Re: Time Machines, FTL, and P=NP

:: But then, without the wackiness to force consistency in highly
:: unlikely ways, it looks to me not too hard to set up a situation
:: where /no/ possible outcome is consistent.  For my simple example,
:: just put the received signal through a NOT gate before sending it
:: back in time.  What happens in that case?  Hard reboot on the
:: universe? 

: Mechanical failure of the time machine, or some other break in the
chain. 

The implications of which are explored in Dr. Asmiov's paper,
"The Endochronic Properties of Resublimated Thiotimoline".
The point being, you don't need a reboot of the universe, you just
need an event large enough to disrupt your machine.  The more robust
you make your machine, the larger the event you need to disrupt it...

Well... actually the Thiotimoline battery wasn't trying to be inconsistent
in and of itself, ie, in its mechanism.  Just an attempt by the operator
to send a different signal pastwards.  But similar principles would apply.
If the machine messes up and sends the same signal it gets one time in
a trillion, that's the one chance that'll come up, even if you try hard
to ensure that can only happen if the sun goes nova, or whatnot.

The same issue is covered in a slightly different way in
the pre-Brain-Eater Hogan novel, "Thrice Upon a Time".  Basically,
in his case, you get chaotic and self-contraditory results, until you
give up and play fair.  No reboot as such... just ghost signals get
received and never sent, etc, etc, (and possibly vice versa, but most
of those cases are edited out of your memory (or out of the timeline)).

But I digress... this isn't rec.arts.sf.written, is it?


Wayne Throop   throopw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   http://sheol.org/throopw