I saw star trek today...

May 16, 2009 17:41

So... let us discuss some time travel theory (again).  What is your opinion on this ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 4

phoenix_oz May 17 2009, 05:03:58 UTC
This is just making my brain hurt. They way I'm thinking it through is that Timeline C ends up creating the situation wherein Timeline A remains unaffected, which then leads Timeline B to be re-created, which in turn re-creates Timeline C, which then leads back to the re-creation of Timeline A, etc.

I'm willing to admit that I may not be considering other factors, but as it stands, without thinking much about it, that is how I understand it.

Reply


lithium6ion May 17 2009, 21:05:35 UTC
Well, if we're going to play the multi-dimensional game, then technically the first guy still creates timeline B because he's not really from the future but rather a parallel dimension 'timeline A' where the events of B and C never happened. (The grandfather paradox, functional or not, is disregarded because we're creating new dimensions each time a timeline is changed.)

So to answer your question, the events of the year 1900 involving the first man occur in timelines B and C (C, assuming you say includes the time before it diverges from B), while the events of the year 2000 involving the second man occur only in C.

Reply


koraelus May 18 2009, 02:52:12 UTC
Interesting idea, Felix. That must C must create A which must create B which must create C again. I think that's what they call the "Time Policing Effect". In that the time-line must be paradox free (in a sense) and so it forces these events to resolve. I think Dan's multi-dimensional theory also works in this case.

Anyway, if you've seen the new Star Trek movie... had you considered how that works out with the vents in First Contact?

Reply

koraelus May 19 2009, 06:58:25 UTC
Also the events of Star Trek IV come to mind...

Also, I'm in Narita airport. You'd think I would be using my precious internet seconds more sparingly.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up