if you shrink yourself and go back in time to stop this, how often would you have to leave a note?

Question

ok you accidentally shrink yourself with a shrink ray. the only way to stop this is to go back in time. you go back to leave yourself a note. after the first note do you have to keep going back and leaving yourself a note?

Answer 1

This is an example of the grandfather paradox. Leaving the note for yourself erases the future conditions that led to you going back in time and leaving the note, which should make it impossible to happen as described. One theory suggests that, simply put, it would turn out that you are unable to successfully leave the note. Or, equivalently, you already failed, or else you'd have gotten the note before you accidentally shrank yourself. Another theory is that a parallel Universe is brought into existence at this point. In the Universe where you left the note, you don't shrink yourself. But you're still shrunk in your own Universe, more's the pity.

Answer 2

assuming that somhow shrinking yourself has no effect on your ability to go back in time, then you would only have to do this once.

To explain further, I don't think this is an instance that is 100% the same as the grandfather paradox explains. Killing yourself or your grandfather during a time travel expedition clearly would render you having never been born. However, traveling backwards in time to leave yourself a note to prevent you from doing somthing that would cause you to travel back in time would not neccaserally prevent you from travelling backwards in time for another reason. Also, preventing yourself from traveling back in time is not the same as preventing yourself from being alive, one is a much more dramatic effect on your life. Also possible, you can leave yourself the note but never read it, or ignore it, so I dont think this situation is exactly a paradox though it is very similar to the grandfather paradox.

Answer 3

The grandfather paradox is a paradox of time travel, first conceived by the science fiction writer René Barjavel in his 1943 book "Le Voyageur Imprudent" ("The Imprudent Traveller") .The paradox, stated in the second person, is this: Suppose you travelled back in time and killed your biological grandfather before he met your grandmother. As a result, one of your parents (and by extension, you) would never have been conceived, so you could not have traveled back in time after all. In that case, your grandfather would still be alive and you would have been conceived, allowing you to travel back in time and kill your grandfather, and so on. According to this theory you would be stuck in an endless time-loop from which there would be no possible escape. You would, however, never know of this loop.

An equivalent paradox is known (in philosophy) as autoinfanticide — that is, going back in time and killing oneself as a baby — though when the word was first coined in a paper by Paul Horwich it was in the malformed version autofanticide.

The grandfather paradox has been used to argue that backwards time travel must be impossible. However, other resolutions have also been advanced.

Answer 4

i dont think it would help leaving a note. you would still be shrunk only now living in the already happened past. you can save the unshrunken past version of your self from this dilema but as you know from Back To The Future part 1 thru 3 if you come in contact with your alternate self it could have catastrophic consequences

Answer 5

Suicidal techniques are greater trouble-free than people choose to think of, particularly in the two babies and persons who've incredibly intense thoughts approximately stuff. it rather is appearing them out which isn't wide-spread. no longer taking criticism (even useful criticism) is thoroughly wide-spread for many people, even nicely previous the teen years! you're a young person. in fact that your techniques is recent technique some incredibly considerable variations and advancements for the time of those years. you recognize what? At this element I reckon you're a classic teen who's surprisingly inventive yet possibly somewhat greater "intense" or under pressure than the familiar joe. Bipolar is achieveable, yet bipolar is so loosely defined which you would be able to call thousands of people who! i does no longer rush to call you bipolar merely yet. what's somewhat useful is that even with the actuality you're having some extremely random techniques and thoughts, you have far greater perception at your age than i could assume. you recognize your thoughts. you recognize once you're being irrational. you could tell delusion from fact. Sheesh. I desire all little ones could do this! ;) "perception" is a suitable high quality, and could keep you from doing all way of stupid issues whilst it is composed of your very own behaviour. upload to that, which you look surprisingly intelligent. The issues and so on? nicely, you seem to function on bigger than wide-spread stages of rigidity. it rather is a ingredient. a undeniable degree of rigidity is important for common alertness and functioning, yet too plenty isn't so reliable.

Answer 6

Time traveler already answered this question. if you were going back in time because of an event you would create a paridox. if you made it to where the event never happened, why would you go back in time. it would never work.

and with that, I'm at 250. level two!

Answer 7

As a time travel expert, I would have to say yes.