Comment on Please be patient.

CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

• Duamerthrax@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  You would need a position to do that and all you might have done is reflect it backwards in time.

  If you could “remove” it by placing it into another dimension, it might disprove the theory, but the causal domain might be larger then previous assumed.

  This is one of those Math Theories that isn’t technically a Science Theory. We can make a mathematical model, but it’s untestable.

  source
• NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Only in its future. Probably you’d have to find the electron precisely at the end of its timeline.

  source

  • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    So I have to destroy 2 electrons to fuck over causality.

    source

    • iii@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      How could you destroy 2, if there’s only one?

      source

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        That’s why it would fuck over causality

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Careful, reality might just destroy you instead to avoid the paradox. I suspect that’s how it avoids all of the paradoxes if time travel is possible in a single timeline universe. And this idea isn’t compatible with the multiple timeline time travel idea (otherwise the electron will end up in a different timeline each time it jumps backwards).

      source
  • pyre@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    If you destroy it, that will be the end of its timeline

    source
  • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    To destroy every other quantum state of the single electron, wouldn’t you need to destroy it at its beginning state? The end state would be at/just after the heat death of the universe, so it wouldn’t really make any difference then.

    source

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      The end state doesn’t have to be at the end of time if the electron can travel backwards in time. It can go to the end, head back towards the beginning, and get destroyed somewhere in between.

      Strictly speaking it would have to get destroyed at some point, or at least have something stop it from going back and forth, otherwise the universe would be all electron.

      source
• Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Thanos should have picked a better strategy

  source
• Mango@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Do it.

  source
• FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Let’s try it and find out!

  source
• NikkiDimes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  I mean…if energy can not be created nor destroyed, it kind of lends to this hypothesis… 🤔

  source

  • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    E=mc2 is the equation for how much energy is created by destroying a given amount of mass.

    source

    • NikkiDimes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      No, E=mc^2^ is the equation of converting mass to energy. Nothing is being destroyed, but simply changing state.

      source