^ You've read John Brunner's The Infinitive of Go, haven't you? 
Trying to make sense of the timeline
- Thread starter laibcoms
- Start date
A very illuminating discussion. Thank you, Idran, for the explanation. Once I overcame my brain's initial reaction to anything structured and mathematical - "brain has encountered a problem and needs to close" - I was able to get a good grasp on what you're saying. Very insightful.
In this theoretical multiversal scenario, for example, if you wanted to find a universe where everything was exactly the same to you except that a lottery ticket you just lost on you instead won the jackpot on, you wouldn't be selecting a specific universe. You'd be selecting an arbitrary member of the subset of universes in which the chain of causation on the solar system was identical (within some bounds) over all time from T=0 to the present but in which all other parameters were unconstrained. It doesn't really matter if you end up in a universe where Deneb is 95% of its size here and Andromeda has three more stars than it does here, for example, so long as you've got that hundred million dollars from the Powerball and the Earth's history is basically the same as it was in your home universe.
Essentially, "eh, close enough" (to quote Homer Simpson) would be good enough.
Now, the probability would still likely be close to 0 (for some reasonable definition of "close to 0"), which might be enough from your point of view to use that counter-argument. But it is a little more complex than just picking a specific value out of an infinite set.
Even so, as you say, the probability would be close to zero. If we're talking about an infinity of universes where every possible one exists, then the overwhelming majority of universes wouldn't even have laws of physics that allowed stars, planets, and life as we know them to exist. Even "habitable" universes would be a minuscule fraction of the whole set. And of those, most would have completely different stars and planets and species. The probability that any of them would have duplicates of Earth and humanity and specific individuals would be infinitesimal.
So yeah, you might not have to search a literally infinite amount of time to find such a randomly occurring near-duplicate, but you'd still probably have to search for millions or billions of years before you stumbled across one. Which makes it a moot distinction on the scale of a human lifetime or even a civilization's lifetime.
^ You've read John Brunner's The Infinitive of Go, haven't you?
I honestly have never even heard of that! What is it?
In this theoretical multiversal scenario, for example, if you wanted to find a universe where everything was exactly the same to you except that a lottery ticket you just lost on you instead won the jackpot on, you wouldn't be selecting a specific universe. You'd be selecting an arbitrary member of the subset of universes in which the chain of causation on the solar system was identical (within some bounds) over all time from T=0 to the present but in which all other parameters were unconstrained. It doesn't really matter if you end up in a universe where Deneb is 95% of its size here and Andromeda has three more stars than it does here, for example, so long as you've got that hundred million dollars from the Powerball and the Earth's history is basically the same as it was in your home universe.
Essentially, "eh, close enough" (to quote Homer Simpson) would be good enough.
Now, the probability would still likely be close to 0 (for some reasonable definition of "close to 0"), which might be enough from your point of view to use that counter-argument. But it is a little more complex than just picking a specific value out of an infinite set.
Even so, as you say, the probability would be close to zero. If we're talking about an infinity of universes where every possible one exists, then the overwhelming majority of universes wouldn't even have laws of physics that allowed stars, planets, and life as we know them to exist. Even "habitable" universes would be a minuscule fraction of the whole set. And of those, most would have completely different stars and planets and species. The probability that any of them would have duplicates of Earth and humanity and specific individuals would be infinitesimal.
So yeah, you might not have to search a literally infinite amount of time to find such a randomly occurring near-duplicate, but you'd still probably have to search for millions or billions of years before you stumbled across one. Which makes it a moot distinction on the scale of a human lifetime or even a civilization's lifetime.
Oh, definitely. I guess it might be somewhat nitpicky to point out, but that's just the way my brain goes when math is involved. :P
^ You've read John Brunner's The Infinitive of Go, haven't you?
I honestly have never even heard of that! What is it?
Here you go.
^ You've read John Brunner's The Infinitive of Go, haven't you?
I honestly have never even heard of that! What is it?
Here you go.
Oh, that does sound interesting; thanks!
(I have to admit that in hindsight, on reading that synopsis, I might have had Starslip Crisis (a very, very vaguely similar story) on the mind, though.
)
Can we be sure ENT is part of the timeline for the Abramsverse? I mean, what with all the meddling in time that goes on, who's to say that things didn't get changed so that for example:
- Sphere builders may not have gone back in time to meddle with the Xindi. Whole Temporal Cold War arc nixed in moments!
- TNG crew may not have needed to go back in time to stop the Borg (ST8) so there were never drones buried in the Arctic. There goes another episode!
Who knows what other things in ENT were a result of time travel from the future?
- Sphere builders may not have gone back in time to meddle with the Xindi. Whole Temporal Cold War arc nixed in moments!
- TNG crew may not have needed to go back in time to stop the Borg (ST8) so there were never drones buried in the Arctic. There goes another episode!
Who knows what other things in ENT were a result of time travel from the future?
Last edited:
^The intent was always that ENT is the actual set of events that leads to the timeline of the other Trek series. The Abrams timeline branched off from that track in 2233. But since the Prime timeline still exists beyond that point, there's no reason why any of its temporal influences on the past should be "erased" just because a different branch coexists with it. After all, there are spontaneous alternates branching off all the time anyway (cf. "Parallels," Myriad Universes).
Good point on ENT. Would it be possible that the time incursions in ENT were not exclusive from the prime timeline but the abramsverse had their own agents involved?
If I understood Trek's time-travel and branches, major events are rarely unique, it's the minor ones that gets "erased". So it would mean the TCW will also happen (or is happening) in Abramsverse?
If I understood Trek's time-travel and branches, major events are rarely unique, it's the minor ones that gets "erased". So it would mean the TCW will also happen (or is happening) in Abramsverse?
By its very nature, the TCW spans -- and creates -- multiple timelines. And anything that existed or occurred in the Prime universe before 2233 is part of the Abramsverse as well, in theory.
However, my explanation in DTI: Watching the Clock for why the Prime universe persisted rather than being "overwritten" by the Abramsverse is that the time travel that created it was strictly one-way, so that there was no mutual entanglement to draw them into phase with each other. Which kind of requires them to remain isolated from each other.
Then again, there's also a physics principle suggesting that if the mass distribution of one of the timelines is changed in a major way -- say, by the destruction of the planet Vulcan -- then that could throw the timelines enough "out of alignment" to preclude them from ever recombining, meaning that both would persist indefinitely even if they did have cross-timeline interaction.
However, my explanation in DTI: Watching the Clock for why the Prime universe persisted rather than being "overwritten" by the Abramsverse is that the time travel that created it was strictly one-way, so that there was no mutual entanglement to draw them into phase with each other. Which kind of requires them to remain isolated from each other.
Then again, there's also a physics principle suggesting that if the mass distribution of one of the timelines is changed in a major way -- say, by the destruction of the planet Vulcan -- then that could throw the timelines enough "out of alignment" to preclude them from ever recombining, meaning that both would persist indefinitely even if they did have cross-timeline interaction.
I came across two physics principles that could explain the timelines remaining separate, and I decided to reference them both, mainly because I couldn't decide which one I preferred. Besides, a little redundancy never hurts. Also, a little redundancy never hurts.
Besides, a little redundancy never hurts. Also, a little redundancy never hurts.
Have you ever worked for the Department of Redundancy Department?
Actually that's not redundant, you can volunteer which means you're not technically employed as there's no financial remuneration. [/pedant]
Christopher, I actually picked up a copy of DTI: Forgotten History while I'm visiting my parents in Georgia. My favorite era is TOS and I'm a sucker for a good time-travel story, so I was an easy sell.
I may start to read it on my flight back tomorrow, but I have this nagging feeling that I should read the first DTI first (I know it probably doesn't matter & you wrote it to be accessible to folks who didn't read the first. This is more about my anal-retentiveness than anything).
I may start to read it on my flight back tomorrow, but I have this nagging feeling that I should read the first DTI first (I know it probably doesn't matter & you wrote it to be accessible to folks who didn't read the first. This is more about my anal-retentiveness than anything).
I tried to write Forgotten History so that it could work as either a sequel or a prequel to Watching the Clock. It seemed appropriate.
Ooh, the "one-way" is new to me. This means I have to re-read DTI#1 earlier than planned, didn't catch my attention the first time.
The "alignment" is so far what I was able to grasp especially after the two sequels.
Haha, yep. It was excellent, no way to know which is the "present". The reader can choose where to anchor him/herself.
Judging from Admiral Marcus's desk in STID, something along the lines of ENT clearly happened in the Abramsverse...
^Of course it did. The timelines only diverged in 2233, so naturally ENT is in the history of both timelines. We know this.