The Invention Paradox Debate

[mrsticky005]

On June 14th 2011 Old Man Wumpers invented and completed the time machine. His arch nemesis Sly Slyvester Svooloo volunteered to be the
first user. Sly Slyvester Svooloo travelled back in time to June 10th 2011
and with the information he had from the future he built the time machine.



Who invented the time machine first?

Old Man Wumpers or Sly Slyvester Svooloo?

[Wooster]

Old Man Wumpers at least by their own world lines.

[deidara330]

When time travel is involved, there are at least two timelines, not one:
- The original constant timeline, which changes as the traveler affects its past but all points before the traveler's earliest destination remain constant.
- The traveler's timeline, which originates from the point the traveler initiates time travel and follows the traveler through different points in time.

I actually came up with this watching Back to the Future, but I think the logic is still valid in any typical time-travel situation. The second timeline occurs simply when you take the events around the time traveler in the order they happened to the time traveler and put them on a line. It essentially creates a new timeline that follows only the life of the traveler. Basically, it's like taking someone's life and making it into a timeline, the defining difference being that the individual's personal timeline doesn't follow the universal set timeline.

By the constant timeline, Sly Slyvester Svooloo invented the time machine. However, by the traveler's timeline, Old Man Wumpers invented the time machine. There is no one true inventor of the time machine since it's a matter of which timeline you choose.

This is only a paradox if you make the assumption that only one person can invent the time machine first. If you simply wrap your brain around the fact that there's no longer one timeline, then you can accept that there's more than one first time for everything.

[Noctis Arashi]

Old man. If the plans were originally his, he constructed it based off the ingenuity of the old man. Even through alternate time lines.

[Kreegah!!!]

Old Man Wumpers because he has the patents. O_o. Governments care not for things such as reality-warping paradoxicals.

[mrsticky005]

Originally Posted by Kreegah!

Old Man Wumpers because he has the patents. O_o. Governments care not for things such as reality-warping paradoxicals.

Sly Slyvester got those too.

[Kreegah!!!]

Obtaining them is not the same as actually getting them in his name. Besides, knowing Sly would betray him, Wumpers destroyed the "housing" of the machine. This means Sly Svooloo is stuck in a loop of just a few days. He travels back in time, makes a machine which likely cannot be just snapped together, and by the time he's set to get patents, Wumper already has his built "again", prompting Sly to volunteer again. Wumper, meanwhile, continues on into the ever-present future (like that?) aging and closing in on death's humble doorstep. Sly is forever stuck in time loop hell. Except that the body is immune to time travel, making it age, so he actually grows old without ever progressing through time.

[tsuki]

Originally Posted by mrsticky005

On June 14th 2011 Old Man Wumpers invented and completed the time machine. His arch nemesis Sly Slyvester Svooloo volunteered to be the
first user. Sly Slyvester Svooloo travelled back in time to June 10th 2011
and with the information he had from the future he built the time machine.



Who invented the time machine first?

Old Man Wumpers or Sly Slyvester Svooloo?

Did the time machine go back with Sly. or did it merely send him back?

If option 1 then Wumpers invented it. If option 2 then Sly invented it.

[Danielle]

H G Well, any subsequent inventing is invalid.

[Wooster]

Fabian socialist do not count.

[Danielle]

Originally Posted by Wooster

Fabian socialist do not count.

How can he have been a socialist if he was racist? >.>

[mrsticky005]

Originally Posted by Danielle

How can he have been a socialist if he was racist? >.>

What makes you think socialists CAN'T be racists?

[Danielle]

Originally Posted by mrsticky005

What makes you think socialists CAN'T be racists?

That would negate the good things socialism can do. >.>

[Wooster]

Originally Posted by Danielle

How can he have been a socialist if he was racist? >.>

Most socialists are racists. Comes with being elite. The National Socialists were particularly racist against Jews.

[Danielle]

Originally Posted by Wooster

Most socialists are racists. Comes with being elite. The National Socialists were particularly racist against Jews.

That's not true, there are a lot of Jews in the socialist party, and further more it isn't racism, it is called either antisemitism or bigotry.

[deidara330]

I'm surprised no one is agreeing with my explanation. Furthermore I'm surprised there isn't really much debating in this thread even though so many people have differing answers.

@Wooster: Nazis were not Socialists. They called themselves Socialists, but they were far from it. If it weren't for them giving Socialism a bad name a lot more of the world would be Socialist because it's way better than what we have now.

[Kreegah!!!]

Time's more like a windy river (make sure you've got the right "windy") with the occasional severe switchbacks where events may occur during differing points, yet still in parallel. I do not believe there are any such things as the proposed time paradoxes. Also, King Hezekiah was healed through time travel, so the closest thing to a time paradox is how the whole world's brought back ten days or so, yet progresses normally sans resurgence of deadly illness. As to Sly-boy, he's stuck in Time's oxbow analogue.

[Merechan]

Leonardo DaVinci invented time travel. He invented time. That's how intense Leonardo DaVinci is. He went back in time to invent time, just so he could have enough time to sit around thinking, "Man I'm so bored, I wish I could go back in time. I'm gonna invent time travel, and go back in time, to tell myself that I can invent time travel!"


STEAMPUNK!

I bet noooooobody gets this reference. XD

[mrsticky005]

Originally Posted by Danielle

That would negate the good things socialism can do. >.>

Yes. Because there's plenty of those.

Free Healthcare!!!

With Higher Taxes!!!

And EVEN MORE BUREAUCRACY!!!

Originally Posted by Danielle

That's not true, there are a lot of Jews in the socialist party, and further more it isn't racism, it is called either antisemitism or bigotry.

No matter what you call hating Jews it's still bad.
Though there's no reason why Jews can't hate on Jews.
There were Nazi Jews you know.

[Danielle]

Originally Posted by mrsticky005

Yes. Because there's plenty of those.

Free Healthcare!!!

With Higher Taxes!!!

And EVEN MORE BUREAUCRACY!!!



No matter what you call hating Jews it's still bad.
Though there's no reason why Jews can't hate on Jews.
There were Nazi Jews you know.

I wasn't talking about Nazis. =/ I didn't even mention them. At all. Not all socialists are nazis or even on the same wavelength.