The problem is you killed your grandfather that conceived your father. Not some other timelines' grandfathers that might have conceived other versions of your father. And why not going back into the past, does not mean simply going back to your past, according to your unique timeline? So you killed, in your timeline, someone who conceived you, you should cease to exist because you are your past, isn't it? If you don't come from your past, where do you come from?

@SpikeMarlene

I think you've misunderstood me. I am running through all the possible scenarios that people can throw that explains how time travel is possible if it's possible to cause yourself to cease to exist.

So in the scenario that some have given such as that awaken_angel has mentioned:

Let's call it Scenario A
Is that we move to an alternate time line.  In which case, as I mention, that would not be the same as time travel. His example explains How killing your grandfather will not cause you to cease to exist.

Just to repeat:

Scenario B. Is that we are predestined, that we will go to the past and act in a predestined order, and would never be able to undo our existence. Such as in Terminator, whereby no matter how hard the machines tries to kill john connor, he survices to the present time of the machiens. Likewise, John connor would never be able to stop the machines from rising.

But this I think is illogical, because this scenario, works, if say we do not know what will happen exactly.... whereby alot of the story is unknown yet to the time travel. I give you an example, if we are able to remotely view the full story of our past or future, and were to alter even a small aspect of it. Is that impossible? That would mean that our future will be played like a puppet, simply because we know what will happen.

Scenario C as just introduce by ScrewBallX  is that, we can kill cause our present self to cease to exist, no prob.  We just take on a different form.

I will have to argue that, 1st of all, we do not know that we will still exist, just in a different body, that is only true if you believe in the buddhist school of thought. but most critically, if history was altered, then even the me, who went back to time would have changed. and the new me, might not want to change anything.  so this will cause another infinite ripple of change.

Scenario D  is that the whole fabric of space and time would collapse on itself, and existence will cease to exist, etc...etc... So it's possible, just devastating.

Well, if so, it would have already happen.

So the conclusion is, there are no likely scenario that shows what would happen if time travel was possible.  This hints that perhaps time travel is not possible at all.  Well apparently it might be, according to special relativity, but not in the way we expect, or want (that can alter the pass).

Read this too just for a balance view.
http://www.theironskeptic.com/articles/montauk/montauk.htm

http://montaukprojectexposed.com/Montauk-P...k-Products.html

Here is an example of the review of the book The Montauk Project: Experiments in Time by Al-Belek
The truth may be out there, but it's not in this book. The author starts on an interesting path but then totally discredits himself by making wildish and unsupported claims about alien involvement. The author claims to have been part of the project years ago, but then mentions at the end of the book that he's just writing this to get others to come forward with the truth. If he was part of this project then HE should be the one to tell the story. I have some knowledge of electronics and the descriptions in this book are nothing more than a collection of terms thrown together. I'm surprised there are publishers out there who will print this stuff.

This book is a complete fantasy. Without wasting any more time writing a review, I'd like to point of one huge error of fact contained in this book. In Chapter 10, pg. 65, the author claims that "In the 1950's, ITT developed sensor technology that could literally display what a person was thinking." Later on this same page and on page 67, he claims that a Cray 1 computer was used "...interfaced with an IBM 360...". The problem here was that the IBM 360 was introduced in 1964 and the Cray 1 was not introduced until 1976, so having this "developed technology" in the 1950s as described was impossible. etc ....

I admit that I too am bias particularly on psuedo science, wild speculations and fantastic claims. You may be right but there are too many frauds and hoaxes out there, too much wild goose chase, searching for the elusive needle in a haystack, that sticking to small incremental steps seem more sensible to me.