Assuming the Novikov self-consistency principle is real, and you from the future appears before you and says you get to pick whether you frick him in the ass or he fricks you in the ass, what do you pick?
He already knows your answer, and the question is really whether you want to get fricked in the ass by yourself now for the reward of fricking yourself in the ass later, or if you want to frick him in the ass now at the expense of being fricked in the ass later.
what if I take more than 15 minutes to finish
That's not how the Novikov self-consistency principle works.
Based.
I resolve myself in the present to go back in time and ask myself if I want to frick myself in the ass now or later as a joke and don't actually intend on fricking myself at any time. Future me will immediately burst out laughing because I now realized and remembered my own joke.
Toss a coin to decide. The probability is necessarily around 50/50. Since the probability is necessarily 50/50, you have disproved the Novikov self consistency principle, since it claims the probability of an inconsistent outcome is zero.
>frick my future self
>wait 15 minutes
>frick my former self
What stops me from doing this? I'm the active part all the time.
NOOOOO you have to do them both or the principle is invalid WTF
It probably hurts less to get fricked in the ass later if you're already a bit aroused and have endorphins pumping around than getting dry fricked in the ass by yourself there on the spot. The right call is to frick yourself in the ass in the here and now and start lubing and limbering your ring in anticipation for what's to come when you go back in time.
Pretty basic stuff.
On the other hand, if you get fricked first and frick later, the more you're butthurt about getitng fricked in the ass, the gentler you will probably be, leading to an equilibrium between asspain and arousal.
This
Receive first then give is objectively the right move
You're sending info into the future about how to assfrick more skillfully
The reverse makes no sense because prostate orgasms are worth more than normal orgasms
I agree with the order, but for different reasons.
If I get fricked in the ass first, what if I end up liking it, and can't enjoy fricking in the ass in the future? At least I will be able to properly enjoy fricking an ass before my taste is potentially ruined.
>The reverse makes no sense because prostate orgasms are worth more than normal orgasms
The reverse makes most sense BECAUSE of this exact reason.
Who want to experience a normal orgasm after a prostate orgasm?
>>You're sending info into the future about how to assfrick more skillfully
>you choose to get fricked now
>future you is mercyless, absolutely jack-hammering your poor butthole
>"cant this bastard be gentle?! this hurts like a b***h!"
>"oh I'm so mad right, now, im gonna get revenge on that guy in 15 mins absolutely destroying his ass"
>thus closing the cycle
I'm assuming my subjective experience is of the stable recursion loop where bottom me gets turned into a quivering mess both times
I answer neither. My future self knows I was going to answer neither. Neither of me gets fricked in the ass.
>make future self frick my cute little ass
>become future me
>force past me to frick me in my cute little ass again
>cum while causality breaks down
heh
I shoot him in the face, clearly it isn't me from the future because I'm not a disgusting homosexual
in the future if we refuse to become gay we'll be charged with committing homophobic hate crime against our future gay selves
Obviously I should do the fricking first as otherwise I may not be able to become hard within 15 minutes of hands free orgasm.
Whatever, its me either way, might as well throw a coin.
Stop making this gey space thread. Space is a NPC ghetto. It doesn't even exist. How can you believe in space if it's just a physical nothing?(an NPC ghetto).
It's not a coin flip since there's a chance (even a small one, like if the 'future me" has some evidence) that the future me isn't actually future me.
I think if Novikov self-consistency principle was true and time travel was possible, you would be unlikely to meet yourself. It would be possible as it doesn't strictly require any inconsistency, but unlikely. Because after all, who the frick would intentionally decide to just say and do the same things you remember the future self doing, once you become him? I would for sure try to do something differently. Now I would by necessity fail to do so, if it really was the future me and there were no alternate timelines etc. but this happening requires further unlikely and contrived things to happen - something random forces me to act the same way every time, or every single time my memory is fricked so bad I remember the interaction which should be memorable as frick so badly wrong I can't choose to act differently.
The bigger the age gap between the two versions of me, the more likely the interaction is however, because my memory of the interaction will be more foggy so it requires less contrivances to happen. For example me meeting my 3 year old self wouldn't be that unlikely - the 3 year old me wouldn't even recognize the older version of me and would have no idea wtf is going on. After all I'm basically an entirely different person from him at this point.
Novikov self-consistency principle would in general have lots of odd implications. Say you tried to meet yourself one year back in the past, but you have no such memory of interacting with your future self. Now, you would probably just fail to meet yourself. But not for 100% certainty, and by trying to meet yourself you would increase the probability of a bizarre lapse of memory that would've made you forget the interaction entirely. As it would be necessary for the meeting to happen.
My IQ is only 100. Please explain the Novikov self-consistency principle in ways an engineer can understand.
It's like Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure and (arguably) Terminator 1/2, as opposed to Back to the Future, Looper and Terminator Genisys/Dark Fate. You cannot alter the past, because you were already there. There is only one timeline.
Let's say you're about to go on a time travel trip to the past, to 100 years before, and you'll go on this trip tomorrow. This time travel trip you're about to embark on is already a part of the history, of the same world you inhabit right now. You can and you will interact with the past in all kinds of ways, but whatever you caused (will cause) to happen has already affected the current time.
So you will be unable to do anything that would be inconsistent with how things are now. What will prevent you? Something. You don't know what exactly. Is it like some mysterious force of fate? Well not really. Imagine you found a video that you knew were authentic, of somebody trying to murder your parents, well before you were born. You know he will fail in this video, no matter how close he seems to be succeeding and seemingly being able to do so, just from the fact that you exist. It doesn't require some anti-paradox fairy to intervene and prevent a contradiction from happening. Similarly, time travel doesn't require any kind of time jannies to "protect the timeline" to prevent inconsistencies.
I would never propose such a thing under any circumstance, so I kill him because I know he's some kind of clone imposter.