The Existence of Time Travel Would Invalidate Free Will

Firstly, my apologies: It was not my intent to impose anything onto your concept, but as you admittedly, left it " bare bones" I simply drew on the only conceptualization available to me. And if you'll permit me to be candid in response to "I was focusing more on time travel as a concept rather than as a scientific means.", if hypotheticals are not bound to at least a minimal degree of plausibility of the possible outcome (seeing how they will play out in the real world) then we'd scarcely entertain them lol. So I think its customary to juggle some, but not all aspects of plausibility when contemplating abstractions, which is why I assumed that most natural laws remain constant, while suspending only those that would impede the the specifics of the hypothetical you proposed; The same as if I were watching a film. And in my defense, the observations in my concept were not high science, as I believe they still conform to our everyday intuitions about reality. So, rest assured that I'm quite disposed to accommodate any specification you put forth as I am, thus far, thoroughly entertained :-), but surely we would both agree that the failure to specify on the front end has kind of left us both at a disadvantage...lol But anyway...once again into the fray...I will say here that I have yet to wholly comprehend the de-authored view of free will. i.e., looking to the universe to discern whether freedom of choice exists, rather than looking to the source of that choice (the human author). I mean let's face it, will is very much a subjective construct..But, this reversal of focus in regard to free will is apparent in so many concepts, in which its existence becomes the burden of the external (universe). Consider your examples which presuppose that in order for free will to exist, we would have to possess: Omniscience: Have unfathomably profound knowledge about the universe. E.g., "the multiverse is simply one way of envisioning an indefinite future". (Figure out which is the correct view)Omnipresence: The ability to see into the multiverses (or any other kind) to verify that free will exists, e.g., "there are bound to be more decisions that would split into different timelines along the way that you traveled".And omnipotence: our sheer must be able to call into existence infinite realities for every decision we make. E.g., "For every possible decision that could be made, a world exists where it has been made".I.e., such qualities that are up til now only attributed to you know who! And in the case that we ever came to possess them, would void your questioning of free will altogether, because if we were able to wield this godlike influence over the universe, there would be no question of free will...or need for your time travel experiment in order to verify it...lolAnd yet, we can easily contemplate its existence or lack thereof, right here on terra firma. And I am aware that your resolution deals with time travel (this isn't digression) I'm just making the point(s) that we are the author of will; That this free will exists (or is probable) independent of what we know about the world, or the limitations placed upon us by natural laws. So I fail to understand why the proof must lie solely in the external, rather than our judgments of our attempts to exercise it, or in the sheer ability to conjure a desire and the undertaking to bring it to fruition? So with that bit of background lol, I return to your resolution... Specifically to causality, the construct on which we all rely intuitively to realize our will/desires, which would follow us through time. Off the grid, on the grid is immaterial, as causality follows each speck individually...(As i said, it is not subject to time, only cause and effect enacted on matter) So this will to time travel, led to BAM, the pressing of the button (cause) into to the future (effect) and into any further will-derived actions (and effects of those actions) that we might make.The mechanics of our arrival to this future time (movement from one location in time to another) is inherent in time travel itself, so it does not necessarily infer a destiny already written, from where I stand. The only way we could know for certain is if we were able to observe the time in between i.e., when we were off the grid, and not just the destination point that we'd traveled to (set to observe). But again that would place is in two places in the universe simultaneously, which to me seems just as unsensible as the possibility of "duplicate[ing]infinitely for every possible version of that future"So what I'm asking for clarification on is: why does my mere arrival into a future mean that that my timeline is already set (i.e., not just causality)and hopefully, while avoiding the pitfalls, which are:1. if all events are predetermined my time travel would've been predetermined also...which means that I wouldn't see any other past except the past that occurred i.e., my pressing the button...2. if i did see myself plodding along in mundane activities (not traveling in time) it would prove that we did indeed have free will...i.e., power to break away from whatever the predetermined future held for us. So time travel would ultimately prove free will not disprove it. Hmmm??? Yes? Yes? No? I thought not..lolEagerly awaiting your response!!!!