Content deleted Content added
→Terminology in physics, philosophy, and fiction: Why past tense? |
|||
Line 12:
Krasnikov writes that these bootstrap paradoxes – information or an object looping through time – are the same; the primary apparent paradox is a physical system evolving into a state in a way that is not governed by its laws.<ref name="Krasnikov2001">{{citation|last=Krasnikov|first=S.|year=2001|title=The time travel paradox|journal=Phys. Rev. D|volume=65|issue=6|page=06401 |arxiv=gr-qc/0109029|bibcode = 2002PhRvD..65f4013K |doi = 10.1103/PhysRevD.65.064013 |s2cid=18460829}}</ref>{{Rp|4}} He does not find this paradoxical, and attributes problems regarding the validity of time travel to other factors in the interpretation of general relativity.<ref name="Krasnikov2001" />{{Rp|14–16}}
A 1992 paper by physicists Andrei Lossev and [[Igor Dmitriyevich Novikov|Igor Novikov]] labeled such items without origin as ''Jinn'', with the singular term ''Jinnee''.<ref name="Lossev1992">{{cite journal|last1=Lossev|first1=Andrei|last2=Novikov|first2=Igor|date=15 May 1992|title=The Jinn of the time machine: non-trivial self-consistent solutions|journal=Class. Quantum Gravity|volume=9|issue=10|pages=2309–2321|url=http://thelifeofpsi.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Lossev-Novikov-1992.pdf|doi=10.1088/0264-9381/9/10/014|bibcode=1992CQGra...9.2309L|access-date=16 November 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151117014658/http://thelifeofpsi.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Lossev-Novikov-1992.pdf|archive-date=17 November 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{Rp|2311–2312}} This terminology was inspired by the [[Jinn]] of the [[Quran]], which are described as leaving no trace when they disappear.<ref name="Toomey2012" />{{Rp|200–203}} Lossev and Novikov allowed the term "Jinn" to cover both objects and information with reflexive origin; they called the former "Jinn of the first kind", and the latter "Jinn of the second kind".<ref name="Everett" /><ref name="Lossev1992" />{{Rp|2315–2317}}<ref name="Toomey2012" />{{Rp|208}} They point out that an object making circular passage through time must be identical whenever it is brought back to the past, otherwise it would create an inconsistency; the [[second law of thermodynamics]] seems to require that the object
The term ''predestination paradox'' is used in the ''[[Star Trek]]'' franchise to mean "a time loop in which a time traveler who has gone into the past causes an event that ultimately causes the original future version of the person to go back into the past."<ref>{{cite book|last1=Okuda|first1=Michael|last2=Okuda|first2=Denise|title=The Star Trek Encyclopedia|date=1999|publisher=Pocket Books|isbn=0-671-53609-5|page=384}}</ref> This use of the phrase was created for a sequence in a 1996 episode of ''[[Star Trek: Deep Space Nine]]'' titled "[[Trials and Tribble-ations]]",<ref>{{cite book|last1=Erdmann|first1=Terry J.|last2=Hutzel|first2=Gary|title=Star Trek: The Magic of Tribbles|date=2001|publisher=Pocket Books|isbn=0-7434-4623-2|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=W6bvoGUg7G8C&lpg=PP1&pg=PA31 31]}}</ref> although the phrase had been used previously to refer to belief systems such as [[Calvinism]] and some forms of [[Marxism]] that encourage followers to strive to produce certain outcomes while at the same time teaching that the outcomes are predetermined.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Daniels|first=Robert V.|date=May–June 1960|title=Soviet Power and Marxist Determinism|journal=Problems of Communism|volume=9|page=[http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015059418874;view=1up;seq=159 17]}}</ref> Smeenk and Morgenstern use the term "predestination paradox" to refer specifically to situations in which a time traveler goes back in time to try to prevent some event in the past, but ends up helping to cause that same event.<ref name="smeenk" /><ref name="Morgenstern">{{citation|url=http://cs.nyu.edu/web/Research/TechReports/TR2013-950/TR2013-950.pdf |title=Foundations of a Formal Theory of Time Travel |last=Morgenstern|first=Leora|year=2010|page=6}}</ref>
|