The time-travel/alternate reality basis for Star Trek raises many questions-- for physicists, of course, but also for philosophers.
Using the circumstances of the movie we've all just seen, I have questions that I hope some of you will offer your thoughts on.
Nero and Spock were both transported backward through time which created an alternate timeline when they arrived (but didn't destroy the one they just left). Let's assume the parallel universe model is the correct one and that, unlike in Back to the Future, there is not a single, prime timeline that can be altered and restored.
If there are parallel universes, like in Sliders (and in the TNG episode where Worf goes from one reality to another), what moral obligations does one have to realities other than one's own? Of course, most people would not have the ability to have any impact on other realities, but in the rare cases (as in Star Trek) when they do, what moral considerations must come into play?
For example, Spock could now attempt to go back in time to save Vulcan from being destroyed. But does he know that he would simply create another reality where Vulcan is NOT destroyed and that the reality he left would go on with the pain that came from Vulcan's destruction? Beyond this, would someone well-versed in the parallel universe model understand that there are an infinite number of alternate realities where unspeakably horrible things have occurred in some and not in others? One can obviously not travel to each reality to fix the bad things that happen. And even if one did try to traverse realities, would they not simply be causing another branch to grow among countless other branches?
It seems to me that Spock, who unwittingly is transported back in time, is making a pre-eminently reasonable decision to do his best to positively influence the reality he finds himself in. Because he is likely unable to get back to the reality he just left (as in Sliders). Or, working in the Back to the Future model, his future, even if somewhat repaired by his actions to bring Kirk to command, is irrevocably altered from HIS perspective since he is in a particular alternate reality that makes access to the one he left no longer possible because that future, for him, is gone, while on some other plain, it may still exist.
In any case, what I'm really asking is, if Spock (and who would know if not him) understands these ideas about parallel universes, it seems that he is making the right decision to stay and try to establish a Vulcan colony rather than tamper even more in time-travel to try to save it. Because he is aware that doing so would only help the Vulcans in one out of a countless number of parallel universes and one can reasonably only do his best in the one he finds himself in.
Using the circumstances of the movie we've all just seen, I have questions that I hope some of you will offer your thoughts on.
Nero and Spock were both transported backward through time which created an alternate timeline when they arrived (but didn't destroy the one they just left). Let's assume the parallel universe model is the correct one and that, unlike in Back to the Future, there is not a single, prime timeline that can be altered and restored.
If there are parallel universes, like in Sliders (and in the TNG episode where Worf goes from one reality to another), what moral obligations does one have to realities other than one's own? Of course, most people would not have the ability to have any impact on other realities, but in the rare cases (as in Star Trek) when they do, what moral considerations must come into play?
For example, Spock could now attempt to go back in time to save Vulcan from being destroyed. But does he know that he would simply create another reality where Vulcan is NOT destroyed and that the reality he left would go on with the pain that came from Vulcan's destruction? Beyond this, would someone well-versed in the parallel universe model understand that there are an infinite number of alternate realities where unspeakably horrible things have occurred in some and not in others? One can obviously not travel to each reality to fix the bad things that happen. And even if one did try to traverse realities, would they not simply be causing another branch to grow among countless other branches?
It seems to me that Spock, who unwittingly is transported back in time, is making a pre-eminently reasonable decision to do his best to positively influence the reality he finds himself in. Because he is likely unable to get back to the reality he just left (as in Sliders). Or, working in the Back to the Future model, his future, even if somewhat repaired by his actions to bring Kirk to command, is irrevocably altered from HIS perspective since he is in a particular alternate reality that makes access to the one he left no longer possible because that future, for him, is gone, while on some other plain, it may still exist.
In any case, what I'm really asking is, if Spock (and who would know if not him) understands these ideas about parallel universes, it seems that he is making the right decision to stay and try to establish a Vulcan colony rather than tamper even more in time-travel to try to save it. Because he is aware that doing so would only help the Vulcans in one out of a countless number of parallel universes and one can reasonably only do his best in the one he finds himself in.
), I'd have to say that what we're seeing this weekend is one of two things-
