<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">Here is the link to the preprint</div><div dir="auto">https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.02511</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Quantum theory is mentioned in the article only in the introduction, although the place where Quantum Theory and General Relativity meet is where it gets interesting :-/</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Time travel is an interesting topic. Time travel forward in time (as it is described for example in the novel "Marooned in Realtime" by Vernor Vinge) is far more likely than time travel back in time. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">-J.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: cody dooderson <d00d3rs0n@gmail.com> </div><div>Date: 9/26/20 22:52 (GMT+01:00) </div><div>To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> </div><div>Subject: [FRIAM] Time travel article </div><div><br></div></div><div dir="auto">An article came out recently about a proof that time travel would not lead to the butterfly effect. <a rel="noreferrer" href="https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/amp34146674/paradox-free-time-travel-is-possible/">https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/amp34146674/paradox-free-time-travel-is-possible/</a> . This sounds great but does anybody understand it enough to explain it to a novice? Has this idea been around for a while, because Netflix's show The<span style="font-family:sans-serif"> Umbrella Academy touches on it?</span><div dir="auto">The article says that the proof is backed up by research from Los Alamos and some experience with random walkers. I am pretty familiar with the latter. My experience is that some random walkers, a recursive path search, and patience can solve a lot of basic computer science problems. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div>
</body></html>