--- In SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com, David Parenteau wrote:
> Actually, both Cedric and Jim severely overcomplicated this.
>
> There is actually only ONE continuing entity, that being the adult
> male. Setting aside the factor that with current technology,
> females who become male cannot sire children (After all, there is
> time travel, so a Femme to Melle Change could possibly sire
> offspring in that concept), this is actually a moderately simple
> set of loops.
>
> And no, there would not be "inbreeding" issues with iterations,
> because there is really only one entity, technically. The
> inbreeding would be essentially actually "cloning" issues. Do this
> the simple way... Trace the lifetime of the individual, and ignore
> a lot of the confusion, then be aware of the fact that there are
> not "multiple instances" or multiple times that this happens.
>
> Baby girl is born. Grows up female. Is impregnated with her own
> genetic makeup, but a male version thereof. (Be aware, we don't
> have to trace the daughter as a "new" entity, it is simply a single
> thread looping to take multiple routes at the same time. The girl
> that is born 9 months later is the BEGINNING of this thread.) Gets
> sex change, and goes back to impregnate him/her self. Again, no
> need to worry about the female version, because that's "behind" us
> on this thread. After placing the baby in the past, male version
> goes on with own life and no family.
>
> The paradox factor could come in theory from the issue that this
> is a closed-start loop. there is no beginning coming in on the
> time line, the actual start is from a jump back, and the middle of
> an existing thread.
>
> However, if you then consider it at a lower level (Raw material the
> body is made from), the base raw material for the entity exits on
> its own thread up until the conception point, and then becomes the
> raw material for the entity's thread.
>
> I hate ASCII art... BUT...
>
> /--->-->--\
> P v--<--<--\ \
> A -->--->---2-\ R \ \
> S / X \ \
> T /--<----<----1/ \-->--3-\ \--->--->--> Future
>
> R is the raw material... I didn't draw its timeline in from the
> past. X is the crossing where the raw material began to become
> processed into a human. Then down left to 1, a baby girl. The
> loop back by the MALE to collect her is completely unimportant,
> it's just a method of getting her back into the past. She grows up,
> and at position 2, she is impregnated by her future male self, thus
> spawning herself off at the X. At 3, she becomes male, and loops
> back to impregnate herself (And later to move her baby self to the
> past, but again, unimportant in the materials thread). Then the
> male can go anywhere and continue its life, but it's the only "one"
> of the "three" that does.
>
> Such a loop has no actual sentient start in the time thread, so
> that is where the possible paradox comes in. However, since the
> materials and energy thread is consistent from the past to the
> future, it really doesn't create a paradox... But -ONLY- if free
> will does not exist, and the future is solidly written. That in
> itself is a disturbing concept.
>
You're forgetting something... There are "two" male threads... The
older male, who listens to his younger self's sob story about having
been female, knocked up, and having the baby stolen... And then
promptly takes his younger male self back in time, and gives him wads
of pocket money, to do the knocking up... He then collects the baby,
drops her off at the orphanage in the past, and then collects his
younger male self, explains the situation, and drops him off at the
Temporal Corp Academy... The younger male thread is ignorant of all
of this, until it is explained to him...
This is where the illusion of "No Free Will" comes from... Everyone
involved had free will, it's just that the older male version gets to
see everyone else's choices before he makes his... He, however,
really *doesn't* have free will in a sense, because he's trapped in a
positive feedback temporal incident...
You see, everyone focuses on negative feedback paradoxes... "I shoot
my grandfather, therefore how can I exist to shoot him...?" Hardly
anyone looks at the positive feedback ones... Yet those are the
logically consistent ones... Either way the decision could go is
stable and self-reinforcing... The older male can act the way he
does, and ensure he exists, and therefore he exists to do it... Or,
he can refrain from doing so, cease to exist, and there is still no
paradox, as there is no one to take those actions, and no one for
them to be done to... Metastable...
::listening for the sounds of more brains popping::
Received on Sun Apr 25 2004 - 10:33:09 CDT