You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Benquo comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, March 2015, chapter 119 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Gondolinian 10 March 2015 06:10PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (339)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Benquo 11 March 2015 10:16:57PM 3 points [-]

I think this is taking "6 hour limit" way too literally, when by far the simplest explanation is that time turners can protect you against Time's tendency towards simplicity for 6 hours or so, but if you try to chain that, it becomes overwhelmingly computationally simpler (and therefore more likely) for the intention to set up such a chain to result in the death of everyone involved, than for the chain to work as designed.

Comment author: Kindly 12 March 2015 01:04:59AM 0 points [-]

I agree that the scheme I propose would fail under many interpretations of how time travel works.

I disagree that we know enough to say that Time has a tendency towards computational simplicity, or that Time-Turners protect you from it, or for that matter that a Time-Turner chain is any more likely to short-circuit in some bizarre accident than a regular use of Time-Turners.

The simplest explanation I can think of under which my scheme might not work is actually the 6-hour buffer model. In that case, I expect no time travel would occur at all, so we'd want to design the scheme in such a way that (a) this is a clean way to fail and (b) this is not a failure case we expect short of either the world ending or the scheme not working.