(November 28, 2017 at 12:50 pm)Hammy Wrote:Not necessarily.(November 28, 2017 at 12:40 pm)LostLocke Wrote: Or, let's go further.Well backwards causality would only make sense like that if time ran backwards, and the notion of time running backwards doesn't seem to make any sense either. And it's worse than that because you seem to be expecting causality and time to run BOTH ways. D cannot cause A if D's existence depends on being caused by A.
What if it turned out to be something like.... A causes B, B causes C, C causes D, D causes A?
To use space instead of time as an example....
I'm in Chicago. I get in my car, point it west, and start driving. If I drive "straight" from my frame of reference, (ignoring obstacles of course), I will eventually return to Chicago. I don't have to drive backwards in space to return, I'll still be moving forward.
That's because we are driving along a 2 dimensional surface, but don't actually perceive this surface curving around a higher spatial dimension that warps it back in to itself. The same could apply to time.
And again, there is nothing in our current understanding of physics that prevents time from doing the same.