Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Question about Terminator 3 Movie
- Thread starter carbonmotion
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Time is relative motion and is spherical rather than linear. There is no time "line" in any sense of the word, unless we're speaking of the chain of causality for any given singularity- but rather an expanding sphere relativity which encompasses everything. We have yet to learn to think spherically, but rather are caught up in the observation of linear causality. From the center of a sphere to any point there is, indeed, a line and the observation of such lines is core of the current temporal paradigm.
All points within the sphere, however, have their own linearity. In other words, there is no single chain of causality but near infinite such chains. When we can grasp this, we will have taken the next leap.
All points within the sphere, however, have their own linearity. In other words, there is no single chain of causality but near infinite such chains. When we can grasp this, we will have taken the next leap.
Oh man if anyone can logically answer that then you should be a writer. My guess is that FACT was only true the initial time the T1000 went through. Now the timeline changed & thus technology changes ... because they NOW have the chip board & the ARM of the original T-1000 that went back in time, so as Dyson said ... "it was lightyears beyond what we knew, and against what they were thinking at the time."
All I know is I cannot WAIT till tomorrows Chronicles 2hr episode.
WHere is THAT official thread.
the chicks in the s.c.c. are totally hot, the terminator reminds me of my h.s. girlfriend lol... except, of course, with much lower maintance and much higher ass kicking.
That's not what I'm referring to. I was saying that you and I might be in Timeline A, whereas in Timeline XAOSJOJASODA we might be dealing with floods of time tourists, even time refugees.
I disagree mildly -- I think the nature of cause and effect precludes time from existing in a spherical form. One problem with spheres is that if you draw a line from the center to the edge, and do that all the way around, you still have gaps at the end. Thus, you need infinite lines drawn infinitely densely (and overlapping) from the center in order to fill that sphere. The problem with overlapping is that things don't happen 53%, or 78%. They either occur a certain way or they occur another way. I suppose I can envision the sphere's timelines as "butterfly flaps wing once" -> Timeline A and "butterfly flaps wings twice" -> Timeline B, where Timelines A and B share significant features and only diverging in minutia that eventually result (or not) in a typhoon... with timelines having kind of a Venn diagram cross-section... but I believe that's a little anthropomorphic. What decides the point of departure for these overlapping timelines? The typhoon? The bird caught by a cat in one timeline and not the other? The butterfly's wing flap?
The timelines must diverge at the point of initial difference, otherwise it becomes a hopelessly subjective law (and the universe is not very subjective). If the timelines diverge, as they do, at a given point and not at another, the lines cannot be straight from the center to the edge, but rather must branch. If I am understanding you correctly, every possible point in time in each of an infinite number of universes (so every possible universe, since infinite means definite) must be connected to those adjacent, and the whole thing ends up looking like a Choose Your Own Adventure® book played out in real life by every single particle and aggregate of particles in existence.
How are the qualities of these timelines determined -- I mean, which ones are shared, and how are they shared between timelines that do not share adjacent space in this outer dimension? It would work unlike anything we can conceive of in the most abstract branches of mathematics or physics, I think (note: I barely passed Algebra II, so feel free to call my bluff with an interesting theory). The only concept I could imagine would be a hyperspheroid concept of time, but I think that's needlessly complicated.
I think that time exists like tree branches in a void. I could also see it as being roughly spherical in shape, but I believe that certain events (adjustment of the mass or energy in the universe, different physical laws, etc) would necessitate that this universe's time could not be a solid sphere. Rather, it'd be something like the surface of a planet in far greater contrast, with many branches ending near the infinite point at the center of time and others stretching out imaginably vast. Of course, I suppose that altitude contrast is itself a very subjective thing...
That's a good idea, and I hadn't considered that explanation. Write a book
I'm a writer, and I have to say that a plot hole like that is pretty irreconcilable. To solve the plot hole is to destroy the story. Sarah Connor's vulnerability and her decision to believe Reese's story (and to fall in love with him) would be a non-issue if he had a "Dear Mom" note from John Connor, a futuristic soldier suit, and a high-powered plasma cannon or wtfever. The hero has to appear insane to the damsel, at least initially. Also, the movie would probably end very quickly (or at least be boring) if Reese or the T-800 had a 2029 gun. It's far more entertaining (and horrifying) to see that no matter how many times he's shot, run over with a truck, smashed with a car, whatever -- Schwarzenegger cannot be stopped. He will pursue them to the ends of the Earth, without the need for sleep or money or food, without any conscience or battery recall issues or any other failing. He is effectively invulnerable, and it's a lot better to be shown that (for ninety minutes or so) than it is for Reese to say "fortunately, I have a BFG-9000. Otherwise, he'd be a real bitch to kill" and spend ninety minutes with the two of them missing shots at each other.
*shrugs* Sometimes plot holes are necessary to the story.
I see what you're saying, but if there are an infinite number of timelines (or even a finite number that's great enough) wouldn't the possibility that we're in Timeline A be extremely remote?
I leave it at this, its a pretty good series of movies...
and I live in the only state that has theme park rides where they governor is the star...
and I live in the only state that has theme park rides where they governor is the star...
Very good point.
But if time traveling is destructive, perhaps most of the timelines are destroyed. I dunno.
Another idea is that our current time might not actually be all that interesting to time travelers. It might be as uninteresting and as incomprehensible to future citizens as, say, 933CE in rural Italy is to most of us. I can't honestly say that, if I lived in 2934CE, that I'd be particularly interested in traveling back in time to study 21st century college students as they play Beer Pong and catch social diseases. Would people almost a thousand years from now really need time travel to study the effects of consumerism or jingoism?
Yup, it's going to be called "Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins" and finally focus on the post-machines-taking-over events and the war between humans and SkyNet.