Slashdot Mirror


The Time Travel Paradoxes of Back To the Future

brumgrunt sent in a fun little piece to get your brain going on a cloudy monday morning. Despite countless viewings of BTTF I still never thought of a few of these. "Throughout Back To The Future Part III, there has to be two Deloreans in 1885. Also, why don't George and Lorraine recognize their son? Why doesn't the time machine disappear in the alternative 1985? These and more Back To The Future paradoxes explored..."

53 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. The one they always overlook by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you travel back in time to the exact same spot, just in a different time, then (unless you're REALLY precise on the exact time of day and year), you'll most likely end up floating in space. People who make time travel movies don't seem to realize that the earth moves around its axis and around the sun. The spot I'm standing on right now will be vaccum in just a few minutes.

    If Marty had went back to a different time of year without a space suit, Biff would have been the least of his worries.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:The one they always overlook by simcop2387 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if you're precise on the exact time of day and year you'll still be in space. the solar system moves too!

    2. Re:The one they always overlook by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I picture a lone Delorean, forever floating through empty space at 88 miles per hour.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:The one they always overlook by Pojut · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We (my "main" circle of friends) discussed this very topic once after watching BttF 2. We concluded that anyone smart enough to create a working time machine (especially one that didn't turn its occupant into goop) was smart enough to do the mathematical calculations. ::shrug::

    4. Re:The one they always overlook by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you travel back in time to the exact same spot, just in a different time, then (unless you're REALLY precise on the exact time of day and year), you'll most likely end up floating in space. People who make time travel movies don't seem to realize that the earth moves around its axis and around the sun. The spot I'm standing on right now will be vaccum in just a few minutes.

      John Carpenter is the only director I can think of who ever complements his time travel explanation (albeit for a radio signal, but still) with the earth's revolution around the sun: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_of_Darkness_(film)

    5. Re:The one they always overlook by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yet not smart enough to *require* enough plutonium in the chamber for a return trip.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:The one they always overlook by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh, sure, like you've never run out of gas.

      --
      Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
    7. Re:The one they always overlook by Pojut · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ::shrug:: people are stupid in weird ways...a mother may be capable of raising a child to adulthood without getting it killed, yet will inevitably forget the kid in the car at least once.

    8. Re:The one they always overlook by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No you see, when you travel through time you still remain trapped inside the same gravitational "depression" in space. You remain at the same coordinates in the universe, and therefore still materialize on earth, because you're moving with the gravitational well.

      Otherwise if you could escape the gravitational well simply by advancing in time, you could jump have the NASA shuttle jump forward one day, and be in space, without needing to use boosters. That would violate conservation of energy and momentum.

      (tongue firmly planted in cheek)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    9. Re:The one they always overlook by shentino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      According to relativity, you never know if your absolute position is changing or not, or even if there is such a thing as absolute position.

      So if you time travel, whose reference frame do you use to advance yourself in time while remaining static in position?

    10. Re:The one they always overlook by Mitchell314 · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Duke Nukem Forever developer elves.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    11. Re:The one they always overlook by slick7 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Can anyone explain it to me in simple terms? I'm not a physicist.

      Sure...wherever you go, there you are..

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    12. Re:The one they always overlook by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 4, Funny

      You realize you just doomed yourself, yeah? Want to ask what could possibly go wrong while you're at it?

      --
      Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
    13. Re:The one they always overlook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      in simple term, we don't know.

      there are some hypothesis of what would happen if time travel were possible, based on paradoxes, quantum mechanics, or just plain old guesswork

      one is that time is unchangeable. that is, the time line as we are living is the one where all the changes and manipulation that are about to happen from people in the future travelling to the pas are already happened. so if you're planning to kill your parents, you have already succeeded at it and thus you would not be there or you would fail at some point in the future before killing them

      another theory based on quantum theory is that every quantum state change that may happen is happening and each time a change may or may not happen the reality splits in two reality, one where the change has happened and one where the change didn't happen. this at quantum level, but could be extended as to complex decision of human being, if those decision are driven by quantum states at some level or other. so if you get back to kill your parents, then all the universe in which you have succeeded, you have not, you traveled and you didn't travel will spawn from the common state, thus not creating a paradox: every state is perfectly stable and every outcome is valid in it's own reality

      another one is that paradoxes couldn't happen, which is similar to theory n1 in that every time travel is not going to change anything but says that paradoxes would not exists, like killing your parents, because something is going to prevent you from travelling in the first time if you're going to change the time sequence. this is mostly used as a narrative device but there are also more formal proof about that involving entropy and mathematical stuff, quite hard to explain in a slashdot post and quite over my grasping to put it down on layman terms, but you can read it further in 'how to build a time machine' from paul davies which is quite a good explicative/scientific book in spite of its catchy name

    14. Re:The one they always overlook by mea37 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, according to Einstein's description of gravity this may not be such an issue as you think. The Earth's movements are, after all, governed by gravity. Now gravity doesn't so much "curve" an object's course, as it bends spacetime around the object's path (which is a straight line).

      And you're here on the Earth's surface, so you're moving along the same line. You hop in your car, start deviating from the straight-line path by 88mph, and then... what, exactly?

      Your post (and many people's intuition) assumes that you suddenly change velocity in all dimensions, so that you move in time but stay at a fixed position in space. The problem is, the concept of a "fixed point in space" is a figment of human imagination; there's no such thing. A fixed point in space implies a prefered frame of reference, and there simply is no such thing.

      So what spacial trajectory does the time machine follow? Well, why would it not continue moving at 88mph deviation from the straight-line path through curved spacetime that it's already following - that being the same line being followed by the Earth?

      Gravity would cause the time machine to "follow" the Earth as it moved through time. Not the Earth's gravity, as many other posters have suggested, but rather the Sun's gravity and the other various forces that move the Earth.

      There are many, many, many problems with time-travel fiction, but the idea that you would be lost in space just isn't one of them.

    15. Re:The one they always overlook by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Interesting

          That's something I always loved about time travel. They never mention spatial teleportation. To accomplish time travel, there must be spatial teleportation to arrive in the same place on a planet. Say your time machine was in Times square, and for some reason you were spatially oriented on the center of the planet, and you attempted to travel 3 hours to the future, when you arrived, you'd arrive somewhere between Gerlach, NV to Ravendale, CA. If you aren't spatially centered on the planet, you'd find yourself about 201,000 miles behind the best place to land (like, something solid with a breathable atmosphere).

          It makes you kind of wonder, how many basement geniuses have accomplished time travel, but were never heard from again?

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    16. Re:The one they always overlook by Graff · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We all know the answer to that one: 1.21 gigawatts!

      Ahh but that just tells us the RATE of energy, not the AMOUNT of energy! The true question is how many gigawatt-hours is it?

    17. Re:The one they always overlook by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't, cat is the opposite of split.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    18. Re:The one they always overlook by SETIGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He knew he had to key in 1955 in order to get the note from Marty that saved his life. Otherwise there would be a Universe destroying paradox.

  2. Despite what who? by UncHellMatt · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Despite countless viewings of BTTF I still never through of a few of these. "
    Did you the whole thing?

  3. Of course there are two DeLoreans by rarel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Of course there are two Deloreans. Doc's and Marty's. It's not a plot hole at all, the whole point is that they can't gut Doc's DeLorean for parts since it would create a paradox and prevent Marty from going back in time to 1885.

    The cool thing is that at one point there are FOUR DeLoreans for a few hours in 1955, Marty I, Cowboy Doc, Marty 2 (with Doc) and Biff's.

    1. Re:Of course there are two DeLoreans by chemicaldave · · Score: 3, Funny

      The cool thing is that at one point there are FOUR DeLoreans for a few hours in 1955, Marty I, Cowboy Doc, Marty 2 (with Doc) and Biff's.

      Delorean actually made that many DMC-12s?

    2. Re:Of course there are two DeLoreans by i.r.id10t · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, but most were seized by the DEA ...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    3. Re:Of course there are two DeLoreans by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I still remember their ad slogan: "Buy Delorean, Because You Can't Spend *All* Your Money On Cocaine.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Of course there are two DeLoreans by Confusador · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, it was cheaper to replicate them through time travel.

    5. Re:Of course there are two DeLoreans by norminator · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course there are two Deloreans. Doc's and Marty's. It's not a plot hole at all, the whole point is that they can't gut Doc's DeLorean for parts since it would create a paradox and prevent Marty from going back in time to 1885.

      It's been a long time since I've seen the movies, but I'm pretty (75%) sure that they not only discuss this, but show Doc's DeLorean broken down in a mine or somewhere.

      Nope. On both counts.

      In any case, I don't think there were any parts on the busted DeLorean that would have helped. Obviously Doc was able to fix the leak in the fuel line before he tried running the car on whiskey. The problem wasn't parts, it was the lack of gasoline.

  4. The gasoline crunch by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Doc probably could have MacGuyvered a distillation setup to make gasoline out of petroleum, but he quickly figured that it would take him much longer than it would take for him to get murdered and so other options were needed. He just didn't bore Marty with the details and called it impossible, adding the words "in what little time we have" in his own head.

  5. Words of Wisdom from UHF Television of the era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Repeat to yourself: It's just a show, I should really just relax.

    1. Re:Words of Wisdom from UHF Television of the era by hedwards · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, great, now I'm reading these posts in Tom Servo's voice.

  6. Jennifer seeing herself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Regarding Jennifer's surprise at seeing herself, the older Jennifer is surprised because they see each other at the same time. Up to the point young Jennifer sees old Jennifer, old Jennifer can't remember seeing young Jennifer because it's not a done deal yet. Time is still in the process of being changed. The movie is pretty clear that changes to the timeline are not predetermined. Old Jennifer cannot remember seeing young Jennifer until it actually happens, thus being a surprise for both parties.

    1. Re:Jennifer seeing herself... by kellyb9 · · Score: 3, Funny

      She's probably just shocked that she looks nothing like what she looked like in the first movie.

  7. Frame of Reference Problem by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I picture a lone Delorean, forever floating through empty space at 88 miles per hour.

    I don't understand why you post first about a frame of reference problem and then joke about 88 miles per hour ... in reference to what? In the movies the DeLorean is traveling at 88 miles per hour as would be seen by an observer standing on Earth's surface. But to someone standing perfectly still in reference to the absolute center of the solar system -- as you seem to imply time machines are initially calibrated to -- then the velocity of the DeLorean would change with the velocity of the Earth around the Sun. Why are you only referencing the solar system and not galaxy or nebula or universe? So ... yeah, 88 miles per hour for those of us still on Earth many miles away. But your own post suffers the same problem that the movie suffers which is a frame of reference to the velocity and position.

    Basically for new writers who write a science fiction time travel story you gotta make sure you mention briefly that you solved the orbit/rotation/surface problem and have calibrated your time machine to account for the ever changing topography of the Earth as well as its orbit and rotation ... Or maybe claim that you machine is anchored to Earth's gravity well to simplify things a bit more?

    They were fun movies and nothing more. It might be fun to dissect them but if this is news, stand back in awe for my dissection of about a hundred other movies ...

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Frame of Reference Problem by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't understand why you post first about a frame of reference problem and then joke about 88 miles per hour ... in reference to what?

      In reference to Einstein's dead body, of course.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Frame of Reference Problem by fat4eyes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't even understand why this needs explanation. We all travel forward through time, and no-one needs an explanation of why we don't phase through the planet as time moves forward. Yet somehow traveling through time in a different direction (or at a different speed) will somehow cause you to end up in space. What needs asking is what does a time machine look like to the people in "normal" time when it is traveling backwards through time.

    3. Re:Frame of Reference Problem by Securityemo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, this problem is moot. As it happens, the absolute frame of reference in this universe defaults to the "sleeping" "body" of Cthulhu, in the "city" of R'hyleh, "located" on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean here on Earth. So at most it's a difference of a few centimeters.

      (Seriously, this always disturb me on some visceral level when works of fiction discuss a universial frame of reference like there was such a thing? The relative frame of reference of "the universe"? Aeaeaeaeafhtagn...)

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    4. Re:Frame of Reference Problem by Stupid+McStupidson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Suspension of disbelief is a real problem for you. You must be first on the list for movie invitations.

    5. Re:Frame of Reference Problem by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't even understand why this needs explanation. We all travel forward through time, and no-one needs an explanation of why we don't phase through the planet as time moves forward.

      Of course we need an explanation. Fortunately we have it: Because the matter below us causes a force on us (combined gravitational, elastic and friction), keeping us at "the same" place relative to the ground. For the very same reason there's no problem with H. G. Wells' time machine, because it's at its place all the time (he constantly sees the surrounding, just in another pace; of course that sort of time travel has its own set of problems, but that's another story), so it also should be subject to this force. However the time machine in BTTF (as well as the time machines in most stories/movies/series today) basically makes a jump in time, i.e. it simply isn't there in the intermediate times, thus there's no force which would keep it in place.

      Of course one could argue that since "the same place at another time" isn't exactly defined anyway, the inventor of the time machine must have built in some calculation of the relative position of earth at the destination, and manages to move the time machine to exactly that place. However, that should enable you to not only choose the time, but also the place where you appear (possibly restricted to the future/past light cone, but that covers all of the earth for any reasonable time travel; of course if you only travel a microsecond, your choices of reentry are severely limited). There's absolutely no reason then to restrict the time machine to enter at the "same" place.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    6. Re:Frame of Reference Problem by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2, Informative
    7. Re:Frame of Reference Problem by anyGould · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Got to make sure? Why? It's fiction, it's a story, entertainment. If you have to make plausible claims and explaination for every little details it'll be a book that bore you to death.

      Agreed - take a trick from Doctor Who or Firefly - explain just enough, and only when it's necessary for the plot. How do you get the time machine to keep you in the same relative position? You turn it on and drive really fast.

  8. The universal answer to these questions by FranTaylor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can be found in a "Rocky and Bullwinkle" episode from long ago.

    Boris Badenof has just cut the rope on a large treasure chest that dangles over a cliff. Of course he is standing on the treasure chest at the time so they both fall together. In typical comic form the treasure chest inverts as it falls, so Boris is underneath it as it crashes to the ground.

    Natasha cries out, "Oh Boris are you okay?"

    Boris says in response: "Don't worry, tis only cartoon".

  9. Separate Time Lines by crndg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are many different ways time travel can be presented in fiction, with many different sets of "rules." In my opinion, BTTF actually sticks pretty close to its own rules, except when a) absolutely necessary for the story, or b) good for a laugh (see a).

    The reason future versions of people don't know what's going on right now in their being-rewritten past is because they're in a different line on Doc's chalkboard. So when Doc in 1885 writes the note to Marty, he is from a future where (when?) he didn't know he was going to be killed by Mad Dog Tannen. So he couldn't possibly know that Marty was going to need to come back and rescue him, and would need gasoline to do it.

    As for why Marty's parents don't recognize him, I would say they've had years to forget the details of what Calvin Klein looked like, and years of seeing their son every day as he grew up to look like someone they haven't seen in 30 years. Think of someone you know and see often. Now look at a picture of them from a long time ago. In your mind, they may seem like they haven't changed, but they have. It's like how I still picture my dad looking like he did a while back, when I saw him more often, and am now shocked to see that he has turned into Rush Limbaugh (not literally, but eerily similar-looking).

    The one good question posed by this article is about whether Marty and Jennifer would exist in 2015, after they have just gone off in the time machine w/ Doc Brown in 1985. At that point, we might think they should be removed from any future time line until they return safely to 1985. I can only surmise that when traveling to the future, the Delorean travels along the future time line it is leaving, without regard for any changes it may introduce by doing so.

    Perhaps a better overall question is: what happens to all the versions of people stuck on those time lines that are then cancelled out by Doc and Marty's travels? Do they zap out of existence? Do the time lines continue on, with fake-boob Lorraine married to Biff and all the other unpleasantness? Should we be happy that everything worked out for "our" Marty, because he's the only character who is the same person we met at the beginning of the first movie?

  10. 2 Pines Mall/Lone Pine Mall by Knightman · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's quite funny how many paradoxes there are in BTTF, and still they managed to put in some truly obscure consistency: http://www.thevrabec.com/2010/07/12/back-to-the-future-you-certainly-havent-noticed-this/

    --
    --- Reality doesn't care about your opinions, it happens anyway and if you are in the way you'll get squished.
  11. wait wait wait! by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You mean to tell me that in the movie about the time travelling, flying delorean, that runs variously on a fusion engine and stolen libyan plutonium, that there's something unrealistic about the plot of that movie? NOOOO!
    haha.

    --
    stuff |
  12. Re:Gambling wouldn't pay by tophermeyer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From what I remember from BTTF II Biff had made most of his fortune making big bets on upsets for just the first few years, then started rolling his fortune into his casino. That's why he had the Sports Almanac shrink wrapped in a safe in 1985, even though it contained sports scores through 2001.

  13. The one nobody thinks of... by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 2, Insightful
    What happened to the Marty who grew up with a go-getting SF-author father?

    Of course, I've thought about time travel more than is healthy.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  14. Re:Being discrete by markhb · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't believe that there is any possible frame of reference that contains an intersection of "being discrete" and "take the Delorean."

    --
    Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
  15. Re:Being discrete by MBGMorden · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They were dragging it around with horses and no one noticed. There's a LOT of open country with no one around back then. Worse case scenario, hook the horses up again, throw some brown burlap over the car, and ride on top of it like a buck-board. I seriously doubt anyone would notice a thing from a little distance, and once they get where they're going they can simply hide it as they did previously.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  16. Remembering 'Calvin Klein' by j-beda · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article states: "Even appreciating that they didn't know 'Calvin Klein' for long, his impact upon them was such that they'd still have an idea what he looks like, many years later."

    I think the author overestimates how much visual memory is likely to fade after 30 years. I just saw some high school classmates after 25 years and looked over some old HS photos. I could barely recall the linking between HS photos and names of the people I saw daily for over three years - including some I lusted after with all the strength of a stereotypical adolescent. Without photographic backup (did Marty get in any photos at the dance?) I doubt they could remember his look very well after only knowing him for a week or so. Combining this with later knowing Marty's face since birth and gradual growth, I do not find it at all implausible that they wouldn't recognize his as a teenager as looking like "Calvin".

  17. It's the timey wimey by drachenfyre · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's the timey wimey wibbly wobbley....

  18. Simple explanation... by denzacar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Note the portal forming in front of the Delorean just before it disappears.

    Delorean is PUSHED through a portal created by the flux capacitor which actually exploits naturally occurring folds in the space-time by poking a tiny hole (from the universe's point of view) in those folds for a fraction of a second.
    Delorean needs to be moving at 88 mph in order to get to the other side in one piece before the portal closes.

    So you see... it is more like the Star Gate than like H.G. Wells' time machine.
    Now, that one should have ended floating in space upon arrival...
    Unless...

    What if gravity wells (being a dent in the fabric of space-time) extend like a trench instead of like a circular dent?
    So, just as it holds you firmly attached to Earth instead of flying out to space while going slowly forward through space-time, Earth's gravity-trench keeps you moving along the same line up/down the trench while you are moving fast forward/backward through space-time.

    There... Now your fiction can make sense.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  19. Gasoline by plopez · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As far as the gasoline aspect goes, you would need the right *kind* of gasoline. I can't find the compression ratios, but the De Lorean would probably need high octane gasoline and since it was in the US it would need a catalytic converter and unleaded gas. There would be more complications if it had a turbo. You would have to reinvent all the chemical processes to create such a fuel. It might be simpler to create a a fuel using local materials such as coal, nitroglycerin, gunpowder etc. like The Doc did. He could have used them to create a sort of HME, rocket fuel, which burns very hot. But that creates the question of why didn't he just make a couple of RATO packs? The Diesel engine was out since it wasn't invented until 1897 and may have required precision machine work.

    Just a few thoughts.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  20. Paradox by digitalsushi · · Score: 4, Funny

    When Doc is talking to himself in 1955, I am pretty sure he created a pair of docs.

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  21. Gasoline by X86Daddy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As a kid, I wondered why they didn't just get gasoline from the stored-in-a-cave DeLorean. I don't wonder any more though. Any DeLorean owner will tell you, don't leave the car sitting with the same gasoline more than six months, especially without a fuel stabilizer. I doubt the Hill Valley General Store stocked Sta-bil in 1885, so I'm guessing Doc Brown drained it.