It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Zero Divergence and Predestination

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 17 2016 @ 01:13 AM
IF one was able to "Enter the past", and Travel through time, it is said that any action you take or decision you make alters the history of the universe in a butterfly effect. When that person reaches the period of time they came from they may see a very different reality than what they had once seen. This is called Divergence; When the history of reality is altered from an original point in time.

It wouldn't matter what point of time you would travel back to, from the creation of the cosmos to the present day if you were to time travel you would cause a butterfly effect that changed everything. I like to call the original point in time before any time traveler had caused a divergence the "Golden Probability." or the point of Zero Divergence.

Quantum physicists and scientists like Albert Eintstein had been quoted saying "The Distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistant illusion." which i believe to mean that everything is predestined from the golden probability. And the Divergence we see in other realities ( or alternate timelines, Dreams, parallel universes) Is what the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is describing.

which the many-worlds interpretationmeaning from wikipedia.

" many-worlds implies that all possible alternate histories and futures are real, each representing an actual "world" (or "universe"). In lay terms, the hypothesis states there is a very large—perhaps infinite[2]—number of universes, and everything that could possibly have happened in our past, but did not, has occurred in the past of some other universe or universes. The theory is also referred to as MWI, the relative state formulation, the Everett interpretation, the theory of the universal wavefunction, many-universes interpretation, or just many-worlds."

i like to call the universe which has many of its included "Branches" of alternate timelines (history of the universe) together making a multiverse.

Infinity litterally exists, every quantum event could create a new timeline; for example death. When you die you become like schrodinger's cat and are dead in one reality but go on to live in a parallel reality.
edit on 17-1-2016 by Belcastro because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 17 2016 @ 02:30 AM
a reply to: Belcastro

A few problems with that: the golden probability wouldn't exist,because in MW there is no prefered reality, just the one you are observing is the one you are observing, but they are all equally real, which means a thing like the golden probability or zero divergence couldn't exist.

Just think about it: If you would decide to timetravel in this reality, there would at the same time be an approximately infinite number of worlds in which you didn't and they could all influence eachother. So the split would be infinite at that point and the points you would arrive at would be infinite and so on.

Also why do you name dreams in one breath with alternate timelines and parallel universes? A joke?

Infinity exists in form of probabilities. In MW nearby universes influence eachother and determine the location of the quantum, which is the easyway out really, because otherwise you'd have to consider all the probabilities which would make the calculation of them equally infinite.

It is more philosophy than physics and untestable. You could only test the theory if you'd kill yourself in an approximately infinte number of worlds. Just like Schrödinger's cat it is and will remain a thought experiment.

Besides what about the conservation of energy? If you split every second into new infinte numbers of universes, wouldn't you run out of energy? Unless you balance that with an equal number of colliding universes...
Which means it doesn't work. Because after all you would always fall back into one.

Also this ATS thread comes to mind talking about the Higgs field and dark energy. If any one of them were even slightly different the universe would collapse wouldn't have come into existence. Also a very good argument against the MW theory, if you ask me.

edit on 17-1-2016 by Peeple because: Add

edit on 17-1-2016 by Peeple because: Auto

posted on Jan, 17 2016 @ 03:10 AM
I do believe in the multiverse for no other reason than I believe..hahahah.. So if I went back in time and killed my father and mother in a head on auto accident before I was ever born (in that time line) all that would do is start a new time line where they were killed and I was never born. When I get back in my time machine and travel back to the time from which I left dear old mom and dad would have existed just as they had before simply because that is the time line from which I left.. Anyone who disagrees simply prove I am wrong... Waiting .. like forever...

Going forward in time is no problem for people who travel at close the speed of light and has been proven scientifically over and over again.. For the non scientific types, Planet of the Apes the original covered that pretty well in a nice little yarn..

We will all be long dead and gone before some of these questions are answered; if ever..

posted on Jan, 17 2016 @ 07:51 AM
I don't subscribe to the multiverse train of thought, it's just seem so ridiculously over complicated the more you think about it.

I've said it on here before sometime ago that I believe everything is predestined.
You, me and the universe around us are just one big reaction which is going though its motion, start to finish.
That unique thought you think you just had was just a chemical reaction set in motion at the very beginning of creation. Free will is just an illusion, you are where you are, doing what you're doing, thinking what you're thinking because thats where the froth of the very first reaction has put you.

Divergence wouldn't happen because If you could step sideways out of time and travel to the past you would just be an observer as the reaction (time) up to and past that point would have already happened so you could not have any interaction with it or any effect on it.

If some how you were able to speed time (the reaction) up and travel into the future and side-step back into time you would be able to interact and have an impact there because you would be at the front of the reaction (time). You would not be able to return from this forward time travel, well you could but you would again just be an observer again because the reaction has already happened.

We are all just a collection of small reactions along for the ride in this big reaction we call the universe.
edit on 17-1-2016 by Tagz because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2016 by Tagz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 17 2016 @ 08:17 AM
If time travel exists. It has always existed. If it does not. It never will.

posted on Jan, 17 2016 @ 09:38 AM

If time travel exists. It has always existed. If it does not. It never will.
a reply to: Klassified

Everything that did or will happen, has. There is only now, and this "now" is influenced by all of creation in what we would think of as past nows and future nows - all of this happening and interacting / influencing NOW. JMO

posted on Jan, 17 2016 @ 10:12 AM
a reply to: Peeple

there is no prefered reality, just the one you are observing is the one you are observing.

The OP's preferred reality is the one in which he now observes. Not preferred as in liking one over the other.

posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 07:41 PM

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Belcastro

Also why do you name dreams in one breath with alternate timelines and parallel universes? A joke?

i was told in a dream by a good friend of mine that dreams were other realities.

posted on Jan, 22 2016 @ 08:43 AM
This was popularized in the "back to the future" movie series.
Its about the forest not the trees (stoner dimensions)?
Obviously we are talking about a revisionist history cure for people that never properly observed in the first place.

"point of Zero Divergence" is a relative term.
E.G. Someones dream from the 1800's is recognized in 1949 but the actual inspiration for that dream came from literature published 100's of years before the birth of Christ. That earlier publishing was an interpretation of anecdotal evidence created even thousands of years earlier.

Looking narrowly at your example, the "back to the future" series is just another John Titor spinoff like the famous one from the 1960's..

For ATS newbies we've got several related concurrent threads running.

None of this violates the laws of causality.

posted on Jan, 22 2016 @ 08:09 PM
a reply to: Slichter

Doc Browns mind reading helmet didn't appear to work with Marty back from the future.

That PA thread SO put up was interesting.
NNT used the term Convex tinkering.
Not an original concept at all, the process is convex but when Davinci explained it he painted it on a concave ceiling.

NNT was an options trader, and is an expert at profiting from the process of compartmentalizing Davinci's "many" ..

posted on Jan, 22 2016 @ 08:43 PM
a reply to: Belcastro

s/f But, how about another theory. Everything we 'think' is real here is based on subliminal suggestion.

posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 12:47 AM
a reply to: Belcastro

Oh that's really weird that you mention that. I had a dream about two weeks ago and in the dream I was asking someone why do I come here in a dream to my childhood home and my parents are alive and sometimes they are already gone and everything's so different?
They explained to me that when you die you can go to a place where you can create the world around you and so can the others, you can choose to stay there forever or just visit and move on (I guess to another existence? I should have asked..), it's always there for us though like all times exist, or you can only visit in a dream. In the dream it seemed to make perfect sense, like the code was cracked and I spent the rest of the dream creating pretty blue flowers and all sorts of beautiful things.

I'm guessing that's pretty much an alternate reality? I can't say it's the truth because it's just a dream but it's kind of self comforting.

posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 06:52 PM
a reply to: Belcastro

Oh gosh I hope not!

new topics

top topics


log in