bigass time plothole
-
k-mann — 16 years ago(November 15, 2009 02:34 PM)
You cannot solve a reverse time travel paradoxit's not the writer's faultit simply can't be done because as far as our science can explain reverse time travel is impossible.
If it were possible, I expect all sorts of odd things would be happening like your best friend suddenly vanishing along with all your memories of him or her. The fact that these things don't happen al the time is further evidence that reverse time travel is impossible.
How can you know that this doesn't happen all the time? If your best friend suddenly vanished along with all your memories of him or her, you wouldn't know that he or she had vansihed, or even existed
-
bonjovirocker — 16 years ago(February 25, 2010 06:54 PM)
this idea was the whole basis of the pilot episode of the remake of the 60s tv show The Time Tunnel (2002), where people, places, events just disappear from existence but sometimes there are vague recollections/memories of these things in the backs of peoples minds, similar to a feeling of Deja Vu.
The pilot episode wasn't too bad for a remake, but sadly the ratings at the time disagreed and it never got past the pilot -
dolores_medina — 14 years ago(July 05, 2011 10:08 PM)
"The fact that these things don't happen al the time is further evidence that reverse time travel is impossible. "
Or we are very careful to make sure we clean up our messes. Van Damme and this movie, do not In any way, shape or form, describe how reverse time travel would really work. There are two types of time change.
One where there is ONLY one Universe and any change that you could potentially make, has already been made, or is impossible to make. This movie does Not describe that one.
There is also the type where any place you could conceivably change the past branches of an alternate universe. The problem with THIS is, as has been stated by the OP, when Van Damme reaches the "present" he reaches a present which is a future to his past self where History has been changed. a History where he may not have gone back in time, or may have gone back to a different time. So there will more than likely be a doubling. The ONLY way a doubling is avoided is if the future self of the new past Van damme, becomes a time cop, and goes back to the past to the exact moment he left for the exact same reason, and that vam damme is the exact same person as " our Van damme. And that is impossible
So this time travel needs to be seen exactly like "Back to the Future" good enough to fool those that do not think about Time travel regularly.
I have to stop and recommend an awesome Book" The man who folded himself" by David Gerrold. I think he already wrote it, wait is it 2011.. or 1911? ahh Internet was never mind. Ya he wrote it.
There are also two short stories by Robert heinlein "All you zombies" and " By His Bootstraps". Both dealing with Time Travel but with different themes. One deals with a strange version of the Grandfather paradox. And the other with well, I leave you to that one for you to figure out on your own it's less of a " who done it" and More of a " when was it done?" -
corneileous — 18 years ago(February 14, 2008 06:42 PM)
Well, look at it this way:
1.) Untill someone figures out if time travel is possible.
2.) What you can and cant do when you travel through time.
3.) What kind of chain reactions occur when you change something in the past.
Untill we can answer all those questions, just let the f u c kin' movie makers do what they want with their own interpretation of time travel, please?
I love it when some people act like they know something about something that no one in the world knows a thing about. -
marcusd25 — 18 years ago(March 12, 2008 11:04 AM)
A very intelligent response. Kudos.
You are absolutely right. Until the technology is there, no one can predict what will happen. It's no different than someone in the 1500's hearing that one day people wouldn't need horses or other animals because everyone would be getting from place to place on a "cart mounted on four circular things that is also capable of propelling itself forward and backwards at a high rate of speed for miles on end, without resting, simply be replenishing the readliy available liquid that makes it capable of the propulsion"
Nobody questions cars now. No one will question time travel, once it is actually possible. -
corneileous — 18 years ago(March 12, 2008 02:08 PM)
I agree. Alot of what is interpreted is pretty intellegent, but if youve ever seen any of the Terminater movies or the Back to the Future movies, alot os similar but each movie has its own interpretations of what you can and cant do when it somes to time travel.
"I come her to chew bubble gum and kick ass.and Im all out of bubble gum.
"They Live" -
jbunt16 — 17 years ago(November 07, 2008 03:16 PM)
You guys need to get caught up on your time travel theories. You can make small changes to the past without problems but if you make a major change it splits the timeline. Walker returned to his timeline but with the knowledge that there was now a new timeline where his wife was alive.
Of course the idiot screenwriters didn't actually think that and it's just a plothole but that's what guys like us are for, to explain plotholes in movies. -
Jiels_liken — 17 years ago(November 07, 2008 05:59 PM)
Its not a plot hole, let me see if I can explain this, he goes back to his past self to save his wife but at that point its the same person because he hadn't been affected by traveling through time yet. If your going to truly think about time travel, you have to think of time as an intellegent force you notice no matter what changed, in the "present" the time police unit was still around? thats "Time" protecting itself. The walker that had his wife saved and knew his son also went back in time, for what ever reason, the same time walker came back from saving his wife. The walker that left that timeline to change something went back to a timeline that had the change done that he did.
with me so far?
that's why you can't go into the future when you "return" you return to another universe where what ever you change was changed that keeps the universe from imploding and why we see the whole movie through one persons eyes everyone else is a totally different person from the beginning of the movie
BTW you can't use one time movie to prove or disprove another movies temporal laws. It depends on the theory behind the movie.
There are 3 main time traveling theories, I'm not going to list them here, use Google if you care but, if you don't care I doubt you've read this far. This movie goes with the multi-verse theory..
WOW I hate temporal mechanics
people are stupid -
Herreken — 16 years ago(August 20, 2009 12:25 AM)
I'm thinking that the death of the 1994 version of the senator pretty much elminates everything from happening. His 2004 version never sends those men back in time to kill the wife, the 2004 version of Van Damme never goes back to 1929 to stop his partner etc etc. But does that mean he never goes back to 1994 to stop the senator in the first place? Is this like the Grandfather paradox?
Murphtones, "Marty McFly knew about his travels through time, but his parents don't remember meeting him back in 1955 because they never time-traveled."
They don't remember meeting him because they didn't know it was him. Plus they only knew him for a week. They probably forgot what he looked like after all those years, even though he played such an important role in their lives.
DISPLAY thy breasts, my Julia! -
dolores_medina — 14 years ago(July 05, 2011 10:20 PM)
"You can make small changes to the past without problems but if you make a major change it splits the timeline."
You are SO wrong Obviously you have not considered the " Butterfly effect" and No i am not referring to the Movie, I am referring to the Chaos Theory a very small change in time , can lead to humungous results perfect example..open a bank account in 1880, with 10 dollars, and let the Interest accrue. then go to the bank, and withdraw your savings now tell me " you can make a small change without problems"
Another example was envisioned by the author of " Bring on the Jubilee" By ward Moore.
One of the best alternate History stories ever written. The South wins the civil war, and we see Life in the continental US in the 1950's. And before you say " But the south winning the civil war is a huge thing. READ the story. Because sometimes. a teeny weeeny change, can breed HUGE results. -
k-mann — 16 years ago(November 15, 2009 02:42 PM)
You are absolutely right. Until the technology is there, no one can predict what will happen. It's no different than someone in the 1500's hearing that one day people wouldn't need horses or other animals because everyone would be getting from place to place on a "cart mounted on four circular things that is also capable of propelling itself forward and backwards at a high rate of speed for miles on end, without resting, simply be replenishing the readliy available liquid that makes it capable of the propulsion"
Cars aren't logically impossible. The problem mentioned in the OP is. The Law of Non-Contradiction, the Law of Identity and the Law of Excluded Middle are just as true now as they were before. And they will be just as true in the future -
dolores_medina — 14 years ago(July 05, 2011 10:43 PM)
"Cars aren't logically impossible. The problem mentioned in the OP is. The Law of Non-Contradiction, the Law of Identity and the Law of Excluded Middle are just as true now as they were before. And they will be just as true in the future"
I sort of remember scientists saying that heavier-than-air travel was scientifically impossible. And yes, i realise that as technology advances, yesterday's impossibility's become today's probabilities, and tomorrow's defenites
What everyone seems to ignore is, that there are plenty of examples of reverse time travel all around us. I think someone left an old watch in an egyption tomb, but " that thing on that corpses wrist with gears and hands could Not POSSIBLY be a Swiss watch right? Which is why I keep telling people Upline.." stop worrying, No one will ever figure out we're here No one will ever believe it because their science says " it's impossible." and Anyone that tells them otherwise is either crazy.. or joking" right? -
dolores_medina — 14 years ago(July 26, 2011 09:45 PM)
"I love it when some people act like they know something about something that no one in the world knows a thing about."
you forgot a phrase that turns this into a proper response
" . that no one in the world knows a thing about yetthat we know of."
Here's an interesting question. If someone say in the year 2574 As you reckon with your calendar were to make time travel practical, even if costly then from the point of view of those in this era No one knows yet butif viewed by someone that knows that futureit is known now. by that person then. and if that person came back in time, to before todaysay.. 100 years ago then your statement is totally false since..
" someone knows" The existence of time travel, makes use of the verb tenses problematic. So when the technology arrives, grammar will change ( has changed? Will have been changed??.. see what i mean? " To will have been or not to will have been, that has will have been the question") as well. -
FlyingPie — 16 years ago(June 18, 2009 06:28 PM)
I know I'm 2 years late in my reply, but that's not the movie's only big problem. For instance, the time travel cart (which the police officers sit in when they travel back in time) disappears when they go back in time and then re-appears when they come back to their own time. Secondly, the whole theory of "the same matter can't occupy the same space at the same time" and how that affected the movie doesn't make sense at all. For one, your body won't have the same matter 10 years from now because the body's cells are continually replaced as they die. Second, if you touch your younger self, the matter isn't really in the same space; you're simply placing part of your body right up next to your younger self, which is different from actually occupying the same space.
-
McFly_2015 — 16 years ago(October 15, 2009 11:41 PM)
I use the Y theory and I'll go by back to the future to explain it:
Up until 1985 there had been no time travel and thus the timeline is a straight line. Marty travels back in part 1 to 1955 and changes the timeline. So we now have the new timeline and the original timeline so the timeline should look like the letter Y turned 90 degrees to the right with 1955 being the point it splits.
Then in part 2 they travel to 2015, Biff steals the time machine, goes back to 1955 and changes the timeline. At this time, now there are 3 timelines; the original one without time travel, the second timeline where Marty changed 1955 and a third one where Biff travels to 1955. So now the timeline looks like a pitchfork angled 90 degrees to the right.
Doc and Marty travel back to 1955 and stop Biff from changing the timeline in 1955 destroying the third timeline and reverting back to the second timeline. So you could either say the timeline now looks like a rotated Y or consider this to be a fourth timeline (which is very similar to the second timeline except for some extra time travelling in 1955 which does not seem to change the future timeline drastically).
I wont factor in part 3 because it doesn't add to the discussion. But anyhow this is how people can change timelines. So at the end or part 1, Marty travels to the second timeline despite being from the first and being the only one with memory from the first timeline.
When Biff returns to 2015 in part 2, he goes to a continuation of the 3rd timeline (and a deleted scene indicates he does not live to 2015 in the new timeline so he promptly disappears).
The only way to return to a previous timeline is to restore it like Doc and Marty do in part 2. Example: Mr. Green goes back in time from 2009 and murders george bush Sr. as a child, presumably he returns to a different america in 2009 since 3 presidential reigns are wiped out but should be the only person who would know who George Bush Jr. was. But now Mr. blue goes back in time to 2008 and murders Mr. Green before he has the opportunity to travel back in time, now the original timeline is restored.
So in terms of timecop, no max should not return to his original timeline where his wife is dead because this event does not happen. Now whether or not he should remember the first 10 years of his childs life is up for debate. Back to the Future theory says no, but Frequency theory suggests he should remember both timelines.
check out my site:
http://www.kwrentagoalie.com/forums/index.php -
dolores_medina — 14 years ago(July 05, 2011 11:01 PM)
"The only way to return to a previous timeline is to restore it like Doc and Marty do in part 2."
There is a problem though. Restoring a timeline from within the timeline is simply changing the new timeline into another branch that will simply be similar to the Old branch but can never equal the old branch.
The ONLY way to totaslly eliminate an old branch is to travel to 2015, and stop old biff, from going back in time. Only by preventing old Biff from even setting foot in 1955, can you " revert" the time line.
perfect example. the Original timeline as it is in Part 2. does Not have Old biff in it. the new timelinedoes. Therefore the new timeline is version 4. not version 2.