proposed solution to grandfather paradox

[landru27]

From my understanding, you are allowed to change the universe in any way you see fit provided you don't affect anything or any one.

The one trick I can do repeatedly is to make slow traffic in front of me turn at the next reasonable place. This is done by moving where their destination is such that is has always required them to turn at the next intersection.

How could it be that changing the location of a person's destination does not "affect anything or any one."?

For example, if the person driving slowly is on his or her way to a job interview, and you change the location at which that business was established, you have just changed countless other car rides for all the people who ever have or ever will drive to that same business, e.g., the people who work there, deliveries, visitors, etc.

Quite possibly, you will affect who works there, because people consider driving distance as a factor in selecting a job.

Quite likely, you will cause other people who drive to that same destination every day to have slow drives on days that they (prior to the change) had a normal drive, since they will encounter totally different day-to-day traffic conditions now that they drive to a totally new place.

... Or am I misunderstanding what you mean by "This is done by moving where their destination is"?

[wstein]

Well that's the trick (and limitation) to it.

This gets into the finer definition of 'change' and 'affect'. Simple difference does not constitute either on its own.

One loophole in change is that it requires a 'before' to compare with. So one of the work-arounds is to change things all the way back to the beginning of time. Then there is no before and therefore no 'change'. Breaks in consistency (in the middle) of history are not allowed.

Best I can tell is that changes in quality of the experience of being incarnate is what really is at issue. This quality is however from the view of the spirit (or higher self), not the incarnate form. Tiny changes like moving a few blades of grass likely do not affect anyone's quality of experience and so are not so hard to accomplish. But of course they don't affect your quality of experience either (then why bother). There's a lot of detail stuff that no one really cares about. Mostly people are fine with whatever as long as there is consistency and they don't know any different.

If you are thinking about changing a person's work location in the sense that yesterday it was on 1st street and today its on 2nd street, then you are correct, that affects things. People remember work being in one place only to arrive and its not there. Consider however if the work location has been the same every time they traveled there. If work suddenly has always been on 2nd street and never on 1st street, then everyone arrives to see things as they remember and expect. Then what has changed? Yes your point is correct that if you 'move' a work location 'too' far (as defined by the workers) then that is a change too. Clearly, less visited places are easier to relocate.

I admit, its very difficult to find another arrangement of reality that is 'equivalent' in all the ways that matter to others yet still advantageous to yourself.

Perhaps I was a little sloppy in describing this. Try: From what I understand, you can change whatever you want as long as you don't make any changes.

[oath]

Didnt this all stem from the time when people still considered time to be linear?

[wstein]

Probably.

More generally its premised on the idea that our choice of actions here (in space-time) is some how limited (likely by mutual agreement) by what are loosely referred to as the 'laws of nature'.

This stems from the experience that things are not observed to arbitrarily rearrange themselves. There is no way to be sure that this is not just an observational problem.

[oath]

Okay so let me get this straight, each dimension contains not only itself, but the properties of the dimensions before it, known and unknown (string theory xtra dimensions) and so time, being the 4th dimension, would be traveling in multiple directions at any one time, and therfore not linear or continuall in a succession of events, but more like a swirling and even colliding mass of matter-energy that may be so chaotic as to appear on several or first glance instances to be something other than it is. Furthermore, the theory in question seems to be such a contradiction and perhaps an example of two different time periods colliding for dominance and existance?