lets take another look at the rabbits and talk paradox...

[bunnydixon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bTvAUVPyLI

so this pretty much shows that the same living thing can exist more than once at any one time. it would also show physical time shifting.

now is this a paradox - if so then the writers have entirely contradicted themselves.

HOWEVER - with regards to time travelling, I think the traditional use of the word paradox is akin to this:

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j303/bunnydixon/timet1.jpg
(for reference)

'The first thing we should note is that there is no paradox within the above understanding of time. If a traveler from point c returns to space-time point b where she did not exist before and causes a branching she then proceeds to travel down the new branch bef (unless another time travel event occurs). She is now free to bring about the non-existence of her analogous self on time line bef. If she does succeed in interrupting the causal chain that as analogous to the one that happened on line bcd that brought about her own existence and if this results in the non existence of her analogous self then of course her analogous self will not journey into the past causing another split in time. This in no way affects the existence of the traveler who left time point c, only the possible development of her analogous self.'

so science aside, perhaps we need to look at the interpretation of the word and the use of it related to lost. most of us will probably once again think of back to the future and the paradoxes created by marty mcfly as his meddling constantly changes the past - more specifically the issue with the almanac lol!

Now when the producers said there would not be a paradox (i'm not even convinced if that is true anymore anyways but if so...), perhaps they meant in this sense as opposed to any others.

[bunnydixon]

which means - as long as the losties do not alter any major events (including interacting with themsleves to do so) - no paradoxes. However, they can co-exist and it is not a paradox.

[krakup]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bTvAUVPyLI

so this pretty much shows that the same living thing can exist more than once at any one time. it would also show physical time shifting.

now is this a paradox - if so then the writers have entirely contradicted themselves.

HOWEVER - with regards to time travelling, I think the traditional use of the word paradox is akin to this:

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j303/bunnydixon/timet1.jpg
(for reference)

'The first thing we should note is that there is no paradox within the above understanding of time. If a traveler from point c returns to space-time point b where she did not exist before and causes a branching she then proceeds to travel down the new branch bef (unless another time travel event occurs). She is now free to bring about the non-existence of her analogous self on time line bef. If she does succeed in interrupting the causal chain that as analogous to the one that happened on line bcd that brought about her own existence and if this results in the non existence of her analogous self then of course her analogous self will not journey into the past causing another split in time. This in no way affects the existence of the traveler who left time point c, only the possible development of her analogous self.'

so science aside, perhaps we need to look at the interpretation of the word and the use of it related to lost. most of us will probably once again think of back to the future and the paradoxes created by marty mcfly as his meddling constantly changes the past - more specifically the issue with the almanac lol!

Now when the producers said there would not be a paradox (i'm not even convinced if that is true anymore anyways but if so...), perhaps they meant in this sense as opposed to any others.

i dont know what to say, *pats bunny on the shoulder* nice work, aristotle

[bunnydixon]

i dont know what to say, *pats bunny on the shoulder* nice work, aristotle

see - not just a pretty face....oh wait....i'm not even that anyways :p

[krakup]

see - not just a pretty face....oh wait....i'm not even that anyways :p

cute as a button, and smart:)

[bunnydixon]

cute as a button, and smart:)

as cute as this button?

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j303/bunnydixon/btn_catFace.jpg

:p

[krakup]

as cute as this button?

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j303/bunnydixon/btn_catFace.jpg

:p

well.... can u stick a bird on there or a rat

[krakup]

but back to serious bunny, i like your explanation. so possible future events can be influenced but not events prior to your time travelling. is that it?

[ortrules]

Speaking of Back to the Future, I think Doc Brown in that movie actually puts it into good perspective. In the 2nd movie he discussed to possibility of present Marty running into future Marty or his present girlfriend running into her future self. So he says there are two scenarios:

"One: coming face-to-face with herself 30 years older would put her into shock, and she'd simply pass out. Or, two: the encounter could create a time paradox, the result of which could cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space-time continuum and destroy the entire universe!"

When the bunny appeared, Chang freaks out. I am under the assumption that he believes something similar to the above quote. The bunny seeing itself could be nothing or it could destroy the universe - so he just doesn't want to take a chance with them seeing each other.

Now, I don't want to get into this again, but I've always made a point that I believe Lost is presenting time in a linear fashion. There are no parallel universes or alternate universes, it's just one single timeline. So if the past can't be changed and you can't start a new timeline, the bunny seeing itself would not cause any problems as theoretically, that event always happens and the bunny always appears - it just never happens to see its other self.

[krakup]

i've got it, time is linear and the island is skipping like a record in time. so is it "stuck" in a certain groove, the island? thats what is trying to be corrected?

on the future,i find it hard to grasp it is already fate acompli, there is still free will and at least i think we have seen small things do change

[ortrules]

on the future,i find it hard to grasp it is already fate acompli, there is still free will and at least i think we have seen small things do change

I think fate determines a lot on the show. Think back to how Charlie wrote "FATE" on his hands. Or how all the season 5 promos used the term "Destiny".

Or better yet, how Ben was fated to turn the wheel so that Locke could travel back in time to give Richard the compass - or even how the plane crashed on the island. In order for Locke to get to the island and become the leader, he has had to go through so many different motions to start this chain of events. I find it more difficult to believe that it was all coincidence rather than some pre-determined fate.

[krakup]

I think fate determines a lot on the show. Think back to how Charlie wrote "FATE" on his hands. Or how all the season 5 promos used the term "Destiny".

Or better yet, how Ben was fated to turn the wheel so that Locke could travel back in time to give Richard the compass - or even how the plane crashed on the island. In order for Locke to get to the island and become the leader, he has had to go through so many different motions to start this chain of events. I find it more difficult to believe that it was all coincidence rather than some pre-determined fate.

look i am torn because i agree with you but this whole plot seems to me about "setting something right". whether the incident is what is trying to be corrected or lockes destiny to be fulfilled, it seems like they are getting a second chance to fix something. i could be completely off

[islander]

Nice work Bunny. Even after three (ok six or seven) glasses of wine tonight I managed to follow that and I agree a paradox is something Halifax wanted to avoid. However the same person/rabbit coexisting at the same time is not in and of itself a paradox.

My problem is that per your diagram, I see line a,b,c,d as the "street" Dan described, and I see line a,b,c,e as a new street created by moving from point c to point b. ORT and his followers will say point d never existed, and point e was always the point to follow point c, but I think that ignores the unnatural situation on the island (time as it pertains to the island is now dysfunctional).

[bunnydixon]

Nice work Bunny. Even after three (ok six or seven) glasses of wine tonight I managed to follow that and I agree a paradox is something Halifax wanted to avoid. However the same person/rabbit coexisting at the same time is not in and of itself a paradox.

My problem is that per your diagram, I see line a,b,c,d as the "street" Dan described, and I see line a,b,c,e as a new street created by moving from point c to point b. ORT and his followers will say point d never existed, and point e was always the point to follow point c, but I think that ignores the unnatural situation on the island (time as it pertains to the island is now dysfunctional).

i only added the diagram as the quote refers to it and there is nothing worse than not being able to see what something is talking about lol!

but yes - quite simply, the whole point is that there being the 2 lockes at once, not interacting is NOT a paradox.

[Unbridled Pageantry]

This whole "there can't be a paradox" thing comes from the writers saying that, right?

What if they're just messing with us.
There are all types of paradox's, moral pardoxes, literature paradoxes, etc.
What if they meant something else because they knew that we would jump right to time parodoxes, and start huge debates like what has been going on here at this site since the first episode.

[loadclr]

This whole "there can't be a paradox" thing comes from the writers saying that, right?

I remember something along those lines, either a video or paper interview... Wish I could remember which it was but...

CC and DL said something (to the effect of) avoiding the typical paradox yet tryin' to create their own take on time travel...

[bunnydixon]

This whole "there can't be a paradox" thing comes from the writers saying that, right?

What if they're just messing with us.
There are all types of paradox's, moral pardoxes, literature paradoxes, etc.
What if they meant something else because they knew that we would jump right to time parodoxes, and start huge debates like what has been going on here at this site since the first episode.

exactly - i think we needed to look at what they meant by paradox.

its also means that time within lost is still linear as you cannot significantly change the past or future yet you can have events such as duplicate losties WITHOUT it being a paradox.

[ortrules]

When they discussed paradoxes they specifically referred to the show Heroes. In that show Hiro travels back in time to say everyone needs to save the cheerleader to save the world. Well, they made the point that if they save the world then future Hiro would never go back in time to give his message.

This is exactly what they want to avoid. We are so invested in the flashbacks and flash forwards that they do not want time travel to change all that - hence, you cannot change the past or future. I believe that working in a more linear sense helps them achieve the use of time travel without messing with the investment we've all made with the show and characters. In my opinion, Heroes was ruined because they just used time travel to manipulate the story anyway they wanted.

[bunnydixon]

When they discussed paradoxes they specifically referred to the show Heroes. In that show Hiro travels back in time to say everyone needs to save the cheerleader to save the world. Well, they made the point that if they save the world then future Hiro would never go back in time to give his message.

This is exactly what they want to avoid. We are so invested in the flashbacks and flash forwards that they do not want time travel to change all that - hence, you cannot change the past or future. I believe that working in a more linear sense helps them achieve the use of time travel without messing with the investment we've all made with the show and characters. In my opinion, Heroes was ruined because they just used time travel to manipulate the story anyway they wanted.


i agree with you there - it got ridiculous! and then they totally abused peters ability.

[islander]

When they discussed paradoxes they specifically referred to the show Heroes. In that show Hiro travels back in time to say everyone needs to save the cheerleader to save the world. Well, they made the point that if they save the world then future Hiro would never go back in time to give his message.

This is exactly what they want to avoid. We are so invested in the flashbacks and flash forwards that they do not want time travel to change all that - hence, you cannot change the past or future. I believe that working in a more linear sense helps them achieve the use of time travel without messing with the investment we've all made with the show and characters. In my opinion, Heroes was ruined because they just used time travel to manipulate the story anyway they wanted.

Ah - shows like Heros (which I've never seen), Back to the Future and Terminator had their characters go back in time with the intent to change the future. The purpose of the show is to change the future.

The only diffence with LOST is that we do not know what the future looked like, unlike those other shows, so we don't know if the future was changed. You always get to say "that's what happened" which is actually less creative and interesting as far as I'm concerned.

[ortrules]

Ah - shows like Heros (which I've never seen), Back to the Future and Terminator had their characters go back in time with the intent to change the future. The purpose of the show is to change the future.

The only diffence with LOST is that we do not know what the future looked like, unlike those other shows, so we don't know if the future was changed. You always get to say "that's what happened" which is actually less creative and interesting as far as I'm concerned.

Is it? Personally, I find the idea that Locke going back in time and being responsible for his own course in life much more entertaining that the notion that we can change whatever we want and do whatever we want.

If you watch Heroes, and maybe someone else who watches it can back me up, you will see exactly why I believe this. While the purpose of the show was to change the future, it was more complicated than that. They convoluted the story with too many potential outcomes and forced the story to change too many times as a result of time travel. It seemed like every episode, Hiro (the time traveler) would say, "I need to save the world" and then travel through time to fix things. That kind of story arc doesn't excite me.

[islander]

Is it? Personally, I find the idea that Locke going back in time and being responsible for his own course in life much more entertaining that the notion that we can change whatever we want and do whatever we want.

If you watch Heroes, and maybe someone else who watches it can back me up, you will see exactly why I believe this. While the purpose of the show was to change the future, it was more complicated than that. They convoluted the story with too many potential outcomes and forced the story to change too many times as a result of time travel.

I'm sure it's a personal preference thing, but in my opinion saying "that's just the way it happened" is too simplistic and not nearly as interesting or challenging for the writers as trying to change a negative outcome in the future without the unintended consequences of changing other positive outcomes.

It is what it is.

[StormyKnight]

exactly - i think we needed to look at what they meant by paradox.

its also means that time within lost is still linear as you cannot significantly change the past or future yet you can have events such as duplicate losties WITHOUT it being a paradox.

Well if there are two Jacks at the same time....I would call that a pair o' docs!

[bunnydixon]

Is it? Personally, I find the idea that Locke going back in time and being responsible for his own course in life much more entertaining that the notion that we can change whatever we want and do whatever we want.

If you watch Heroes, and maybe someone else who watches it can back me up, you will see exactly why I believe this. While the purpose of the show was to change the future, it was more complicated than that. They convoluted the story with too many potential outcomes and forced the story to change too many times as a result of time travel. It seemed like every episode, Hiro (the time traveler) would say, "I need to save the world" and then travel through time to fix things. That kind of story arc doesn't excite me.

i am with you on this one - it did become far too convoluted. i made it 3/4 eps into season 3 and gave up. then they had to redo their own rules constantly to cover all the boo boos they were making ;)

[notsolost42]

Great work done regarding paradoxes! I just have to disagree with your theory about the bunnies showing that the same living thing can exist in two different times simultaineously.

I strongly believe the reason behind the writers doing that was to point out to us that it is something that is not supposed to happen and is extremely dangerous. Let us not forget Candle's reaction when the bunny of the future/past returned in physical form to the bunny of the present. He completely freaked out. He made sure that they did not see each other and were not even in the same room together. To me, this shows just how dangerous it is and that it was not supposed to happen. I look at it more of a foreshadowing from the writers telling us what Candle thought. This is not supposed to happen.

By the way, last week there were postings about Locke and Sawyer in the present on the island when they were in the past, such as when the Swan hatch light came on and when Kate helped Claire deliver the baby. I rewatched the first season episodes to see exactly how TPTB placed our characters in question during those episodes. I think it was Brother Desmond that said to watch Deus Ex Machina and Do No Harm.
In the episode Deus Ex Machina, Locke has dropped off the ill fated Boone to the caves for Jack to take care of and disappeared. When Locke pounds on the Swan and the light goes on. He is completely alone at that point. He is actually not even seen again for the next episode. He does not return on camera until Boone's funeral. So, there is a chunk of time that TPTB have to play, a full episodes worth of day/days with where John Locke is and when he is.
The same with Sawyer. In the episode Do No Harm, when Claire gives birth, Sawyer is seen briefly in the early morning hours on the beach eating fish with Michael and Jin and not seen again on camera until the next morning. Time is very specifically shown with early morning hours, daylight, night and then repeated. Again, TPTB have written the script so that they can play with where and when Sawyer is.
This is why I am saying that these characters are not going to be in two places in time simultaineously. If you go back and watch you will see that the time they are traveling through (the past or that which already happened) is unaffected by them and therefore they can be placed anywhere when they are marching through that which already happened again. There are no paradoxes created this way. I know that Brother Desmond also posted that Locke did affect Desmond in the hatch that night. I would like to know which episode is it that Desmond tells Locke he was going to commit suicide but heard him pounding. I recall that Locke had an epiphany that when the light came on it was not a sign from the island but rather "just you (Des) going to the bathroom. I very much remember that line in particular.
As for the other characters it doesn't matter because they weren't on the island at that point in time anyway and their presence doesn't effect anything that already happened.
So, I am not buying that there are two of the same folks running around in time simultaineously. I need evidence to support that theory just as I have provided evidence to support the contrary.

[bunnydixon]

go back and listen to last episode - locke can hear himself pounding on the hatch door. its very apparent.

i agree with you on the bunnies in the sense that both of them being there at the same time can potentially be disasterous. HOWEVER - it DID happen. they never said it shouldnt or couldnt happen, they showed us that it is indeed possible and is bad!

i dont believe that the writers wrote the season 1 episode because they knew in the future they were going to place sawyer and locke in that time once again. I think the writers used that 'time' as it contained suitable moments for them to convey what they intended to in the little prince....that sawyer is missing kate (its also workd well in terms of the whole maternal issue) and that we the viewers would recognise the light.

i am not arguing that they dont set things up from the start, as there is no doubt of that at all. however, i dont believe EVERYTHING was written specifically from scratch with the entire show in mind. we already know for a fact that the writers have had to adapt and change things throughout the run of the show (walt and michael emerson being the best evidnce of that.)

[ortrules]

Notso, if you go back to that thread, you will see that I posted images that clearly shows there have to be two different Lockes and Sawyers on the island. When Desmond was consciously time traveling, he would jump directly in to his 1996 self - including the clothes each respective version was wearing. In that thread, I show that Locke is clearly wearing different clothes when looking at the hatch and when sitting by the hatch and could not be jumping into his past self.

As far as the bunny, I know you keep saying that the writers are foreshadowing to us that this kind of event can't happen - but the point we are all making is, it did happen! The same bunny jumped into the room and there were two of them. While I realize this isn't supposed to happen, the fact that it did means that it can happen. When the island is moving unpredictably through time, then there is the possibility of this event happening. Is it dangerous to happen? Yes. Is it supposed to happen? No. Did it happen? Yes. And I think that's the point. Why bother creating the video and showing it if it will never come into play?

[bunnydixon]

also you havent provided evidence - what you have said justifies your thoughts, but is pretty circumstantial. thought you would know that having worked in law enforcement :p ;)

[Brother Desmond]

In the episode Deus Ex Machina, Locke has dropped off the ill fated Boone to the caves for Jack to take care of and disappeared. When Locke pounds on the Swan and the light goes on. He is completely alone at that point. He is actually not even seen again for the next episode. He does not return on camera until Boone's funeral. So, there is a chunk of time that TPTB have to play, a full episodes worth of day/days with where John Locke is and when he is.

I would like to know which episode is it that Desmond tells Locke he was going to commit suicide but heard him pounding. I recall that Locke had an epiphany that when the light came on it was not a sign from the island but rather "just you (Des) going to the bathroom. I very much remember that line in particular.

Regarding Locke, the writers don't have a day/days to play with in between Locke dropping off Boone, and Boone's funeral.

Locke drops off Boone, and disappears.
We see Locke pounding on the hatch door at night. We know it is the same night in which he dropped off Boone because he is still wearing the clothes he was wearing when Boone was injured. His shirt has Boone's blood all over it. These are the same clothes he wears to Boone's funeral.
Jack works on Boone all night.
Kate delivers Claire's baby.


I know it seems like more time elapses, but all these events happen within the same time. These events take place over two episodes, but they happen within each other. Locke pounds on the hatch while Kate delivers Aaron, and while Jack is trying to save Boone.

As for Desmond and John, their encounter you are asking about takes place in the season 2 finale, "Live Together, Die Alone" We see a flashback where Desmond has a gun and is about to read his Charles Dickens book. The book earlier in the episode he said would be the last thing he would read before he dies. He opens the book and finds a note from Penny in it. He begins to tear the hatch apart when he hears banging and turns on the light.

After the flashback there is dialouge to further prove Desmond heard John banging on the hatch door. I posted the exact quote in another thread.

[notsolost42]

Regarding Locke, the writers don't have a day/days to play with in between Locke dropping off Boone, and Boone's funeral.

Locke drops off Boone, and disappears.
We see Locke pounding on the hatch door at night. We know it is the same night in which he dropped off Boone because he is still wearing the clothes he was wearing when Boone was injured. His shirt has Boone's blood all over it. These are the same clothes he wears to Boone's funeral.
Jack works on Boone all night.
Kate delivers Claire's baby.


I know it seems like more time elapses, but all these events happen within the same time. These events take place over two episodes, but they happen within each other. Locke pounds on the hatch while Kate delivers Aaron, and while Jack is trying to save Boone.

As for Desmond and John, their encounter you are asking about takes place in the season 2 finale, "Live Together, Die Alone" We see a flashback where Desmond has a gun and is about to read his Charles Dickens book. The book earlier in the episode he said would be the last thing he would read before he dies. He opens the book and finds a note from Penny in it. He begins to tear the hatch apart when he hears banging and turns on the light.

After the flashback there is dialouge to further prove Desmond heard John banging on the hatch door. I posted the exact quote in another thread.

Thanks Bro Des. I'll go back and watch the finale. But, I think you actually answered my question and contradicted yourself. You said in your post that it was John Locke's pounding on the hatch that kept Des from committing suicide when clearly it was finding the letter from Penny in his book. That kept him from killing himself. John was right, he probably just flipped on the light to go to the bathroom. I'll watch again though.
As for the timeline. I watched very carefully and it is over the course of two days. Locke drops off Boone, Locke disappears. That was during daylight hours. The next time we see Locke is at night at the hatch. It is not until Boone's funeral that Locke is seen again. Clearly, that is at least the next day. Shannon doesn't even find out Boone is dead until the next morning when she comes strolling back down the beach after spending the night with Sayid. The funeral would likely be later in that same day. So, I am talking about a period of two days here. It was very clearly shown. Perhaps we are saying the same thing?

[bunnydixon]

i dont think bro des contradicted himself, perhaps you have different interpretations of why he did not kill himself - bro des's based on the script telling him that desmond was disrupted from suicidal thoughts by lockes pounding - yours based on the thought that looking at penny must have given him the will to carry on?

[Brother Desmond]

Allow me to save you some time. The following is the flashback scene where Desmond contemplates suicide.

Desmond looks at his gun and takes a swig of booze. He pulls out his book and opens it. A letter falls out. It's from Penny.

Dearest Des,
I'm writing this letter to you as you leave for prison, and I've hidden it in the one place you would turn to in a moment of great desperation. I know you go away with the weight of what happened on your shoulders, and I know that the only person who can ever take it off is you.
Please don't give up, Des, because the only thing we really need to survive is one person who loves us and you have her. I will wait for you always.

I love you, Pen

Desmond holds the letter and cries. "It's gone," he says and throws the booze. "It's all gone!" He tears apart the book shelves and falls to the floor. Then he hears banging.

Outside the hatch, Locke is yelling. Desmond looks up and shines a light. Then he smiles.

The next quote is something Desmond says to John just before turning the fail-safe.

"Three days before you came down here, I heard a banging on the hatch door, shouting," Desmond says. "But it was you, John, wasn't it? You say there is no purpose, there's no such thing as fate. But you saved my life, brother, so that I could save yours."

[ortrules]

I pulled this from the original thread I created it in. It further provides proof that John and company are physically time traveling:

Here is definitive proof that they are physically time jumping and not consciously.

When Desmond's conscious was jumping through time, he jumped right into his past self. He jumped from the freighter right into his time in the army. That means he jumped right into whatever he was doing in the past and was wearing whatever clothes he was wearing at that time.

Such is not the case now. When they jumped to the time when we saw a hatch light, if they were consciously time jumping, Locke would have jumped into himself staring at the hatch. He also would have been wearing the same clothes.

Here is Locke at the hatch:
http://gallery.lost-media.com/albums/ep-caps/season1/1x19-deus/normal_deux635.jpg

And here is Locke seeing the light in the sky from the hatch:
http://gallery.lost-media.com/albums/ep-caps/season5/prince/normal_prince-208.jpg

If he is consciously traveling, how could he have been in two places at once. Additionally, look at the color of his shirt - different clothes. Plus, he doesn't have the blood on his shirt from Boone dying.
http://gallery.lost-media.com/albums/ep-caps/season5/prince/normal_prince-225.jpg

Clearly there are two different Locke's on the island at the same time. So clearly they are not consciously time traveling, but are indeed physically time traveling.

[bunnydixon]

bro des and ort - THATS evidence :D

[notsolost42]

And at the same time John Locke's epiphany was that he did not receive the sign he thought he had from the island, that it was just Desmond flipping on a light going to the bathroom. There was nothing mystical about the light that night.

[bunnydixon]

And at the same time John Locke's epiphany was that he did not receive the sign he thought he had from the island, that it was just Desmond flipping on a light going to the bathroom. There was nothing mystical about the light that night.

nobody is debating that

[Brother Desmond]

As for the timeline. I watched very carefully and it is over the course of two days. Locke drops off Boone, Locke disappears. That was during daylight hours. The next time we see Locke is at night at the hatch. It is not until Boone's funeral that Locke is seen again. Clearly, that is at least the next day. Shannon doesn't even find out Boone is dead until the next morning when she comes strolling back down the beach after spending the night with Sayid. The funeral would likely be later in that same day. So, I am talking about a period of two days here. It was very clearly shown. Perhaps we are saying the same thing?

On this topic I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I saw the timeline differently. I see it as:

Locke, drops off Boone, disappears. This is during daylight hours.
Jack begins to work on Boone.
Jack sends Jin and Charlie to Claire with instructions that Kate has to deliver. By now it is night time.
Boone dies, Aaron is born, Locke pounds on the hatch door. This all takes place at night.

There may be some wiggle room as to which happens first and last between Boone, Aaron, and John, but they all happen on the same night, in my opinion. Same timeline, two episodes.

[notsolost42]

I'm gonna just throw this one out there for you all to chew on now.

Suppose it is the island that is moving in time and just dragging their consciousness with it? Then, if that is the case, they could physically be on the island while there consciousness is manifesting in that time again. That would also be why, as Ort so skillfully pointed out, they are dressed differently than their past selves.

Anyone?

[ortrules]

I'm gonna just throw this one out there for you all to chew on now.

Suppose it is the island that is moving in time and just dragging their consciousness with it? Then, if that is the case, they could physically be on the island while there consciousness is manifesting in that time again. That would also be why, as Ort so skillfully pointed out, they are dressed differently than their past selves.

Anyone?

I can't even follow what you're saying here. Can you please elaborate?

[notsolost42]

I can't even follow what you're saying here. Can you please elaborate?

Well, there has already been the question of whether or not the island is moving in time or the losties are. What I am saying is perhaps the island is moving in spacetime and it is dragging the consciousness of the losties with it. In that way, they could actually have a physical appearance on the island second to the one that is already there and be wearing the clothes they have on when they are being dragged through spacetime. Does that help at all or is it more confusing?

In Desmond's case, he alone jumped in spacetime. So, I am saying it is the island jumping and they are essentially along for the ride.

[Missie]

Well, there has already been the question of whether or not the island is moving in time or the losties are. What I am saying is perhaps the island is moving in spacetime and it is dragging the consciousness of the losties with it. In that way, they could actually have a physical appearance on the island second to the one that is already there and be wearing the clothes they have on when they are being dragged through spacetime. Does that help at all or is it more confusing?

In Desmond's case, he alone jumped in spacetime. So, I am saying it is the island jumping and they are essentially along for the ride.

Are you saying the the losties and the island are physically time traveling? If so, then yes I agree with you.

[notsolost42]

Are you saying the the losties and the island are physically time traveling? If so, then yes I agree with you.

Well, kind of. I am saying that the island is time traveling and the losties are being dragged along for the ride. If that's the case then I can see their physical presence in both times simultaineously because they are physically on the island when it moves. And that would explain them wearing the same clothes as when they left the present. It would also be the difference of their time jumping experience vs. Desmond's time jumping experience. The island is hurtling through spacetime and the losties are just hanging on!

[islander]

Well, kind of. I am saying that the island is time traveling and the losties are being dragged along for the ride. If that's the case then I can see their physical presence in both times simultaineously because they are physically on the island when it moves. And that would explain them wearing the same clothes as when they left the present. It would also be the difference of their time jumping experience vs. Desmond's time jumping experience. The island is hurtling through spacetime and the losties are just hanging on!

I agree.

So is Mrs. Hawking looking for the coordinates in spacetime where the island will intersect with the O6 (plus Ben) and allow them to reunite with the island?

[ortrules]

Well, kind of. I am saying that the island is time traveling and the losties are being dragged along for the ride. If that's the case then I can see their physical presence in both times simultaineously because they are physically on the island when it moves. And that would explain them wearing the same clothes as when they left the present. It would also be the difference of their time jumping experience vs. Desmond's time jumping experience. The island is hurtling through spacetime and the losties are just hanging on!

This is precisely what is happening. The island is moving and our Losties are jumping through time with it. As I've always said, time travel is the result of something else happening. No one seems to have control over it - they just get caught up in it. They are time traveling now because the wheel was turned and the island was disrupted. Desmond traveled because they went through the wrong bearing and he had been exposed to high levels of radiation. Before that he time traveled because he turned the fail-safe key. Ben traveled after turning the wheel.

It would also seem that Richard and the Others have a way to avoid moving with the island (the Temple?) and are able to stay in the present time - which is why Locke went back in time and the Others around him didn't, and also why Richard didn't move with Locke when they were talking.

[ortrules]

I agree.

So is Mrs. Hawking looking for the coordinates in spacetime where the island will intersect with the O6 (plus Ben) and allow them to reunite with the island?

I believe that this 70 hours she referred to is a time when the island will be in the future (the off island present, 2008) and the O'6 and Ben will be able to get to the island while the island is in that time. They will then "hope on for the ride" and travel through time until they are able to stop the island from moving.

If they don't get back to this island by that time, the island will never again appear in their time and they won't be able to get back.

That's my guess anyway.

[islander]

I believe that this 70 hours she referred to is a time when the island will be in the future (the off island present, 2008) and the O'6 and Ben will be able to get to the island while the island is in that time. They will then "hope on for the ride" and travel through time until they are able to stop the island from moving.

If they don't get back to this island by that time, the island will never again appear in their time and they won't be able to get back.

That's my guess anyway.

...and something really bad happens....per the "God help us all" warnings.