Time Travel discussion

Is TIME a Loaf of Bread?

As a writer of Time Travel books, I’m often called on to explain certain conflicting circumstance inherent to the genre & chief among these would be ‘Loops in Time’ or various examples of the ever-dreaded ‘Paradox’ & often these concepts include other ‘Realities’ involving differing or changing Timelines, etc.

These topics clearly involve two separate aspects of the issue, language & usage (plainly understood terminology as opposed to skill in employing such) but beyond these very real aspects & as the basic starting point for any lucid discussion, Time itself must first be defined, for doing so makes or breaks any story’s scenario & therefore its credibility.

While few people think that they can truly understand Time, most do think that they know what it is, yet the Fourth Dimension is never one fixed phenomena that acts in a standard fashion & that’s where the common confusion sets in, at least in reference to the aforementioned items, that is.

For in the final analysis, the flow of Time must be understood as acting in two distinct ways not just one & as each example acts very differently, most problems involving Time Traveling plots stem from trying to mesh these two conflicting points of view, or not being aware of any distinction between them in the first place.

I explain it in this way, simplistic but telling:

Is Time a Loaf of Bread or is it really a Map?

Does Time ‘flow’ in sequence, one PRESENT after another PRESENT, after another and so on, as the recurring pieces of sliced bread in a loaf,

OR

Does Time act more like a Roadmap, where any path taken then becomes the PRESENT & so leads to various other possible paths, with unending potential PRESENT choices up for grabs depending only on the several routes you could then take?

Once the nature of Time is defined using this simple distinction, the listed concerns then become moot, for the apparent conflicts are no longer in play, or at least they can be explained in a rational way that enhances the plot, as opposed to using plots that under scrutiny fail to pass the test of credibility.

As such, any good Time Traveling story can be filtered through this lens & the lesser examples can be as well, with the differences thereby becoming apparent and understandable, as opposed to just being confusing, or simply boring.

In my books, all Epic Fables of the elusive Elastic Limit of Time, many other things are of course covered, but this distinction is always taken into account & yet I’ve never explained it as such & perhaps you think I’m in error.

If so, this thread is intended to give a venue to take exception or to express a differing view.

Or not.

Who knows what the Future will bring?

Howard wrote: "Does Time act more like a Roadmap, where any path taken then becomes the PRESENT & so leads to various other possible paths, with unending potential PRESENT choices up for grabs depending only on the several routes you could then take?"

The problem I have with that is where does the energy come from to create all those possible paths?

I always like the river analogy -- that time flows like a river, in a natural path, taking the path of least resistance. We can attempt to alter the flow of the river, but it tries to return to the original path. So, if you go back and save someone's life, do they just end up dying the next day from something else, restoring the natural flow?

And, like the Grand Canyon, the longer the river flow in its natural path, the harder it is to change that path.

Randy wrote: 'where does the energy come...' & also 'We can attempt to alter the flow of the river…’

Very nice observations, Randy:

In Science, which attempts empirical description (as opposed to any other established discipline), equations must equate, or something always equals something else (that’s why they’re called equations), yet that means each side is always the same thing just described differently: Two plus two equals three plus one, it's the same concept & so it is with all elegant explanations.

Yet the known mass of the universe nowhere near equals the vast space in which it resides.

Current explanation leans toward so called 'dark matter' making up the difference, although they don't know how to identity it & so by extension can’t provide an adequate description, which you’d need to comply with the discipline, as I’ve said.

Anyway, this is whence the energy comes, what powers the flow, that is & the point is that there’s plenty of it from which to pull the necessary power that drives the Timeflow.

Secondly, if Time is a Loaf of Bread you can always go back to the very beginning & so alter what you wish.

I'll ponder this while I make my breakfast tomorrow morning, I'll try not to let the jam distract my thoughts!

Tej mentioned distracting jam:

A sticky wicket, so to speak?

Howard wrote: "Tej mentioned distracting jam:

A sticky wicket, so to speak?"

Nope its just i might think of the jam as the flow of time on my slices of bread and that just might complicate my figuring out the metaphores!

Mixed metaphores so to speak, like toast & jam?

OK I'm done now.

Hmmm....
Now I am thinking of the many Time Travel novels I have read and putting them into the two groups. However, Randy make a point about time itself always wanting to fix itself. If it veers off the natural course, it tries to get back on track. The Connie Willis books are like that.
Is this a gray area to your segmentation? Or just a loaf of bread that lost a few slices from the middle?

Well Debbie, if you’re using this example you must carry it through:

If Time is a river diverted only to return to its original (or intended) course, then it becomes a matter of degree.

In other words, greater change in the flow would mean greater Time to correct such.

This would mean, given sufficient change to begin, the corrections may not work themselves out for some period.

Ergo, in a given circumstance, Time as a river could be changed in the short term, say easily someone's lifespan.

Everything is relative.

This is all explained in my books & the river example is heavily covered in the first one, a free download on Smashwords:

And Debbie:

Rapid change is always possible given only slight tweaking & examples of this are covered in my second Epic Fable:

I think that time does not even exist.. just into the situation is you and what you think about everyone around you if you think past return it would hellishly return to you and those around you .. the cause is your brain and your eyes.. more accurately you send and receive em waves it all depends on which wave you send and receive

You can also confirm above observation wid others' observation and wid urs too also everyything seems relative due to the fact that ur brain is one you (infact everyone ) tries to unify different thoughts into one single thought so that you can study them better

Well, Vishal, we're splitting hair here: Time is real, the effects apparent.

Those effects, however, may not be, it depends on your perspective for others' observations most definitely would be relative to the whole & energy next to energy always has effects.

You mention 'what you think about' & that's just fixing a point within the collective field, still, doing so & what follows is thereby defined by time, given your consciousness, your awareness, is sufficient to register.

When it does it's either a road map (or river, etc.) or a loaf of bread, again your choice.

The flow itself doesn't really matter, just the direction you choose.

For example, you can read my latest book of short stories in any way you choose; In any order for they stand alone, or front to back, or even backward by starting with the last & then reading forward.

Also, as Time always has Paradox, none of my three books are sequels but they do in fact explain each other and, as with the short stories, my books can be read in any order, it doesn't matter, only your choice.

Making it will fix your place in Time & you'll define that by one of two ways, as we're discussing.

Here's the book that you can read backwards:

I'm sorry if anyone has conveyed the marking of hellishly wrong it just means quickly and substantially

Also Howard u are right I was just fixing a point in the scenario which I see in others

Yes, but that point is on a map, or not.

You must decide which; no one else can.

Its on the map on one dimension and not on the other..hehehe:)

I hope it's just a discussion

http://stephaniegolden.net/writing_bl...