Time Travel discussion
General Time Travel Discussion
>
Time Travel categories, the way I see it. (sorry so long)
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
I have to agree with you I think its a great twist to find the protagonist the cause of the very thing he/she is trying to avoid and also to think of time as some entity beyond our mortal attempts to try and change.
Would you put Groundhog Day into 1.1?I don't think 2.2 is a possible scenario. The very fact that you are trying to change things means things *are* different, because you exist within the time window and are doing things differently.
Matt loves 'thinking these theories out and making sure everything connects'I agree, as my books demonstrate.
Randy wrote: "Would you put Groundhog Day into 1.1?I don't think 2.2 is a possible scenario. The very fact that you are trying to change things means things *are* different, because you exist within the time w..."
Yes. Groundhog Day 1.1.
Good point maybe there is no 2.2 only 2.3, but I recall watching a movie where the many character kept trying to change things, but the outcome was always the same. Though maybe through different means.
I need to think on that one. Thanks!
I don't think you're a nerd - I think one of the enjoyable things for most avid readers of TT is looking at the rules/ continuity/ consistency. Unfortunately I've found some stories lately that claim to have TT, but are so vague on the rules that I couldn't even guess where they'd fit into your scheme. That's a bad thing.
I agree with Matt (excellent taxonomy) and John, especially about 2.3: there's something exquisite about being the author of the very fate you're seeking to change.
Mod
There is also one more sub partition I'd like to add to your 2.3. make it 2.3.1. One in which there is an endless loop but the object that goes through the loop is actually aging...creating a further paradox.
An example is the John Lock's compass in Lost. Let me see if I can remember this right. So in 1950s, Time traveller John Locke of the future gives Richard a compass. Richard keeps the compass until in 1978, he gives it to young John Locke. Some time later, John Lock travels back in time to the 1950s and gives Richard the Compass...and so the loop goes on. But the compass is ageing. Everything else is looping but not the compass. With every loop the compass is getting older and at some point would become brittle. Whats more, the compass had no blasted origin.
Its nonsense, a paradox. Yet fascinating.
We did have a thread started by Brenda called Taxonomy of Time travel which covered same ground and Brenda was building on it as we came up with more ideas. Unfortunately these sort of discussions get buried and this was in the Just for Fun section...(Amy, I'm tempted to amalgamate the two?)
Anyway have a look at Brenda's structure here which we all participated in:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Right. The John Locke compass in Lost is an example of the where-did-it-begin paradox, the more general form of which is: someone knocks on my door, says he's me, from the future, an older self, and has travelled back in time to tell me how to build a time-travel device. Sometime after he leaves, I do just that, and I eventually use it to go back in time to tell my younger self how to build a time-travel device. So, where in this loop did the time-travel device originate?It's paradoxes like that, by the way, which make think that, as a matter of reality, we'll never time travel. Indeed, the "travel" is a characteristic of of space, which we easily travel through, and its use in connection with time is to some extent a misapplied metaphor.
"One's reach must exceed one's grasp, or what's a meta for?"
The big appeal to me is not the how (though I do often find this fascinating). I always find myself trying to understand the author’s theory on time travel itself, the rules so to speak and how these effect or define the story. Continuity is important to me and I find myself frustrated when theories don’t always line up. I often find myself thinking for hours after I have read or watched something, connecting all the dots and trying to answer all the events and effects based on the knowledge given by the author. I think this is why I enjoy TT so much.
Ok enough blah, blah, blah. This is how I usually classify / identify / interpret TT. Bear with me this may be hard to communicate (and still a work in progress).
First I break it down into 2 categories:
1. Events can be changed.
2. Events cannot be changed.
Then “Event that can be changed” breaks down to:
1. Creates alternate reality (for you) in which the present you is in no danger but continues on your own path. You could return to the time you came and things maybe dramatically different (even if you never were born). I think a good portion of TT falls in this category. Though if you keep reading it may be more complicated than all that.
2. Creates new reality in which you or others may cease to exist. Of course if you don’t travel back in time past your birth, this may be hard to determine.
From there these can split into multiple directions. Do you retain memories, or can you change all or some events, on and on… But I think most can be classified in these two categories.
On the other side “Events that cannot be changed” breaks down to:
1. Observer (In which obviously you can only observe).
2. No matter how hard you try the same thing happens.
3. Because you attempt to change something is in fact the very reason the outcome occurs. In other words, you are the author of your own fate. In a sense and endless loop. (Not to be confused with finding yourself in a loop and then being able to effect change (Which may be one of my favorites, because of its depth)).
And of course these could be broken down as well, but this is always the starting point for me and I feel most TT can fall into these categories.
So if you endured all that and are still reading, I’m curious on your thoughts or something I might not be seeing or maybe I’m just a big nerd. I love thinking these theories out and making sure everything connects. But sometimes you’re just not given enough info and that can be frustrating (more thought on that later).