On The Paradox of Temporal Dislocation

Time travel, or as it should be called, temporal dislocation, is something that people have speculated and written about since time immemorial. There are references to "traveling" to the future embedded in ancient folk tales and myths, such as in the Hindu tale of Mahabharata, the story of the King Raivata Kakudmi, who travels to heaven to meet the creator Brahma and is shocked to learn that many ages have passed when he returns to Earth. There is also the well know Western story of Rip Van Wrinkle, who sleeps for a number of decades and wakes to a world completely different than the one he used to know. Less often mentioned is temporal dislocation into the past, mostly because to try to incorporate it into fiction without allowing a host of plot issues to crop up is difficult to say the least. However, both sides of the coin, forward temporal dislocation and reverse temporal dislocation, are equally important in defining what people like to popularly refer to as "time travel".

Before we can asses any temporal dislocation, first we must consider useful tools in trying to untie the paradoxical knots of time:

1. The first is superstring theory, aka, a higher-dimensional model. To try to cover the basics of this whole bucket of worms, I recommend watching this video here. The main thing to take from this video is that each higher dimension is a tesseract through the dimension below it. This is because if you where to fold and create a "wormhole" (aka, an Einstein-Rosen Bridge), you would be folding your dimension in the one above it. For the purpose of this argument, we will imagine that the 4th dimension (the one technically above our own) is time. We will be using the 4th dimension and the tesseract though it, the 5th.
2. The second tool is Everett's Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI), which, while contented amongst theoretical physicists, is useful to allow for reverse temporal dislocation. Summed up, it's an extended and refined "multiverse" theory (actually, it's closer to a multi-reality theory).
3. The third tool is the idea of Non-Elastic Time Travel. To try to seriously contemplate time travel you must do away with your wishy-washy, elastic timeline mumbo-jumbo. The idea that a timeline will adjust itself due to changes you have acted upon it from the past is simply absurd. This annoys me because it is so widely used as a panacea for fictional writers incorporating time travel into their works, and while I have no problem with it used there (as to try to explain "actual" temporal dislocation would be incredibly difficult to do), the popularization of the idea is faulty. Now, this presents a problem for traveling into the past, but we will attack this paradox with the two tools mentioned above in due course.
4. Fourth, time dilation. The idea being that the faster you go, the "slower" you experience time relative to those outside of your velocity. People traveling in a space ship at near-lightspeed would experience only minutes in the shuttle, while those not in the craft would experience hours. This could be used to solve the idea of how to cause temporal dislocation, but I will elaborate on these popular theories in due course.

With all our tools in place, let us begin. First, since it is easier to comprehend, let us consider "time travel into the future". By far the easier of the two types of time travel to understand, there are two basic types of forward time travel: 1) what I like to call 4th level travel and 2) 5th level travel. They are virtually the same in theory, but in practice the difference is tremendous. For the sake of the argument, lets just imagine that you "travel" to the future by accelerating to near-lightspeed. With 4th level travel, you would simply travel forward in time and come back to regular speed at a random iteration of the world you left. You only traveled along the 4th dimension, and let time take you where probability dictated. Now, with 5th level travel, you are actually tesseracting through time, and as such, can transcend the placement of probability and inject yourself into any possible timeline you chose. As long as the point you re-enter at is in the "future" from where you left and an actual possible iteration.

Now, for time travel into the past. Traditionally speaking, it is simply not possible. Let me repeat; not possible. Traveling the 4th dimension into the past cannot be done, full stop. However, that does not stop one from traveling through the 5th dimension and going back into the "past". Allow me to explain: one cannot travel down their own timeline and be in the past of their own timeline. It's not just impossible, it's inconceivable, because the instant you would enter your own timeline in the past, you would be changing something. Even by beginning to enter it, you would be altering some small factor, moving one molecule a millimeter, and changing everything irrevocably. Without our little cheating gizmo, namely timeline elasticity, this presents a major problem. The solution is, however, neat. You see, once you travel to the "past", and you alter something in the timeline, you are automatically not in that timeline anymore. You have gone off to a different branch, another reality where you traveled back in time all along. Now, because you never really reentered your timeline and stayed in the 4th  dimension, you where actually traveling in the 5th. Reality-jumping requires that you travel in the 5th dimension, and since reverse temporal dislocation is merely that, you cannot travel back into the "past" without traveling through the 5th dimension. This whole thing incorporates MWI Theory, and allows it to fit into the model appropriately.

Additionally, reverse temporal dislocation allows for a singular occurrence to take place; that of time loops. The scenario above dictates that of what I like to term as an Open Time-Loop. These aren't so much loops, but people just artificially jumping back into the past, like "regular" reverse time travel. The other side of this coin it that of Closed Time Loops. These are where there's an object, be it a physical object or a piece of information, stuck in a perpetual loop of going back in time, traveling froward normally, then going back in time to complete the cycle. Unlike Open Time-Loops, Closed Time-Loops are not actually in the 5th dimension. Because they do not jump realities, they are simply  loops in the 4th dimension. Closed Time-Loops would have to be committed to a single timeline, and cannot be broken. You could try and artificially break the loop, but all you'll succeed in doing is pushing yourself into a timeline where there was no Closed Time-Loop to begin with. This preserves the integrity of the Closed Time-Loop.

Of course, this isn't even discussing the possible way one could time travel. Well, thanks to Einstein's theory of relativity, forward temporal dislocation is fairly simple; accelerate to near light speed. Reverse temporal dislocation, on the other hand, is significantly more difficult and highly contentious. If we ignore the impossible task of achieving light speed while still interacting strongly with the Higgs Field to keep from transcending the whole "mass" issue, then it might be possible to travel back in time that way. However, as previously stated, current theory disallows this. There is the idea of using wormholes, but again, current theory works out that we'd only be able to use a classic 4th dimensional wormhole to travel back to the time when the wormhole was created, using a little of the Einstein's Theory of relativity mixed in. There are other theories, some even involving tachyons, but these are as tentative as the rest. The only real hope I see is higher dimensional wormholes, specifically those through the 5th. Unfortunately, I am unsure as to whether conventional science has anything to say on the possibly of 5th Dimensional Einstein-Rosen Bridges. Further enquiry is necessary.

Well, I suppose one can only hope that some phenomenon will be observed that will shed more light on the whole mess of "time travel". Perhaps a brilliant theoretical physicist will come along and help us out of these paradoxes we've run ourselves into. I am intensely curious to divine the answer to many of the questions regarding time dilation and time dislocation. And I'm sure the answers would be most... interesting.

Oh, The Humanity!

A question that has been weighing heavily on my mind of late is that of what makes a human... well... human. You could try to list physical traits, like "bipedal, mammalian, oxygen breathing, carbon based life forms possessing the abilities to give birth to live young, form complex thought and make difficult ethical decisions regarding other human beings." Or you could go with a dictionary definition: "any individual of the genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens." Now, both of these seem to be pretty concrete; however, the problem is that they will always have grey areas. No matter what you do, there will always be some sort of gap between what is human, and what is not. Perhaps the gap is too small to see, too small to exploit. Still, this gap is inevitable with any objective approach to the problem.

To prove a point, lets take the first definition. I could pose the counter argument of there being an alien life form possessing all of those qualities. Ok, then what if we add another trait to the list? Same thing. Anticipating my strategy, one could then go to add "belonging to an Earth-originating species." Ah, but what of people, say, from different dimensions? They don't come from our Earth, so are they not human? Balderdash... ect. Can you see how this would go on?

And so we must ask, what makes the people we know to be human, human? Why am I human? Why is the last person I talked to human? Why is my mother human? And above all, why is a dog/cat/anything else NOT human? What separates them so succinctly? What puts one thing into one category and another into the other? What allows us to solve this inherently subjective problem?

Wait, subjective? Yes, that's it! Since the problem is inherently subjective, then the answer should be subjective as well. What makes someone human is that is how you perceive them.

Allow that to sink in. Now, realize that is basically it. Someone is human because that is how you think of them. A dog is not human because you are not perceiving it as human, you are perceiving it as a dog. The reason we can get confused and caught up in objective details is because due to the sheer number and connectedness of humans today there is bound to be major overlap. The idea that someone human because "that is how you perceive them" as the solution to the equation allows for those little places where not everyone agrees. It works in every case because everyone is deciding from their respective viewpoint; hence, the answer fits all cases for all people. If there is indecision, then you simply do not have enough information on the subject to decide. I'm sure we will strive for a more... concrete definition, and perhaps some day we will come to it. Until then, though, this is why we still have juries.

The Pendulum of Society

The fact of human conflict is one that people have been trying to solve, or ignore, or come to terms with for a long, long time. Why is there this conflict? Where does it stem from? People often quote historical reasons, especially for large-scale conflicts, but this is a temporary solution. These historical conflicts, where do they stem from? And some conflicts don't even seem to have a historical reference to them. So why and how is this a constant and continual problem?

Of course, conflict between two parties of indeterminate size can take an infinite number of iterations to become selectively unique for each possible case. Generalizations are useful, but they blur lines. However, there seem to be common themes:

1. Us vs Them: People make friends, build connections, create social lives. This is an inevitable part of being a "fully functioning" human being in today's global capitalist society. However, the creation of groups of "friends" inevitably leaves the rest of the people as "not friends". This is initially harmless; but, the system is that of a mathematically unstable "Inverted Pendulum". A little nudge in the direction of concretization and hostilization of the outside group will continue to lead to negative feelings until it culminates into two distinct parties. If we continue along this route, it becomes an ironic situation, where a group of people split themselves into halves multiple times based on multiple factors, such as first religion, then gender, then political affiliations... ect. Eventually you have a situation where in trying to gain friends you have successfully alienated yourself and others completely because everyone is somehow now on the "other side".
2. Lack of Communication: A misunderstanding is also a common root cause of such things. People's severely limited physical means of expressing data and information (not to mention the highly dubious way of absorbing said "information") allow for error to add upon error and hence conflict to grow. This is usually done first to one side, where they misinterpret the true meaning of a message and respond harshly. Repeat. Or they don't respond at all, and the frustration of the event can have future consequences if the first party remains oblivious to the danger. Of course, lack of communication also manifests in convoluted information flows, allowing indirect (and hence, heavily distorted) data to come to one party. The party then forms conclusions based on aforementioned data and voila: resentment seeds planted.
3. General Negative View of Fellow Humans and Their Flaws: What people seem to be largely unable to do is comprehend their own limits. One can only imagine how poor their judgement for other human beings is. Hence, it's a 50/50 chance of someone forming high expectations based on a limited data set. When these expectations aren't met, there is disappointment, or, in extreme cases, resentment. Sometimes one incident is enough, sometimes it takes multiple incidents, but in any case, the result remains virtually the same. The problem here is that people cannot seem to accept that humans are beautiful simply because they don't meet your expectations. It shows there's more to them then you where originally able to discern.

Hopefully, someday, people will actively try to eliminate these conflicts to ensure not only a better live for themselves in the long run, but also for everyone else. Unfortunately, I highly doubt this; it only takes one. One person to get mad. One person to push a bit. And down swings the pendulum.