[Arriving in stages …] ‘Templexity’ because ‘time-travel’ isn’t even roughly the destination (but it’s a privileged place to start). The Book.
Your idea for a time-voyaging machine is ideal — for in spite of Wells, no really satisfactory thing of this sort has ever been written. The weakness of most tales with this theme is they do not provide for the recording, in history, of those inexplicable events in the past which were caused by the backward time-voyagings of persons of the present and future. It must be remembered that if a man of 1930 travels back to B.C. 400, the strange phenomenon of his appearance actually occurred in B.C. 400, and must have excited notice wherever it took place. Of course, the way to get around this is to have the voyager conceal himself when he reaches the past, conscious of what an abnormality he must seem. Or rather, he ought simply to conceal his identity — hiding the evidences of his “futurity” and mingling with the ancients as best he can on their own plane. It would be excellent to have him know to some extent of his past appearance before making the voyage. Let him, for example, encounter some private document of the past in which a record of the advent of a mysterious stranger — unmistakably himself — is made. This might be the provocation for his voyage — that is, the conscious provocation. — H. P. Lovecraft, in a letter to Clark Ashton Smith (1930)
‘Looper’ Director Rian Johnson … [interviewed] (Borys Kit, 27/09/2012)
Time Travel Movie Looper Will Be Longer In China (Rudie Obias, 25/06/2012)
Nine Problems with Looper (that Aren’t Brain-Melting Time Paradoxes) (Mike Dickison, 12/10/2012)
Johnson on Looper (video).
Time Travel and the Halting Theorem (Alyssa Vance, 23/01/2013)
Loops and Augmentation: Pragmatism, Accelerationism, and Navigation (Naught Thought, 10/09/2014)
Templexity @ UF (2.1)
An Introduction to Urbanomy (29/07/2013)
Time Spiral (29/07/2013)
Omega Capitalism (29/07/2014)
Tackling Templexity (15/09/2014)
Time Discipline (16/09/2014)
Anachronistic Oedipus (18/09/2014)
Time Travel and Computing (Hans Moravec, 1991)
Closed Timelike Curves (Kip S. Thorne, 1993)
Time Bandits: What were Einstein and Gödel talking about? (Jim Holt, 28/02/2005)
The quantum mechanics of time travel through post-selected teleportation (Seth Lloyd, Lorenzo Maccone, Raul Garcia-Patron, Vittorio Giovannetti, Yutaka Shikano, 2010)
Making TV Safer: Chinese Censors Crack Down on Time Travel (David Barboza, 12/04/2011). (SARFT statement here.)
A Guide To SF Chronophysics (Justin B Rye, 1997)
Einstein replies to critics (excerpt on time anomaly):
Kurt Gödel’s essay constitutes, in my opinion, an important contribution to the general theory of relativity, especially to the analysis of the concept of time. The problem here involved disturbed me already at the time of the building up of the general theory of relativity, without my having succeeded in clarifying it. Entirely aside from the relation of the theory of relativity to idealistic philosophy or to any philosophical formulation of questions, the problem presents itself as follows: [see diagram] […] If P is a world-point, a “light-cone” (ds2= 0) belongs to it. We draw a “time-like” world-line through P and on this line observe the close world-points B and A, separated by P. Does it make any sense to provide the world-line with an arrow, and to assert that B is before P, A after P? […] Is what remains of temporal connection between world-points in the theory of relativity an asymmetrical relation, or would one be just as much justified, from the physical point of view, to indicate the arrow in the opposite direction and to assert that A is before P, B after P? […] In the first instance the alternative is decided in the negative, if we are justified in saying: If it is possible to send (to telegraph) a signal (also passing by in the close proximity of P) from B to A, but not from A to B, then the one-sided (asymmetrical) character of time is secured, i.e., there exists no free choice for the direction of the arrow. What is essential in this is the fact that the sending of a signal is, in the sense of thermodynamics, an irreversible process, a process which is connected with the growth of entropy (whereas, according to our present knowledge, all elementary processes are reversible). […] If, therefore, B and A are two, sufficiently neighbouring, world-points, which can be connected by a time-like line, then the assertion: “B is before A,” makes physical sense. But does this assertion still make sense, if the points, which are connectable by the time-like line, are arbitrarily far separated from each other? Certainly not, if there exist point-series connectable by time-like lines in such a way that each point precedes temporally the preceding one, and if the series is closed in itself. In that case the distinction “earlier-later” is abandoned for world-points which lie far apart in a cosmological sense, and those paradoxes, regarding the direction of the causal connection, arise, of which Mr. Gödel has spoken. […] Such cosmological solutions of the gravitation-equations (with not vanishing A-constant) have been found by Mr. Gödel. It will be interesting to weigh whether these are not to be excluded on physical grounds.