Paradox 2

Meta-time 2

Paradox is due to the mixing of para-level (meta-level) and original level.

— Me@2012-09-29 02:22:14 PM

… including the time-travel paradoxes.

As long as you put time-travel into a story, you mix the meta-time and the original time within that story. Thus time-travel paradoxes appear.

— Me@2012-10-01 10:33:05 AM

The two typical time-travel paradoxes are the grandfather paradox and the ontological paradox.

The grandfather paradox is that time-travel would create an inconsistent story. For example, if you time-travel back to 10 years ago and kill your younger self, you present-self cannot exist. So you could not have time-travelled back to 10 years ago and kill your younger self, you present-self can exist. But your present-self have time-travelled back to 10 years ago and kill your younger self, then you present-self cannot exist.

The ontological paradox is that information can come from nowhere and events can happen with no cause. For example, your future-self goes back in time to give you the solution of a homework problem. After copying it, you go back in time to give your past-self the solution of that homework problem. The question is, where does that homework solution come from?

The meta-time is the author’s time or the readers’ time, which is the real, in a sense that it is the real causal chain. The original-time is the time within that story, which is fake, in a sense that it is not the real causal chain. As long as we distinguish the meta-time (author’s time) and the original-time (story-time) clearly, the two paradoxes can be transcended.

To avoid the grandfather paradox, only the author should be allowed to go back into an earlier story-time. For example, after finishing the 10 chapters of a story, the author goes back to the first chapter to rewrite and polish it. The characters within that story should not be able to go back into an earlier story-time.

To transcend the ontological paradox, we should realize that the “information from nowhere” is actually from the meta-time; the “event with no cause” is actually caused by the author of that story.

— Me@2012-10-03 02:21:45 PM

2012.10.03 Wednesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Memory 4.3

Copy Me, 5.2

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 3 日的對話。

「十年前的我」和「現在的我」的記憶不盡相同,而導致不是「同一個人」,有兩重意思。

第一重是,「現在的我」(三十歲)比「十年前的我」(二十歲),多了十年的記憶。那就是我剛才所講的「增加」。

第二重是,即使只比較人生頭二十年的記憶,「三十歲的我」回憶(例如)「十六歲那年」發生了什麼事,已經不及「二十歲的我」回憶「十六歲那年」那麼詳細和準確。那就是我剛才所講的「變形、刪減 和 篡改」。

更震撼的是,如果我真的問你,「十六歲那年」發生了什麼事,你可以答到的,可能不出十件,甚至只有一兩件事。震撼的地方在於,「十六歲那年」共有 365 日,而你竟然只講到不夠十件事情。「十六歲那年」對於一個「三十歲的人」來說,只一堆模糊的印象,記憶的疑團。

根據我的經驗,近乎只有一個情況,會令我真正明確回憶起,中學時代的某一件特定事件。那就是當收拾房間,整理一大堆物件的時候,偶然會見到那個時代的一些「紀念品」,例如 成績表、筆記、書籍、相片 和 電影戲票 等。

— Me@2012.10.03

2012.10.03 Wednesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK