Causal loop - another one to add to the science curriculum?

[Robert Oz]

Since intelligent design proponents promote teaching theories that lack evidence and are untestable, and treat the evolution/ID debate as an either/or problem, I'd like to throw in a third theory to be considered in science classes - causal loop.


Science classes could be broken up into three theories:

1. Evolution - species arose through a gradual process of natural selection of beneficial mutations over billions of years.

2. Intelligent design - species were deliberately created by an intelligent designer at some point in the past.

3. Causal loop - species arose through a causal loop, where a time-traveller from the future travels back in time to deposit life on the planet, which eventually leads to the time-traveller's own birth. There is no intelligent designer, since the time-traveller did not create life, but merely transported it. The effect is the cause.


For more information on causal loops, see:

The Novikov self-consistency principle under Types of Time Travel, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel

and

Predestination paradox, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_paradox


The majority of scientists would object to including a causal loop in the science curriculum for the same reasons that they object to including intelligent design (i.e. no evidence, no testable claim, etc.). However, I can't think of a valid argument intelligent design proponents could put forward to exclude causal loop.

So, would intelligent design proponents agree that science classes should now be broken up into three theories - evolution, intelligent design and causal loop?

[Pure Argent]

Y'know, the sad part of this is that it's actually more convincing than ID.

[qayak]

The ID crowd would embrace your idea. They would be cutting the time spent on Evolution by 66% (assuming each received equal time) and that furthers their goal of discrediting Evolution because it is counter to their silly superstitions.

[Safe-Keeper]

Except from that pesky lack-of-evidence deal, it's a more than sound theory. If not a little mind-boggling, but then again, so's evolution:p.

Just so long as you don't ask for a starting point, it'll do.

[Piscivore]

Hmm... God deposits life in universe ---> life produces man ---> man becomes god ---> god travels back in time and deposits life in universe.

[Pure Argent]

Hmm... God deposits life in universe ---> life produces man ---> man becomes god ---> god travels back in time and deposits life in universe.

Win

[!Kaggen]

Hmm... God deposits life in universe ---> life produces man ---> man becomes god ---> god travels back in time and deposits life in universe.

My question is why does the 1st god God and the 2nd god god?

[Piscivore]

My question is why does the 1st god God and the 2nd god god?

Because the first god started the sentence. They're the same guy.

[Pure Argent]

Except from that pesky lack-of-evidence deal, it's a more than sound theory. If not a little mind-boggling, but then again, so's evolution:p.

What are you talking about? You mean you've never seen Terminator?

[!Kaggen]

Because the first god started the sentence. They're the same guy.

Hmm...... i thought the sentence started with Hmm.....
Sorry:p

[Piscivore]

Hmm...... i thought the sentence started with Hmm.....
Sorry:p

Not a problem. I should have used a line break.

[Dancing David]

Since intelligent design proponents promote teaching theories that lack evidence and are untestable, and treat the evolution/ID debate as an either/or problem, I'd like to throw in a third theory to be considered in science classes - causal loop.


Science classes could be broken up into three theories:

1. Evolution - species arose through a gradual process of natural selection of beneficial mutations over billions of years.

2. Intelligent design - species were deliberately created by an intelligent designer at some point in the past.

3. Causal loop - species arose through a causal loop, where a time-traveller from the future travels back in time to deposit life on the planet, which eventually leads to the time-traveller's own birth. There is no intelligent designer, since the time-traveller did not create life, but merely transported it. The effect is the cause.


For more information on causal loops, see:

The Novikov self-consistency principle under Types of Time Travel, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel

and

Predestination paradox, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_paradox


The majority of scientists would object to including a causal loop in the science curriculum for the same reasons that they object to including intelligent design (i.e. no evidence, no testable claim, etc.). However, I can't think of a valid argument intelligent design proponents could put forward to exclude causal loop.

So, would intelligent design proponents agree that science classes should now be broken up into three theories - evolution, intelligent design and causal loop?

Sort of like Rincewind and the sandwich in Diskworld.

[Pure Argent]

Sort of like Rincewind and the sandwich in Discworld.

Fixed.

[Dancing David]

Fixed.

I knew it when I did it, but had to go on to something else, better than Dickworld, where everyone is named Richard.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

3. Causal loop - species arose through a causal loop, where a time-traveller from the future travels back in time to deposit life on the planet, which eventually leads to the time-traveller's own birth. There is no intelligent designer, since the time-traveller did not create life, but merely transported it. The effect is the cause.
Don't you need an intelligent designer to poof this loop into existence from nothing?

~~ Paul

[Robert Oz]

Don't you need an intelligent designer to poof this loop into existence from nothing?

~~ Paul


No. Not with causal loops and the Novikov self-consistency principal.

The causal loop means the poof into existence came from the future of said existence. There's no initial poof that requires an intelligent designer.

In a causal loop, the fact that we exist means someone from the future must, at some point, travel back into the past to deposit life. Otherwise, we would not be here. Someone is predestined to become a time-traveller and ensure his or her own existence.

[Kahalachan]

Hmm... God deposits life in universe ---> life produces man ---> man becomes god ---> god travels back in time and deposits life in universe.

My favorite explanation so far. If only this were true.....

[Unlike a Bull]

It reminds me of Asimov's "The Last Question" Linkage (http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html). If you haven't read it, I recommend it.

[rocketdodger]

It reminds me of Asimov's "The Last Question" Linkage (http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html). If you haven't read it, I recommend it.

Hahahah, I was planning on posting a link to this as I read the thread, but then I got to the bottom of the thread and you have already done it!

Fanstastic.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

The causal loop means the poof into existence came from the future of said existence. There's no initial poof that requires an intelligent designer.
But who poofed the future into existence?

~~ Paul

[godless dave]

I find a causal mobius strip more plausible, or at least more trippy.

[Robert Oz]

But who poofed the future into existence?

~~ Paul


There is no beginning or ending to a causal loop and, therefore, no required poof.

The past comes from the future and the future from the past.

[Robert Oz]

But who poofed the future into existence?

~~ Paul

There is no beginning or ending to a causal loop and, therefore, no required poof.

The past comes from the future and the future from the past.


Take the causal loop in The Terminator as an example.

It is impossible to say whether John Connor's birth or John Connor sending Kyle Reese into the past created the loop, since neither can be identified as the beginning of the loop. The loop is just there. Where is the beginning of a circle?