You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > T1-The Kyle sent back by his son to father himself
April 25 2024 7.56am

T1-The Kyle sent back by his son to father himself

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

 

jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 27 Feb 17 4.19pm

Originally posted by Pikester

Jamie,

Sometimes when you're standing in a pub, resplendent in your Husker Du T-shirt, explaining time travel to a new drinking buddy..... do you ever notice their eyes glaze over and they seem to be just nodding rather than really listening?

Just wondering like....

Often, and its cheaper than rhoypnl.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 27 Feb 17 4.28pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Ha ha. Good one.

There is no doubt that the original movie is a wonderful piece of self contained science fiction but the wider issue of paradox does not stand up to scrutiny. If the machines could travel back in time they could have gone back and killed Sarah Conner's mother for example or the human race from day one. It is only conceivable that new parallel timelines can be created by changing past events or you could effectively kill your own parents and then cease to exist thus making your original action impossible. For that reason a paradox just can't happen as imagined in Terminator or a host of other films.

Skynet isn't omniscient, it only know's where Sarah Conner is at a specific time period, presumably the amount of information available in the future is limited (destroyed, ironically in the war).

It doesn't even know what she looks like, where she is. Only that she's called Sarah Conner and was in a specific area of LA during that time period.

Of course, if it succeeds, it becomes a paradox, but for Skynet, which has effectively lost the war, so that doesn't matter, its a 'hail mary' pass - Whatever the outcome, its better than being destroyed.

John Conner, has no choice, but to effectively stop that happening, and in doing so probably changes his own fate somewhat but not extensively (in fact arguably it probably results in a better equipped John Conner in the future).

It doesn't even ensure that humanity will lose the war either, only that it will change it, by changing the leader.

Skynet also, can't go too far back. It can't wipe out the human race, before it exists. Nor can it risk its own existence by changing the past either.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 27 Feb 17 4.44pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I thought it was fairly decent. Good cast and well written. A lot of quite good sci fi gets canned. The ratings war is ruthless in the US.
I was even sad to see the new 'V' cancelled.

I certainly wouldn't be shy about sending 'Cameron' back in time for me....

I thought Summer Glau really excelled as a 'friendly terminator'.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 27 Feb 17 4.50pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Skynet isn't omniscient, it only know's where Sarah Conner is at a specific time period, presumably the amount of information available in the future is limited (destroyed, ironically in the war).

It doesn't even know what she looks like, where she is. Only that she's called Sarah Conner and was in a specific area of LA during that time period.

Of course, if it succeeds, it becomes a paradox, but for Skynet, which has effectively lost the war, so that doesn't matter, its a 'hail mary' pass - Whatever the outcome, its better than being destroyed.

John Conner, has no choice, but to effectively stop that happening, and in doing so probably changes his own fate somewhat but not extensively (in fact arguably it probably results in a better equipped John Conner in the future).

It doesn't even ensure that humanity will lose the war either, only that it will change it, by changing the leader.

Skynet also, can't go too far back. It can't wipe out the human race, before it exists. Nor can it risk its own existence by changing the past either.

So what you are saying is that because no destructive paradox occurred then it's OK.
The problem is that by sending a time traveler back, you would take an unacceptable risk of a butterfly effect that could change the entire future and erase your own existence.
Equally, anything that you alter in the past has effectively already happened from you point of view so is therefore a matter of record. That means you could check to see if something had changed. That would render it useless as a tactic. John Connor sending his own father back is also a causal loop which would mean that in theory, he had no free will in making that decision and that he came into existence from nowhere.
I have a big problem with that.


Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (27 Feb 2017 4.52pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 27 Feb 17 4.57pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I certainly wouldn't be shy about sending 'Cameron' back in time for me....

I thought Summer Glau really excelled as a 'friendly terminator'.

I'd let her play with my phased plasma rifle.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View eagleman13's Profile eagleman13 Flag On The Road To Hell & Alicante 27 Feb 17 5.57pm Send a Private Message to eagleman13 Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add eagleman13 as a friend

Originally posted by Pikester

Jamie,

Sometimes when you're standing in a pub, resplendent in your Husker Du T-shirt, explaining time travel to a new drinking buddy..... do you ever notice their eyes glaze over and they seem to be just nodding rather than really listening?

Just wondering like....

This almost made me spit my beer out

 


I'm a blind man, i'm a blind man, now my room is cold,
When a blind man cries, Lord, he feels it from his soul.
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 28 Feb 17 10.43am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

So what you are saying is that because no destructive paradox occurred then it's OK.
The problem is that by sending a time traveler back, you would take an unacceptable risk of a butterfly effect that could change the entire future and erase your own existence.
Equally, anything that you alter in the past has effectively already happened from you point of view so is therefore a matter of record. That means you could check to see if something had changed. That would render it useless as a tactic. John Connor sending his own father back is also a causal loop which would mean that in theory, he had no free will in making that decision and that he came into existence from nowhere.
I have a big problem with that.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (27 Feb 2017 4.52pm)

We can't tell if he has free will, but realistically, even if he does, sending Kyle Reese back would be the right choice - even before Kyle Reese is his father. Other than himself, Reese is the person most familiar with Sarah Conner, and the most likely to give 'everything' to save her. We know he's also an experienced and resourceful solider - The ideal choice.

John Conner always existed, and was always Sarah Conner's son. What we don't know is who was his father before Reese is sent back. Remember that the terminator is not successful, and all that happens is that the time line of John Conner is altered.

In fact, the actions of Skynet, actually improve the situation for the future John Conner, because now his whole life is spent in preparation for the future.

Of course its entirely possible people do not have free will, but it likely doesn't matter who JC sends back to save his mother, as long as they are successful, he will be born at some point - Its irrelevant that Reese is his father (because we know a john conner must exist to send him back).

JC could choose not to send anyone back, or someone else, but why would he, even if he knows Reese is his father, they've just won the war, any sacrifice is acceptable. So he sends the best option he has. It would be insane to make any other decision (even from a point where he doesn't know Reese is his father). He knows Reese is incredibly loyal to him, and possibly in love with his mother.

So all that Conners time change involves is minor shifts in his existence, it doesn't involved a contradictory paradox (which him not existing would).

Of course killing Sarah probably just means a different person would lead the surviving humans. It would be erroneous to assume that only John Conner can do it. We believe that, because of the stories told about the great leader. But say if Churchill died in 1938, do you really think the UK wouldn't have fought or that no one would have led the UK.

The war with the machines is inevitable, and the resistance from humans is inevitable. All that changes are small aspects.

So maybe John Conner is born a few years earlier, and has different genetic make up.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 28 Feb 17 10.44am

Originally posted by Pikester

Jamie,

Sometimes when you're standing in a pub, resplendent in your Husker Du T-shirt, explaining time travel to a new drinking buddy..... do you ever notice their eyes glaze over and they seem to be just nodding rather than really listening?

Just wondering like....

Also, technically, its a Husker Du sweatshirt... but...

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 28 Feb 17 12.58pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

We can't tell if he has free will, but realistically, even if he does, sending Kyle Reese back would be the right choice - even before Kyle Reese is his father. Other than himself, Reese is the person most familiar with Sarah Conner, and the most likely to give 'everything' to save her. We know he's also an experienced and resourceful solider - The ideal choice.

John Conner always existed, and was always Sarah Conner's son. What we don't know is who was his father before Reese is sent back. Remember that the terminator is not successful, and all that happens is that the time line of John Conner is altered.

In fact, the actions of Skynet, actually improve the situation for the future John Conner, because now his whole life is spent in preparation for the future.

Of course its entirely possible people do not have free will, but it likely doesn't matter who JC sends back to save his mother, as long as they are successful, he will be born at some point - Its irrelevant that Reese is his father (because we know a john conner must exist to send him back).

JC could choose not to send anyone back, or someone else, but why would he, even if he knows Reese is his father, they've just won the war, any sacrifice is acceptable. So he sends the best option he has. It would be insane to make any other decision (even from a point where he doesn't know Reese is his father). He knows Reese is incredibly loyal to him, and possibly in love with his mother.

So all that Conners time change involves is minor shifts in his existence, it doesn't involved a contradictory paradox (which him not existing would).

Of course killing Sarah probably just means a different person would lead the surviving humans. It would be erroneous to assume that only John Conner can do it. We believe that, because of the stories told about the great leader. But say if Churchill died in 1938, do you really think the UK wouldn't have fought or that no one would have led the UK.

The war with the machines is inevitable, and the resistance from humans is inevitable. All that changes are small aspects.

So maybe John Conner is born a few years earlier, and has different genetic make up.

Reece was always John Connors father because they are in a causal loop. There was never an alternative father. It is a paradox that could only exist using the rules of time travel as portrayed.

There are more fundamental issues with the whole idea.

The past, from the observers perspective is the past, even if you could change it. Therefore anything a time traveler did in the past would have already happened. As a consequence, the observers present would always be a result of past events and therefore he would be unaware of any change that had happened.
In effect, that means changing the past is impossible because it is always the existing past to the observer. If you erased your own existence by accident in the past you could not have done it in the first place as you never existed.
This renders the whole idea of altering time irrelevant and harmless as the observer only is aware of one time line. Films never get it right because it would be no fun.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 28 Feb 17 4.32pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Reece was always John Connors father because they are in a causal loop. There was never an alternative father. It is a paradox that could only exist using the rules of time travel as portrayed.


There are more fundamental issues with the whole idea.

The past, from the observers perspective is the past, even if you could change it. Therefore anything a time traveler did in the past would have already happened.

Yes, but that's from a perspective within time and space. The ability to travel into the past, and allowing for a non-deterministic universe, means that any change would be the 'already happened' and that must then re-inform the future, implementing a butterfly effect.

I think the idea of the 'creates an alternative universe' provides a decent explaination. For me, I see it that there is universe 1 in which John Conner isn't Reese's son, where he discovers that the terminator has been sent back in time to kill Sarah Conner - and universe 2 in which Reese becomes JC's father.

We follow the events only in Reese's memories of Universe 1 and in the action that occurs once the T-800 and Reese have come back in time (and thus created Universe 2).

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

As a consequence, the observers present would always be a result of past events and therefore he would be unaware of any change that had happened.
In effect, that means changing the past is impossible because it is always the existing past to the observer. If you erased your own existence by accident in the past you could not have done it in the first place as you never existed.
This renders the whole idea of altering time irrelevant and harmless as the observer only is aware of one time line. Films never get it right because it would be no fun.

But here we see the break down of the reliance of an point of observation, a singularity point in essence, where the observer is only capable of seeing actions within our perspective. Its also not necessarily true of all observers either, as the time traveller(s) will have memories of a future that 'no longer exists' - or possibly have constantly shifting memories as the events they change in their now present, potentially change their future.

As Reese existence is not long enough to establish what happens once you change time significantly to affect your own past.

I think the alternative universe theory of time travel makes sense, at least in terms of a thought experiment to get your head around the fact that both universe 1 and 2 can exist in a kind of f**ked up cat in a box kind of way.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View L.E.Eagle's Profile L.E.Eagle Flag 28 Feb 17 5.05pm Send a Private Message to L.E.Eagle Add L.E.Eagle as a friend

I think many of these time travel questions were answered head on by the excellent BBC sitcom Goodbye Sweetheart.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 28 Feb 17 5.07pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

But here we see the break down of the reliance of an point of observation, a singularity point in essence, where the observer is only capable of seeing actions within our perspective. Its also not necessarily true of all observers either, as the time traveller(s) will have memories of a future that 'no longer exists' - or possibly have constantly shifting memories as the events they change in their now present, potentially change their future.

As Reese existence is not long enough to establish what happens once you change time significantly to affect your own past.

I think the alternative universe theory of time travel makes sense, at least in terms of a thought experiment to get your head around the fact that both universe 1 and 2 can exist in a kind of f**ked up cat in a box kind of way.


I think the multi timeline version is the only one that can exist in reality.
In the single time line theory any journey into the past would erase the version of that person in his own time. He would therefor no longer exist as his original self and only as himself in the past. Potentially he could therefore have done none of the things that he had done as his original self if he ever existed at all. He would therefore have no memory of any future since it never happened in the first place. More importantly he might not have traveled back in time in the first place rendering the whole loop a non starter.
The past is always the past no matter who you are or where you observe it from. The future is always the future.
What that means is that if you could see the future it would also be of no use at all because the future is a direct result of the past and therefore unchangeable.


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > T1-The Kyle sent back by his son to father himself