[gear54rus]

Self-fulfilling prophecy, yes.

But the article reads like some sci-fi bs tbh. What's considered the 'same outcome'. If I kill baby Hitler, would the universe create another just like him? Or someone else will do same things? If someone else does them, surely it won't (for example) kill as much people. So someone dead would now be alive in the future (or vice versa). And now the outcome isn't the same yeah?

Sorry but this is bs.

[suby]

I find the concept absurd as well. If you do something like go back in time and murder Hitler, you're going to be impacting the actions of every single human being alive. Within a few generations there's going to be an entirely different set of people alive than the set of people alive in the universe in which Hitler was not murdered. This idea that you would still have to go back in time because the universe corrects itself makes no sense because there's just no way you would still exist. I'd be willing to entertain the idea that someone else would go back in time for the same reason, but it's all just wild speculation.

[throwanem]

Pratchett: “Shoot the dictator and prevent the war? But the dictator is merely the tip of the whole festering boil of social pus from which dictators emerge; shoot him and there'll be another one along in a minute. Shoot him too? Why not shoot everyone and invade Poland?”

[quickthrower2]

Perhaps it’s the paradox that makes the travel impossible rather than the physics with the infinite loops settling/converging on the scenario where time travel is not discovered / possible.

[kiba]

This is assuming you will be successful in assassinating Hitler and that the timeline is mutable as opposed to the idea that time travel was always 'meant' to happen.