|
On March 18 2016 23:12 JimmiC wrote:
Any idea has the problem with changing history. A portfolio of stocks probably does it the least. The collectibles idea changes either the person that has it now doesn't or you have changed the market by making it more common than it would be with out you. If you held a a otn of 1% or less shares of companies people would basically not care. Also, money laundering laws were way less strict than there are today. And in the USA there were tons of banks just ran by individual citizens that would happy to take your money little to know questions asked.
I don't imagine you would so drastically affect a market of collectibles assuming you kept it within reason. Off hand you wouldn't need a pallet of Action Comics #1.
|
Zurich15366 Posts
On March 18 2016 22:06 Simberto wrote:
It adds complications and points of failure. For example, you don't have an identity in 1980, because you haven't been born yet.
How do you know?
My plan assumed I had been born already. I also assumed you can take stuff with to the past, so you would of course take the debt in the present, where you have sufficient securities.
As to the suspicious stock owner who doesn't vote: $100,000,000 in Apple stock is just 0.01% of shares. And sure, you could diversify of course.
|
United States44203 Posts
If you want crazy returns wouldn't bitcoin be better? Went up something like 1000000% from where it started and they can be generated without involving outsiders.
|
On March 19 2016 02:45 KwarK wrote:
If you want crazy returns wouldn't bitcoin be better? Went up something like 1000000% from where it started and they can be generated without involving outsiders.
I hadn't even thought of that, wouldn't even have to go back too far.
|
Zurich15366 Posts
Bitcoin is a bad choice though to make A LOT of money without violating the minimal disruption rule. If you started really really early there simply weren't a lot Bitcoin around total, plus they weren't tradable.
And later they appreciated enough to not even outperform stocks from the 80s.
The biggest chunk of Bitcoin in individual possession was at its highest some 400 mio I believe? And that was Satoshi Nakamoto's starting batch. Getting anywhere near those numbers would seriously disrupt the development of Bitcoin - maybe enough to not let them appreciate as expected in the present.
The beauty of course would be the present transfer of past bitcoin mining. All you would have to carry over to the present somehow would be your wallet key.
|
if you can travel back multiple times, write up a list of the greatest heists that were never solved, travel back to them and rob that item. Probably rob something non-unique, or it will be hard to sell in the present.
|
I thought the time travel maneuver was to perform only ONE action/decision? A lot of these takes a bit of planning and starting bank.
As an example, if I go back X years to buy stock--most likely I won't have the capital to even buy it, and I would not have the job stability I have now to get the kind of loan to buy the stock I need. Even then, getting a loan and buying stock are two actions/decisions and not just one.
If we allow multiple actions--wouldn't you just memorize as much of the important events of world history as possible and just become a God?
"I am ____ from _____, the heavenly father of all you ____" and just start making predictions that are accurate. Start your own religion, and have vassals giving you base percentages of their income each week/month/year for the rest of your life?
|
On March 20 2016 00:29 Thieving Magpie wrote:
I thought the time travel maneuver was to perform only ONE action/decision? A lot of these takes a bit of planning and starting bank.
As an example, if I go back X years to buy stock--most likely I won't have the capital to even buy it, and I would not have the job stability I have now to get the kind of loan to buy the stock I need. Even then, getting a loan and buying stock are two actions/decisions and not just one.
If we allow multiple actions--wouldn't you just memorize as much of the important events of world history as possible and just become a God?
"I am ____ from _____, the heavenly father of all you ____" and just start making predictions that are accurate. Start your own religion, and have vassals giving you base percentages of their income each week/month/year for the rest of your life?
doesn't work because you will quickly change history and render all your knowledge obsolete.
|
How about go back in time, find something common (like whiskey) whose value jumps if it's an antique, bury those things in an undisturbed location only you know about, come back to the present and dig up the time capsule and auction everything?
|
|
|
On March 20 2016 05:09 JimmiC wrote:
Could you just head back and give yourself a list of stock tips. When to buy and sell? Or did we outlaw that. Because that seams like the easiest.
One of my caveats was you couldn't do the back to the future route.
|
United States44203 Posts
On March 20 2016 05:09 JimmiC wrote:
Could you just head back and give yourself a list of stock tips. When to buy and sell? Or did we outlaw that. Because that seams like the easiest.
Stock tips involve buying and selling which involves someone else selling and buying. That's a recipe for changing the future significantly. The idea is to cause the minimum damage to the timeline. So something that would be perfect is to go back to when some treasure was lost, say, something like Nazi gold which was buried and never found, note where it is and then leave yourself a map to it. The only change to the timeline would be the existence of a map that wasn't there before which, hopefully, would cause only a little damage, especially if you made the map yourself.
|
Little example.
My oncle bought a car once upon a time for 20k, he later sold it for 35k - which was a good deal at the time.
Nowadays that same car is worth over 1.5 Millions (iirc and i forgot what kind of car it was  )
With knowledge like this you don't need any stockmarkets or anything, just a place to store "stuff".
Btw: My oncle isn't bitter about this in the least.
|
To avoid the "don't change history" issue, you can change order.
1) decide what to buy and where to store it.
2) go and check if it's there in present time.
3a) if it's there, go back in time and buy it. You know it'll be a success.
3b) if it's not there, don't time travel. You'll fail.
In essence, you can check before you go if you'll succeed.
And anyone that secretly plans to not go at all if you find the stuff, just take it and don't care where it came from: you'll very likely not find anything. Can't fool causality.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
^if 'decision' is already causally effective to give you that thing why go back at all lol.
stuff like newcomb's paradox shows that mental events intuitively understood to be causally efficacious events are not necessarily so. this is not the reuslt of the biology but in our conceptual representation of these events. in hte newcomb paradox one can define 'prediction' to be not causally efficacious while reliance on it produces causally different outcomes or branches in the thought experiment.
|
It's a "Time can't be changed" interpretation of time travel. Under that assumption, every time travel has already happened, and all of history (including the future) is a constant.
Thus, if you find something where you decided to place it later on, either you got really lucky, or someone is going to travel back to place it there.
The main problem with time travel is that noone knows what the rules are, yet a lot of people are very convinced that they know them, because they have heard one convincing set of rules, and all of them have a lot of weirdness in them.
There are a bunch of rulesets, for example
"Time can't be changed, all of your actions in the past already happened"
"You create a new timeline that is basically a new reality, or actually a new reality every time you change something (So every time you time travel)"
"Fluctuating Paradoxes"
"Paradoxes resolve to a stable state, which usually involves you not being in it"
"Time Cops punch you if you paradox"
"Paradoxes explode the universe"
"Wibbly-Wobbly Timey Wimey"
and probably a bunch more
As a related note, one of the best descriptions of an actual society of time travelers that makes some sort of sense can be found in the "Continuum" tabletop RPG. I'd greatly recommend it just for very cool description of that society (Not for actually playing it though)
|
On March 20 2016 10:01 oneofthem wrote:
^if 'decision' is already causally effective to give you that thing why go back at all lol.
stuff like newcomb's paradox shows that mental events intuitively understood to be causally efficacious events are not necessarily so. this is not the reuslt of the biology but in our conceptual representation of these events. in hte newcomb paradox one can define 'prediction' to be not causally efficacious while reliance on it produces causally different outcomes or branches in the thought experiment.
If you're not going back if they are there, they will not be there. There is no history where the stuff are there and you don't go back. Then where did the things come from? So if you're not the kind of person that would go back when you find the stuff, you'll never live on a timeline where the trick works.
|
On March 20 2016 10:12 Simberto wrote:
It's a "Time can't be changed" interpretation of time travel. Under that assumption, every time travel has already happened, and all of history (including the future) is a constant.
Thus, if you find something where you decided to place it later on, either you got really lucky, or someone is going to travel back to place it there.
The main problem with time travel is that noone knows what the rules are, yet a lot of people are very convinced that they know them, because they have heard one convincing set of rules, and all of them have a lot of weirdness in them.
There are a bunch of rulesets, for example
"Time can't be changed, all of your actions in the past already happened"
"You create a new timeline that is basically a new reality, or actually a new reality every time you change something (So every time you time travel)"
"Fluctuating Paradoxes"
"Paradoxes resolve to a stable state, which usually involves you not being in it"
"Time Cops punch you if you paradox"
"Paradoxes explode the universe"
"Wibbly-Wobbly Timey Wimey"
and probably a bunch more
As a related note, one of the best descriptions of an actual society of time travelers that makes some sort of sense can be found in the "Continuum" tabletop RPG. I'd greatly recommend it just for very cool description of that society (Not for actually playing it though)
I'm pretty convinced that, if time travel is possible, it'll be calculated thorough the "sum over histories" method. You take a starting state and an end state, and you sum over possible ways to go from the start to the end. Including time travel. From that sum, you can calculate the probability to get the end state, given the start state. That's already how physics is done, no need to change it, just an extension in which space time paths from start to end you allow.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 20 2016 13:12 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2016 10:01 oneofthem wrote:
^if 'decision' is already causally effective to give you that thing why go back at all lol.
stuff like newcomb's paradox shows that mental events intuitively understood to be causally efficacious events are not necessarily so. this is not the reuslt of the biology but in our conceptual representation of these events. in hte newcomb paradox one can define 'prediction' to be not causally efficacious while reliance on it produces causally different outcomes or branches in the thought experiment. If you're not going back if they are there, they will not be there. There is no history where the stuff are there and you don't go back. Then where did the things come from? So if you're not the kind of person that would go back when you find the stuff, you'll never live on a timeline where the trick works.
but is your deciding to go back sufficient, at that moment, to see the causal consequences of actually going back?
|
On March 20 2016 14:16 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2016 13:12 Cascade wrote:On March 20 2016 10:01 oneofthem wrote:
^if 'decision' is already causally effective to give you that thing why go back at all lol.
stuff like newcomb's paradox shows that mental events intuitively understood to be causally efficacious events are not necessarily so. this is not the reuslt of the biology but in our conceptual representation of these events. in hte newcomb paradox one can define 'prediction' to be not causally efficacious while reliance on it produces causally different outcomes or branches in the thought experiment. If you're not going back if they are there, they will not be there. There is no history where the stuff are there and you don't go back. Then where did the things come from? So if you're not the kind of person that would go back when you find the stuff, you'll never live on a timeline where the trick works. but is your deciding to go back sufficient, at that moment, to see the causal consequences of actually going back?
Ahh, fine question.
If you'll go back if you find things, it makes the history of picking up stuff possible, but the history of not finding stuff and not going back is also possible. Which one will actually happen? Not clear.
You can of course chose to just go without checking, and hope for the best. You won't have the guarantee that it'll work, but maybe you are ok with the risk. Or if you try the pre-checking and don't find anything, you can still go anyway and store the stuff somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
