Yes, this is precisely the speculation I've put forth here. The current universe is one of the infinite set (let's called this "S sub-1") in the zone of probability that happens to be immune from the anachronistic effects of time travel.

Further, because our universe is one in a set of infinite universes, the changes in our universe are instantaneously accommodated so that the laws of causation are never changed, throughout the existence of our universe, from its beginning to its end, through the transformation / cross-universal transmigration of all affected events, down to the slightest iota of energy, matter, and time, from one S sub-1 universe to another.^1

Regarding the conservation of energy, alluded to in the message following the above-excerpted, there is no question in my mind that it applies to events that take place in this universe alone. But if the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics is true, there exists at least some violation of conservation of energy if for no reason than that there is an information transfer that results upon the occurrence of any precipitating event subject to the interpretation. If an instantaneous information transfer that allows such occurrences exists, then there is an intuitive argument that the transfer itself is not subject to conservation laws, if for no other reason than there is no cognizable way to explain it as a transfer of energy.

One can also speculate that quantum entanglement (teleportation, which has been evidenced in laboratory results) also results in an information transfer in much the same way. That is, entanglement changes in a local set of parameters results in an instantaneous change in a remote or separated set. The explanation for this effect is that each set is somehow linked, but this only places of the question at one remove: How are they linked? Are they linked purely and solely in the ordinary dimensions of this universe, or, for example, do they exhibit linkages across other instantiations of this universe? (Of course, the fact that we can notice the violations of ordinary physical laws of causation at all is problematical for my speculative theory, and I admit that, but then quantum entanglement is not time travel, strictly speaking.)

Regarding some of the questions in the third message, I hope to edit this message to address some of them.

I agree with you that this is simply an exercise in pure speculation. However, the idea of a higher plane in which various universes may be viewed is not a fictional postulate. For example, it is used in a recent book written by Dr. Lisa Randall, a Harvard physicist, entitled Warped Passages.

Your comments on the violation of the laws of conservation are also aptly made, and I hope that the above comments of mine directed to the first reply suffice to touch upon a proposed answer.

Again, yours is the mainstream of thinking, and I concede that. But there are also physicists who speculate that if time travel is possible, the universe prohibits any violation of causality. This prohibition is the "cosmic censorship principle" to which I referred.

I also agree with you that it is absurd to believe that the universe actively "thinks" at all, in any human sense.

____________________________________
1. An illustration of cross-universal rectification may be as follows: Suppose there is a secret laboratory somewhere that is working on a time portal. Suppose, further, that yesterday at 2:00 p.m. local time, the time portal was fired up for the first time and that at 2:01 p.m. yesterday a mouse was attempted to be sent back in time to a point one minute prior to the time at which the time machine was first activated -- i.e., to 1:59 p.m. It is discovered at 2:02 p.m. that the time machine has done nothing more to the mouse than apparently turn it into a brilliant flash of light and gamma radiation. Did the mouse in fact die? In our universe, it may have; we cannot tell. All we know is that the animal disappeared. But under this speculation, it is possible that the mouse did travel back to 1:59 p.m., but not to that point in time in our universe, nor to any parallel universe in which the anachronistic, anti-causal effects of time travel are, strictly speaking, impossible, but instead to a universe in a set of universes (possibly S sub-1, as defined above) in which the effects of changes in the spacetime continuum may be causally accommodated. For example, the mouse might have been transferred to a universe where, the time portal was turned on at 1:59 p.m., replacing the mouse there that was, unfortunately, microwaved by the machine into "nonexistence".