Essential time travel reading

[littleredman]

This may help some people consider the way in which the Losties are time travelling, and how the future cannot be altered except for in Desmond's case (apparently).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_paradox

[islander]

I appreciate all the work that's been done on time travel, but I think it's up to the writers to define how they want to address time travel. Who ever heard of consciousness traveling before?

[littleredman]

I appreciate all the work that's been done on time travel, but I think it's up to the writers to define how they want to address time travel. Who ever heard of consciousness traveling before?

Of course it's up to the writers, but this seems to be the thinking they're following. They're not just pulling it out of the hat; they're basing it on other ideas and theories.

Also, artist Paul Laffoley has apparently dealt with “retrocognition of the past and occasions of precognition of the future.” in his work for years. http://www.laffoley.com/

And in the comic book 'The Invisibles' characters use a "consciousness projection technique to travel through space and time".


In my defence I said that the original article may help people "consider" what is happening in Lost, not solve any mysteries or out-think the writers.

[islander]

Of course they are following this theory - it's easy. Hey, no matter what happens, "it was meant to happen". Yawn.

[littleredman]

Of course they are following this theory - it's easy. Hey, no matter what happens, "it was meant to happen". Yawn.

What's your point?

[islander]

What's your point?

Just an observation:

It's easy to define the future if everytime something funky happens like Dan from the future talking to Des from the past, you define the event by saying "that was supposed to happen"; therefore, the future did not change.

Obviously time travel is for sci-fi, but with that in mind, I don't see how someone from the future could interact with someone in the past and not alter the future, and it makes for much better theater in my opinion.

I enjoy the show, but I think they have taken the easy way out by selling us "that was meant to happen".

[littleredman]

Just an observation:

It's easy to define the future if everytime something funky happens like Dan from the future talking to Des from the past, you define the event by saying "that was supposed to happen"; therefore, the future did not change.

Obviously time travel is for sci-fi, but with that in mind, I don't see how someone from the future could interact with someone in the past and not alter the future, and it makes for much better theater in my opinion.

I enjoy the show, but I think they have taken the easy way out by selling us "that was meant to happen".

Intesting perspective, but I actually thought the opposite. I think it makes the show much more complex and layered simply because there's no option for them to go back and do whatever they want.

We're now discovering things through time travel in the same way we discovered things in flashbacks. Things about characters, and aspects of the islands history.

If anything, this route means that the writers have to be more careful in the way they depict interactions in the past. It doesn't make it 'easier'...

[littleredman]

Just an observation:

It's easy to define the future if everytime something funky happens like Dan from the future talking to Des from the past, you define the event by saying "that was supposed to happen"; therefore, the future did not change.
.

Also; this wasn't supposed to happen. Dan DID change the future with Des.

[islander]

Intesting perspective, but I actually thought the opposite. I think it makes the show much more complex and layered simply because there's no option for them to go back and do whatever they want.

We're now discovering things through time travel in the same way we discovered things in flashbacks. Things about characters, and aspects of the islands history.

If anything, this route means that the writers have to be more careful in the way they depict interactions in the past. It doesn't make it 'easier'...

LOL...it does seem to be two sides of the same coin.

I say they can do whatever they want (besides meet themselves - the ultimate sci-fi no-no), and it doesn't matter...."that's the way it's supposed to be."

And - if Dan meets Des in 1954, that's ok because he's 'special'.

Lets go in to the past and take all kinds of stuff like guns, outriggers, compasses, but no big deal...that was meant to happen

I have hope though. Ben knows too much about future events not to have traveled to the future so he could be up to something that would be cool.

[navyguy]

This may help some people consider the way in which the Losties are time travelling, and how the future cannot be altered except for in Desmond's case (apparently).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_paradox

Good find. Did you click on the link for the 'ontological paradox'? the ontological paradox is when an item, idea, or w/e has no actual origin. We have the compass that Richard gives Locke, that Locke gives it to Richard, only for Richard to give it back to Locke 50 years later.

Hence, we have an "ontological paradox" since the compass has no true origin