So apparently Futurama may have been the closest to getting time travel right. This is because when Fry travelled back in time and accidentally killed his grandfather, he did not negate his own existence. Instead he became his own grandfather due to the time line apparently being "self correcting". https://www.npr.org/2020/09/27/9175...vel-is-theoretically-possible-researchers-say
he could kill his actual grandpa and not be affected any bit. because he created a new timeline. time can and will be changed. that's the possibility effect. this research article is just a hogwash of simplified ideology where they tried to prove one person correct since the start. time from which you came will never alter. but the time point you did alter creates a new path, the one you instantly belong to, and you can't return to the original path the same way you cam from.
Uhm, that would be only under the theory of multiple timelines. But the other theory is that the universe is one giant math equation and the math equation is solved at all times. Which means even if you go back in time and do any changes, that was already accounted for as the past and future exist at the same time. So its not that the universe is self correcting, it simply was always correct.
Okay so I read the article just now and... I disagree with the timeline being self correcting, because a self correcting timeline would mean that at one point in time the universe is not accurate, even if the end result is the same. I think its more accurate to say that the timeline is always correct. To point out the flaw of you killing patient zero and becoming patient zero. You went back in time which means you are immune to the virus, and you will go back to the future so there is no guarantee you would spread the virus. You can also choose to kill yourself, then what? The universe isn't smart enough to just self correct. A more accurate look is that the universe is ALWAYS correct. To give the covid example. If you go back in time and kill patient zero, nothing will happen because they aren't patient zero. You see, you are under the assumption that when you were told about patient zero. But there could be multiple possibles, they could have been patient zero and you killing them spread the blood which went to patient 2, 3 and 4. Or its possible they are not the real patient zero and the government simply used the dead person as a scapegoat. Now what if you were related to the virus and go back in time fully knowing 100% they are patient zero and kill them? Then insure it doesn't spread? Well you see, you are assuming that what you see, hear, smell and etc are real. In reality, you could have suffered a brain malfunction that made you believe what you saw was real but it could be your halucination. Aka, no matter what change you made to the timeline, that change was already accounted for the moment the universe came into being. Thus a paradox can never happen. And it's difficult to prove that paradox because you would have to without shadow of a doubt prove it existed. It's going back to the old if a tree falls in the forest and no one knows about it. As long as no change is observed, no one can tell the change was there. And your 5 senses aren't good enough to guarantee an accurate observation. Under their theory, if I bring back a planet destroying bomb and blow up the earth. How will they self correct? Send another time traveler to save it? In my theory, you bring back the bomb but it fails to explode or doesn't explode in full but you die from the shock.
so they basically watched tenet a while ago and decided to write up a thing or two and publish it? time travel being something akin to a mirror. but the fault of that is the loop it always brings. something made the loop, so it immediately disqualifies the theory they present.
I don't quite like this "self correcting" theory of time and universe. For me, if someone traveled back to the past, they should be no longer 'bounded' by their past time-line. So if they killed their grand parents, then their grand parents will die, just that. If the universe is one giant equation, then someone who traveled back to the past would be a new added variable, so the reault will change depending what they do. I think...
Time travel is always a tricky thing, since it is mostly based on imagination. I believe the more self consistent an idea is, the closer it is to reality. A paradox is a sign of the idea being incomplete. Now in case of fry, if we go by the single timeline theory, then instead of calling it self-correcting, I would say fry was his own grandfather all along. Multiple timeline theory would mean, fry's grandson is not him and exists in a different timeline, his own timeline being intact. Basically in multiple timeline, you are not actually travelling to your own past, so all the paradoxes go out the window.
If you travel back in time and change something only to discover that the universe auto-corrects itself, then this is proof of the existence of destiny. A story I read touched on the idea of time travel and destiny existing. The main character proposes two scenarios: 1. Destiny is ruthless. If you travel back in time and save someone. Destiny will find a way to kill that person. The longer the person lives the more cruel and unavoidable destiny becomes. Similar to the movie Final Destination. 2. Destiny is lenient. If you save someone, destiny will still try to achieve its original goal. However, the longer the person lives the more accepting destiny becomes to the persons existence. You can also help destiny reach its goal without that person dying. (Ex. Person A is killed by a criminal who was just paroled even though he committed serious crimes. Person A's parents become activists protesting easy sentences for such criminals. If Person A is saved and you managed to find someone to fill the role of activist, destiny would stop going after Person A. Person A could also fill that role himself.)