....if the idea isn't Einstein's then whose it? I didn't come up with it and now neither did he

....if the idea isn't Einstein's then whose it? I didn't come up with it and now neither did he

... another thought ... what if Einstein were born in the 800's instead of the 1800's - would he have still been able to come up with E=MC^2? ... fast forward to an Einstein-less 20th century - does E=MC^2 go undiscovered? ... shooting from the hip, I'd say the answer to both is "no" ... Darwin wasn't the only one on the trail of natural selection; Mendel's discoveries lie buried while they were independently discovered some years later ... that Einstein was a genius there is no doubt - but as far as E=MC^2 goes, he was simply at the right place at the right time to midwife yet another idea belonging to human culture into being ...

Say for some reason I had the ability to travel in time and I chose to go back in time just before Einstein created his special theory of relativity. Before he had the chance to think it up I told him that E=mc(2) and all the other things he mentioned and gave him permission to use it, meaning he never came up with it. I come back to the present and realise....if the idea isn't Einstein's then whose it? I didn't come up with it and now neither did he

I do not know the resolution to your question other than backwards time travel for macrosopic objects may not be possible and evidence of this is the paradox you gave.

... just another broken symmetry? ... e.g., in theory, the high-energy plasma of the Big Bang could have just as easily condensed into antimatter - electrons with positive charge; protons with negative charge; etc. ... why it didn't do so (or condense into some other exotic substance) is just the luck of the draw - a broken symmetry - a random choice at a multi-pronged bifurcation ... same thing with time? ... that is, of all the possible directions in which time can (in theory) flow, time in our universe flows in the direction it does simply because at some bifurcation or another it broke the symmetry of possibilities into a single actuality?

All that's left to do is to explain why time (at macro scales) only flows in one direction ... but at the same time, don't we also have to explain why substance (at macro scales) only takes the form of matter? ... that is, why is it that the symmetries of possibility in our universe only reify (at macro scales) as singular actualities? ... is it a matter of mutual incompatibility? (i.e., would a meeting of time and antitime be as explosive as a meeting of matter and antimatter?)

At macro scales, the second law of thermodynamics, comes into play, which is a compelling contender to the nature of time.

I do not understand your request to explain why substance (at macro scales) only takes the form of matter? I am confused as does substance ever take form other than matter?

I am not familiar with the idea of anti time. Would you please elaborate.

Say for some reason I had the ability to travel in time and I chose to go back in time just before Einstein created his special theory of relativity. Before he had the chance to think it up I told him that E=mc(2) and all the other things he mentioned and gave him permission to use it, meaning he never came up with it. I come back to the present and realise....if the idea isn't Einstein's then whose it? I didn't come up with it and now neither did he

... it both is and isn't ... if you could reverse the flow of time, would you reverse entropy? ... the short answer is "no" ... particle physics is "time reversible" - particles behave the same regardless of whether time runs in the direction it does now or if it were to run in the opposite direction ... if individual particles behave the same regardless of the direction of time, then statistical aggregations of particles also behave the same regardless of the direction of time ... thus, the second law of thermodynamics applies no matter which direction time goes!

... Antimatter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

... here's a brief explanation of broken symmetry: imagine a pencil perfectly balanced on it's point ... it could fall over in any of 360 degrees ... it has 360 degrees of symmetric possibilities ... the minutest random breath of air disturbs the pencil's balance and it falls ... it points in only a single direction - the 360 degrees of symmetric possibility have been broken.

Now consider the universe just after the Big Bang - all high-energy plasma so full of symmetrical condensational possibilities (matter, antimatter, super-exotic-we-know-not-whats, etc.) ... as the universe expands, the energy density decreases and reaches a critical condensational point ... the minutest random fluctuation of energy disturbs the plasma's balance and it condenses ... it points in only a single direction: matter - the unknown degrees of symmetric possibility have been broken.

Now the question is: why? ... why was there a symmetry of possibility that could only result in a single actuality? ... why do we see mostly matter, instead of equal parts matter, antimatter, super-exotic-we-know-not-whats, and etc.?

... a simple liberty I took in drawing an analogy to "antimatter" - the analogic implication being that it might be as disasterous for "time" and "antitime" to come into contact as it is for "matter" and "antimatter" (KABLOOIE!)