pp 1–12 | Cite as

Time travel and coincidence-free local dynamical theories

  • Giuliano TorrengoEmail author
S.I. : The Legacy of David Lewis


I criticize Lockwood’s solution to the “paradoxes” of time travel, thus endorsing Lewis’s more conservative position. Lockwood argues that only in the context of a 5D space-time-actuality manifold is the possibility of time travel compatible with the Autonomy Principle (according to which global constraints cannot override what is physically possible locally). I argue that shifting from 4D space-time to 5D space-time-actuality does not change the situation with respect to the Autonomy Principle, since the shift does not allow us to have a coincidence-free local dynamical theory.


Time travel Wormoholes Multiverse 


  1. Abruzzese, J. (2001). On using the multiverse to avoid the paradoxes of time travel. Analysis, 61(1), 36–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arntzenius, F., & Maudlin, T. (2002). Time travel and modern physics. In C. Callender (Ed.), Time, reality and experience (pp. 169–200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (an updated and longer version, with the same title, is in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (Ed.).Google Scholar
  3. Bernstein, S. (2014). Time travel and the movable present. In Being freedom and method: Themes from the philosophy of Peter van Inwagen. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  4. Deutsch, D., & Lockwood, M. (1994). The quantum physics of time travel. Scientific American, 270(3), 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dowe, P. (2003). The coincidences of time travel. Philosophy of Science, 70, 574–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dowe, P. (2007). Contraints on data in words with closed timelike curves. Philosophy of Science, 74, 724–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Earman, J. (1972). Implications of causal propagation outside the null cone. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 50, 222–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Effingham, N. (2012). An unwelcome consequence of the Multiverse Thesis. Synthese, 184(3), 375–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hewlett, L. (1994). Letters to the editor. Scientific American, 271, 5.Google Scholar
  10. Horwich, P. (1975). On some alleged paradoxes of time travel. Journal of Philosophy, 72, 432–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Horwich, P. (1987). Asymmetries in time. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hudson, H. E., & Wasserman, R. (2009). Van Inwagen on time travel and changing the past. In (a c.) D. Zimmerman Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 5, pp. 41–49). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  13. Lewis, D. (1976). The paradoxes of time travel. American Philosophical Quarterly, 13, 145–152.Google Scholar
  14. Gilmore, C. (2007). Time travel, coinciding objects, and persistence. In D. W. Zimmermann (a c. di) (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. III, pp. 117–198).Google Scholar
  15. Harrison, J. (1971). Dr. Who and the philosophers or time travel for beginners. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 45, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lockwood, M. (2005). The labyrinth of time. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  17. Meiland, J. W. (1974). A two dimensional passage model of time for time travel. Philosophical Studies, 26, 153–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Richmond, A. R. (2000a). Plattner’s arrow: Science and multi-dimensional time. Ratio, 13(3), 256–274.Google Scholar
  19. Richmond, A. R. (2000b). Recent work: Time travel. Philosophical Books, 44, 297–309.Google Scholar
  20. Riggs, P. J. (1997). The principal paradox of time travel. Ratio, 10(1), 48–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sider, T. (1997). A new grandfather paradox? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 57(1), 139–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sider, T. (2002). Time travel, coincidences and counterfactuals. Philosophical Studies, 110, 115–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sider, T. (2011). Writing the book of the world. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thom, P. (1975). Time-travel and non-fatal suicide. Philosophical Studies, 27, 211–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. van Inwagen, P. (2009). Changing the past. In (a c.) D. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics, (Vol. 5, pp. 3–28). Oxford: OUPGoogle Scholar
  26. Vihvelin, K. (1996). What time travelers cannot do. Philosophical Studies, 81, 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università degli Studi di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations