At 11:05 PM 4/24/04, you wrote:
>--- In SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com, ShujinTribble <tribble@b...>
>wrote:
> > Rick Pikul wrote:
> >
> > > In concept, it is possible to have a natural child the same
>age as
> > > you, if you are willing to invoke time-travel.
> > >
> > > Witness the story _All You Zombies_, where a time traveller
>meets a
> > > woman, gets her knocked up, comes back nine months later to pick
>up
> > > their daughter so that she can be entered into the time academy,
>grow
> > > up, meet the time traveller, have their daughter, get a sex
>change,
> > > and go back in time to get the woman pregnant and collect their
> > > daughter for the time academy.
> >
> > did you hear that? That was the sound of my brain shorting out.
> > I HATE Temporal Mechanics!
> >
> Think of it as a mathematics problem. Assign each party a
>variable. Let's say the original time-traveler is "a", the original
>woman is "b", and the original daughter is "c".
> In the original formula, "a" mates with "b" and produces "c".
>Once "c" is born, "a" returns and claims "c". After training, "c"
>becomes "b", and "a" mates with her. producing "c". After "c" is
>born yet again, "b" becomes "a", returns to the past once more to
>mate with "b" in order to produce "c".
> In the original formula, "a + b =c". Yet, ultimately, "a = b =
>c". All variables are essentially one and the same, the only
>difference being their current place on the timeline (and their
>respective reality origin), which affects their value. The
>schematic could also be "a + a = a", "b + b = b" or "c + c = c", yet
>because each original variable is altered by time, they no longer
>retain their original values. The father is the mother is the
>daughter. Such a situation would end up producing at least 3
>different realities, because in each one, the party who is left
>behind continues their life on a measured timeline. So in the first
>problem, "b" continues existing in the current time, while "c"
>and "a" step outside of time. "c" then grows up to become "b",
>while the existence of "a" continues onward in the first sequence of
>events (assuming that "a" stayed around to raise "c"). However,
>if "a" stayed to raised "c", then "a" would be older, and therefore
>continuing an existence in much the same way as the original "b".
>Thusly, "a + b = c", "b(c) + a = c" and finally, "c(a) + b = c".
>All the variables are the same, but they cannot coexist
>simultaneously and still be able to affect the other timelines.
> Since there cannot be multiple similar variables at the same time,
>and with the same properties, there must therefore be numerous
>realities, each one allowing the same variable to have a different
>beginning and a different end, yet at the key moment in time (a + b
>= c), they are all exactly alike, but existing separately.
> Holy shit, I don't know whether I just made things more
>complicated or less. In any case, "c" would have some serious
>genetic defects resulting from severe inbreeding. By the time you
>get to the third sample, "c" (or "a" in this case) may be little
>more than a drooling idiot. And I think I just heard something pop
>in my cerebellum...
>
>
>--JMH
Wow... talk about being a narcissist. How much more in love with yourself
could you be?!
First... or last depending on how you look at it. Being born from yourself,
then becoming pregnant from a male version of yourself from the future,
then becoming that male and impregnating yourself... jeeze.
...
Ok this cannot happen. primarily because this has no cause only effect.
Where does the initial B, as Jim put it, come from? This person/thing can't
have just popped into existence and started this loop.
I smell a paradox. and it keeps getting nastier with each iteration.
And imagine, if one of them were to be given birth control drugs this freak
of temporal biology would just pop out of existence.
Actually, just let him/her/it repeat the cycle enough times and they'd
cease to exist because the compounded genetic defects of N(the number of
times this cycle occurs) generations of inbreeding would make C into a lump
of retarded meat that probably die in birth, as Jim also said.
Cedric - I gotta go to work now, seeya :)
Received on Sat Apr 24 2004 - 23:43:36 CDT