time AND SPACE cop
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Timecop
martinpearce — 12 years ago(August 13, 2013 02:47 AM)
Like most time travel movies this one misses the fact that if you travel in time you stay in the same place, just at a different time. BttF got it right and of course Dr. Who knows.
This is a fun film so it's not a make or break thing just something that bugs me! -
mikey1969 — 12 years ago(November 27, 2013 10:51 PM)
Sure, you stay in the same place. Unfortunately, the earth isn't occupying that space. Even if you were to go back a few seconds, the Earth would rotate underneath you and you'd be a few feet from where you started, but travelling back years? Not only would the planet be in a different spot around the sun, but the solar system would be occupying a different place in the galaxy, which would be in a different spot in the universe.
You can't be a time traveller without also travelling in space. Might as well add in the ability to drop you anywhere on the planet you want, since you've gone 99.99% of the way there already by plotting where in space everything was at the time yo need to go to. -
avortac — 11 years ago(April 16, 2014 11:23 PM)
I have always thought of that like.. planets are sort of 'protected enclosures', where it doesn't matter where they are -physically-, if you travel in time inside their protective spheres.
I mean, wherever the planet moves in space, there the time-traveler moves too, because the time-traveling is locked to the planetary sphere. Only if you time-travel outside such a protective sphere, you can travel "in time only".
Which still doesn't change the original assessment, that he should be called "Time and Space Cop", if we are to be accurate.
However, since moving in space is a very mundane, everyday thing to do, something that most people do a lot during their incarnations anyway, that would be like saying he should be called "Breathing Time and Space Cop that is also capable of eating, digestion, thinking, moving his arms.."..
Well, you get the idea. You can't include -everything- in the title or definition, you just include the more interesting/astonishing bits - besides, he was someone who was POLICING_TIME_TRAVEL, which makes him effectively a TIMEcop, instead of TIME and SPACE cop. He wasn't policing SPACE TRAVEL, you see.
(Instead of 'space', perhaps some other word could be used, like 'location', but "Time and location cop" would sound even stupider)
Furthermore, "SPACE" also means that slightly huge area around Earth, so it could be a bit misleading to call him 'Time and Space Cop'. He wasn't moving so much in 'space' as just 'changing his geoposition' or 'Earth coordinates', 'location on the planet', or something along those lines.
"Earth coordinates and Time Cop" would definitely sound like a movie I'd like to see just out of curiosity, though.
So, in conclusion, I'd say that "Time Cop" is still the more descriptive and accurate rendition of the name, especially considering WHAT he is policing. He is not a peace officer, he is a policy enforcer, and those policies have to do with TIME travel only, not geopositioning or space travel, even if such traveling might be necessitated by certain missions.
A traffic cop doesn't have to worry about telecommunications policies, even if someone is using a cell phone to call a taxi cab for himself. The same way, a time cop does not have to worry about space/location policies, even if someone is moving his location while time traveling.
Which makes Damme's character a Time Cop, not a "Time and Space Cop". -
smoko — 11 years ago(October 19, 2014 09:05 PM)
@mikey1969 Holy crap, you're right. If you went back, say, six months in time, the Earth would be on the opposite side of its orbit, and you'd materialize in outer space. Zero oxygen, motherfcker - have a nice day.
-
frankduxvandamme — 11 years ago(November 10, 2014 05:54 PM)
If you watch the movie The Time Machine, the time traveler sits in his vehicle and pushes the lever and time starts moving really fast around him. He sees the sun rising and setting really fast, and the landscape around him changes really fast. He is NOT instantaneously disappearing from one point in spacetime and reappearing in another. Instead, he is simply slowing down his rate of time within a bubble created by his time travel machine. The machine itself is still sitting in a particular spot on earth and obeys the normal laws of gravity so that it stays in that particular spot on the earth. The machine itself has simply created a bubble for which the rate of time within that bubble is slower than the rate of time outside of the bubble.
In reality, this is actually possible, thanks to relativity, but only in the direction of the future, not the past. If you had a fancy spaceship and flew around the earth really fast a bunch of times you could actually slow down your rate of time, and wind up seconds, minutes, days, or even years into the future. And if you did this in orbit about the earth, you would automatically follow the earth's trajectory through space, so that you wouldn't wind up in the middle of nowhere in outer space. In fact, this is a real phenomenon that has been observed, and it must be taken into account in our own GPS satellites in order to make accurate measurements.
Of course, this isn't actually how time travel is typically illustrated in movies like Timecop and Back to the Future. Somehow they travel instantaneously between two points in spacetime without ever acknowledging the space component, only the time component. -
nbreyfogle-1 — 11 years ago(November 14, 2014 06:00 PM)
"The most ridiculous thing about that version of time travel is how nobody seemed to notice a seemingly frozen man sitting in a weird contraption stuck in place for several decades."
No. Since all physical processes change when time traveling, this means that all energy outputs are also changed, thus changing light at the quantum level to invisibility for the human eye. H.G. Wells actually addressed this in his novel, though he did so in a way that's not up-to-date, of course, since he wrote the novel in 1895. -
nbreyfogle-1 — 11 years ago(November 14, 2014 05:50 PM)
"Sure, you stay in the same place. Unfortunately, the earth isn't occupying that space. Even if you were to go back a few seconds, the Earth would rotate underneath you and you'd be a few feet from where you started, but travelling back years? Not only would the planet be in a different spot around the sun, but the solar system would be occupying a different place in the galaxy, which would be in a different spot in the universe.
"You can't be a time traveller without also travelling in space. Might as well add in the ability to drop you anywhere on the planet you want, since you've gone 99.99% of the way there already by plotting where in space everything was at the time yo need to go to."
At the equator, the Earth rotates on its axis at about 1000 miles per hour. In just one second, the rotation would cause almost 1/3rd of a mile displacement for a time traveler. In three seconds, the displacement would be about 3 miles not just a few feet as you'd guessed!
Also, the Earth travels in its orbit around the sun at even greater speed: about 18.5 miles per second (66,600 miles per hour), so that spatial displacement would be even greater for a time traveler. Much, much greater. -
nbreyfogle-1 — 11 years ago(November 14, 2014 06:01 PM)
"Sure, you stay in the same place. Unfortunately, the earth isn't occupying that space. Even if you were to go back a few seconds, the Earth would rotate underneath you and you'd be a few feet from where you started, but travelling back years? Not only would the planet be in a different spot around the sun, but the solar system would be occupying a different place in the galaxy, which would be in a different spot in the universe.
"You can't be a time traveller without also travelling in space. Might as well add in the ability to drop you anywhere on the planet you want, since you've gone 99.99% of the way there already by plotting where in space everything was at the time yo need to go to."
At the equator, the Earth rotates on its axis at about 1000 miles per hour. In just one second, the rotation would cause almost 1/3rd of a mile displacement for a time traveler. In three seconds, the displacement would be about 3 miles not just a few feet as you'd guessed!
Also, the Earth travels in its orbit around the sun at even greater speed: about 18.5 miles per second (66,600 miles per hour), so that spatial displacement would be even greater for a time traveler. Much, much greater. -
xstrym — 11 years ago(July 23, 2014 12:21 PM)
Let's just call him
Time Clock Cop
he sits there, watching people punch in and out all day, but the fun really starts up during shift changes! Eatin' donuts all day and then the fat JCVD fight scenes would really be the icing on the cake. "MMMM cake!", JCVD mumbles. "Stay inside the lines with yer punches!" he mushmouthes with powdery goodness shooting from his lips.
Time Clock Cop: People punch in, but fat JCVD punches them out! Coming soon to a break room near you!
just a thought
"Where's yo missin' arm, mutha fkka?!?"
-
PentrilCausrel — 11 years ago(March 25, 2015 01:22 PM)
What if in your particalization you are transferred by registering receptor properties of molecules on a basis of time and alteration of those particles Thus being swept through the existence of the material as it had previously existed Being present at target loc from where you had previously
Y resided.
you beep elitist