* The child (you) must have obtained every gene from his father (you) in order to be you.

Terastas, as I said, there is no possibility for trying to redirect the path because, you having already experienced it, it has *already happened* and therefore has a set path.

WhiteShepherd, I don't have a clue what you just said. I'll read it tonight.

Jackalman again, I said in my second post that i'm aware of the 'different paths' theory and I won't stand to it being mentioned

[Shadowhawk]

EDIT - Sabu, ask the admins to delete my post if you want, it's cool...  '> but I think this should be mentioned anyway, even though you don't want to hear it    it is after all a viable answer. A linear timeline seems too simplistic to me, it makes us too important in the universal plan or something... Besides, the end is worth it - END EDIT

To be honest, I agree with Jackalman's assessment to an extent, but I have long held with the theory that every event, no matter how small, where there is a choice made, by everyone and everything, splits off individual timelines which continue on a parallel course, each one of those embodying one result of the various choices not taken, and the timeline that said person or thing experiences is the single result of the choice made. In other words, there are infinite parallel lines of future time. However, if said person/thing wants to go back and change something, that person/thing will go back along the path that was taken - a single line into the past that reflects all the choices that individual and others in his/her/its line before, has made - thus anything changed branches off yet further infinite future lines, yet different from those that had already been created. This happens for everyone and everything in the universe. There is no real issue of paradox here, but this theory has an added complication in that each timeline has or has had or will have a "you" - and that "you" is only aware of the one path that he/she/it is on.

So can you go back, kill your father, do your mother and become your father?  not as easy as all that, because you only have access to your path, and not those of the others - in this scenario you would have to have access to the root timeline that spawned all the others, which is to say have access to the decision that resulted in the first "you" to make a decision.  confused yet?  add to that the genetic drift that was mentioned and the likelyhood that you'd be you on the exit of this choice is slim. Plus this theory does not entertain the idea of a loop, as it is not setting up a loop so much as an alternate outcome each time this happens; the decision may be a loop, but the outcome is not, and would be different each time it happened, in infinite forward paths.

ok, now I've confused myself...

Stipulate a linear timeline, and sure, you can be your own father if you are a clone of your father to begin with - and yes it would be a loop, but it could be influenced to change that - say you decided after hooking up with your mom that you didn't want this to happen again - if you made the child aware of his origins, it's a 50/50 shot as to whether he'd do it again in the future, not an infinite loop as you propose. beside that, other changes creep in - maybe past you decided to have more children than there originally were in your family. Or maybe your mom decides not to have kids at all. Maybe knowing your upbringing causes you to raise the kid slightly differently, resulting in a different personality - or maybe there's some kind of accident that wouldn't have happened if you hadn't gone back (since it's you making the decisions and you are NOT your original dad - a different personality and experience set even if the genes are identical, clony!'>...  it's not all cut & dried like you propose, even if you don't accept the multiple line theory.

[Sabu]

Quote (Shadowhawk @ July 25 2004, 6:40 pm)

EDIT - Sabu, ask the admins to delete my post if you want, it's cool...  '> but I think this should be mentioned anyway, even though you don't want to hear it    it is after all a viable answer. A linear timeline seems too simplistic to me, it makes us too important in the universal plan or something... Besides, the end is worth it - END EDIT To be honest, I agree with Jackalman's assessment to an extent, but I have long held with the theory that every event, no matter how small, where there is a choice made, by everyone and everything, splits off individual timelines which continue on a parallel course, each one of those embodying one result of the various choices not taken, and the timeline that said person or thing experiences is the single result of the choice made. In other words, there are infinite parallel lines of future time. However, if said person/thing wants to go back and change something, that person/thing will go back along the path that was taken - a single line into the past that reflects all the choices that individual and others in his/her/its line before, has made - thus anything changed branches off yet further infinite future lines, yet different from those that had already been created. This happens for everyone and everything in the universe. There is no real issue of paradox here, but this theory has an added complication in that each timeline has or has had or will have a "you" - and that "you" is only aware of the one path that he/she/it is on. So can you go back, kill your father, do your mother and become your father?  not as easy as all that, because you only have access to your path, and not those of the others - in this scenario you would have to have access to the root timeline that spawned all the others, which is to say have access to the decision that resulted in the first "you" to make a decision.  confused yet?  add to that the genetic drift that was mentioned and the likelyhood that you'd be you on the exit of this choice is slim. Plus this theory does not entertain the idea of a loop, as it is not setting up a loop so much as an alternate outcome each time this happens; the decision may be a loop, but the outcome is not, and would be different each time it happened, in infinite forward paths. ok, now I've confused myself... Stipulate a linear timeline, and sure, you can be your own father if you are a clone of your father to begin with - and yes it would be a loop, but it could be influenced to change that - say you decided after hooking up with your mom that you didn't want this to happen again - if you made the child aware of his origins, it's a 50/50 shot as to whether he'd do it again in the future, not an infinite loop as you propose. beside that, other changes creep in - maybe past you decided to have more children than there originally were in your family. Or maybe your mom decides not to have kids at all. Maybe knowing your upbringing causes you to raise the kid slightly differently, resulting in a different personality - or maybe there's some kind of accident that wouldn't have happened if you hadn't gone back (since it's you making the decisions and you are NOT your original dad - a different personality and experience set even if the genes are identical, clony!'>...  it's not all cut & dried like you propose, even if you don't accept the multiple line theory.

here we go..

Jackal, I agree with that theory entirely. I myself came up with that one many years a go when I was a little tyke wandering around pondering the universe '>

However for the purpose of this excercise, the 'multiple timelines' is one gigantic ploy someone conjured up because they didn't have a response to the paradox that otherwise proves time travel's impossibility.

However, when you moved on to describing the linear approach, you forgot one important aspect I made in relation to the set path.

There is no chance for error. You could not decide to alter yourself as you grew up because, as you have already been through that time path before, it has already happened and therefore must happen exactly as it did. It's like seeing into the past, except you're living it again from a different perspective..

You bring up an interesting point about the clone thing.. although there is no 'to begin with', the cloning idea would greatly increase the chances of the kid having the same genes.

There would be no family tree. Just a family circle. Unless you then had more kids with your mother, who you went back to be with, who then went without any time travelling mumbo jumbo and just wondered where their brother ended up when he strangely dissappeared.

Then the family tree would just have one particular branch that wound around into itself.

[Kasarn]

This is a paradox because you skipped a vital step, a step without which you can't even ask the question which creates the paradox.

And that question is:
How did you travel back in time in the first place?

You need to define that first, because you answer that and you will solve your paradox. And of course, no definition will be good enough, except the correct one, and if you come up with that, you'll become rich and famous, and if you do that...can I have some money?
-----
Anyway, the child can't be you. Because how do you define who you are? Hell, you aren't even you because your body has completely regenerated itself at the end of roughly ten years (your brain taking the longest to regenerate, I think, followed by the heart).
-----
In my opinion, if you just used multidimensional physics (it's pretty much exactly what it sounds like), you would solve all your problems because you would take the "Time" dimension out of the main equation (it wouldn't matter is time was linear or not, you'd get the same result because time would just need to be a point), but you would still not father "yourself", merely a facsimile.
-----
Also, why is everyone assuming that if this occurs, the universe wouldn't collapse on itself or something?
I'm not overly pessimistic, but it had to be said (of course, if the universe did collapse, you probably wouldn't notice).
'> '>

Alright, I'm done, I think (I managed to procrastinate for two hours coming up with poorly thought out theories, all of which failed to answer the question as asked).

[Sabu]

How did I travel? This is not a step in the paradox itself - it is specified in part of the situation (that the travellling was done, regardless of method). Answering it will not solve a paradox, it will simply define the means to the situation already presumed.

Perhaps this entire excersize was intended to illustrate the absurdity of travelling back to influence the past.

I have already covered the idea of you being a different person in different times. We're working on the theory of self as a continuum, not as a product of its many instances.

The multiple instances has already been explored and torn apart as an excuse for those who can't accept the paradox Read all the posts above.

It would not destroy the universe if it happened. My entire point is that it cannot happen, given the specific conditions, because it is a paradox. Multidimensional suggestions try to redefine my question, I didn't say 'give birth to a being with your mother', I said 'give birth to *yourself*. Very specifically.

*Reads over WhiteShepherd's post 3 times trying to understand it* Ahh screw it, its to late for this!
Attempting to understand whats going on in this thread has just burnt my brain out ...need sleep.

[DarkDancer]

Well, as far as I have seen, in science fiction, there are 3 different theories on time travel (what's weird is sometimes a show will use more than one... ). There is the mulitple time line theory, this has been discussed.

There is the time is tragically maleable so everything you do in the past will bring a huge change theory.

There is also the time cannot be changed, so do what you want in the past because it nothing will change (predestination temporal causality).

There's an interesting story by Heinlein. It would take forever to detail it here, but look it up, it's called "By His Bootstraps". It explains perfectly how the going back in time and becomming your own father could happen without any genetic issues... '>

[Kasarn]

I was gonna make a post, but it ended up being very long and not making much of a contribution

Here's the gist
Multidimensional quantum physics does not use multiple instances (not in the way you describe it anyway) and you are not two different people in two different times. It works perfectly well in a linear timeline with only one of you. It still isn't a correct answer though, it merely cheats to produce the result.

Theory of self as a continuum is fundamentally flawed, as "self" is not a single entity, but billions of seperate entities trying to rip apart (unless you count an intangible soul, which I have chosen to ignore for this statement, because it causes even more problems).

And time travel devices often have the user being destroyed and reconsituted at the other end (which is why I asked the how), which would mean you are no longer you (although I assumed this was not the case).

Just because you think you are you, doesn't necessarily make it true.

And I agree with White Shepherd, although (like everything I've done so far) his model does not solve the paradox as written. The real sticking point is the fact that you must father yourself, which is an extreme outside chance in a linear timeline which isn't completely predetermined (but doesn't invalidate the paradox itself).

And here is my original post (it's in straight text and still has iB code all over it)

So the solution is that we do not have free will, merely the illusion of it. Everything has already been pre-determined and the universe has a start and has a definate end. This means that you can travel back in time and change whatever you like. But since time is already pre-planned, you are doing it in a theoretical present, then returning to the present and can see the consequences (although you wouldn't have to return, you could stay there). This also means that you could travel to the future and see the consequences of your actions of messing with time before you have done them, and then you would know that you have no way of avoiding your fate, because even if you try and escape your fate, that has been planned as well and you will unwittingly do as fate has decreed.

It's bleak and pessimistic, but as far as I can see, such a model could solve the paradox. Although can see some problems with the way I have written it.

If I made no sense, I'm not surprised (tests have shown that my mind and thought process are definately oddball).
Oh well, if this topic hurts your head, think about this statement for a while (it's much more fun)
"This sentence is false."

[Admiral Purge]

Alot of these posts were really long and complicated, so forgive me if this has already been said.

I don't see a paradox, or a reason there can't be a first time. Improbabilities do not make for paradoxes, only very unlikely situations.

The given in the question is that when you go back in time to mate with your mother, the offspring turns out to be you. By this, I assume that we mean "genetically identical to you", because anything else attached to the genes is going to be the sum total of experiences that it cannot have experienced with you any more than one can grow older than ones older sibling.

Regardless - if you could not have been your own father the first time, then your father would simply have to pass on the same genes that you do to your mother. Highly improbable, but not impossible, so far as I know.

-edit- To be clear, I'm not trying to get "multi-dimensional" here. I'm simply saying that in one single universe, there could be two separate genetically identical "you's", doing the same things over and over in the loop you described.

[Kasarn]

I got bored coming up with stuff with no research, and did a quick search on the web.

Here are some interesting links
http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/theory/
http://science.howstuffworks.com/time-travel.htm
http://www.friesian.com/paradox.htm

This one has a lot more explanation
http://www.biols.susx.ac.uk/home/John_Gribbin/timetrav.htm

And this one went straight over my head, but was still an interesting read
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/time-travel-phys/

Oh, and a paradox is defined as
- Something which seems absurd or unbelievable, yet may be true
- A statement that appears contradictory