|
Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions. If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name. |
|
|||||||
| Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#46 |
|
Commodore
Location: South Dakota
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
Presumably, the first time Dax convinced everyone to visit the planet eventually known as Gaia, there was no settlement and no colonists, just the barrier. When they tried to leave, they were thrown back in time. Then, their descendants lived until the Defiant showed up again, this time with colonists and an Old Odo to change the course of events. They didn't pass through the barrier in the same way, so didn't go back in time. Should the colony have persisted in this new timeline? Maybe. The mechanisms of time travel haven't always been consistent, but that could be a result of the different methods of time travel employed. |
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Ensign
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
You're saying the time travel must be valid because we saw it in the episode. That means any mistake the writers make becomes true. If you accept that, then there's no point in talking about plot holes in the first place. Because there's no such thing. Look at Trek XI. Nero went back in time and blew up Vulcan. So by the present its already destroyed. So why would he go back in time and blow it up, if it doesn't exist to threaten him? If the older Odo doesn't exist, how can he sabotage the ship and prevent them from traveling back? In the show they didn't say the colony existed for a time. They said the colony never existed. That's correct, since they never traveled back to found it. But since they never traveled back, how can colonists who don't exist prevent their own existence? Also, I don't see how using different time travel tech would change the laws of physics. Gauss' Law of Electricity is always true, regardless of what type of sensor you use to observe electric fields.
__________________
"Something I seldom say to a customer, Jim. In this galaxy, there's a mathematical probability of three million Earth-type planets. And in all of the universe, three million million galaxies like this. And in all of that and perhaps more, only one of each of us. Don't destroy the one named Kirk." -Dr. McCoy |
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Commodore
Location: South Dakota
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
You're assuming that the only time travel that can occur is if it is a predestination paradox, which isn't the case. Calling other instances of time travel that don't result in predestination paradoxes "plot holes" is incorrect. |
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Ensign
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
The reason I'm arguing against that here is b/c of what the characters said in the show. They didn't say that they've now crossed into an alternate timeline where there's no colony. They said the colony never existed. That was the major ethical dilemma. Sisko eloquently summed it up by saying that as long as they exist in memories, they existed. All of that suggests that the real issue is that Odo wiped the colony from existence. Yet if he never existed, then how could he have prevented his own existence? I'm not saying this is the only way to handle time travel, just that its how the writers handled it in this episode. Without resolving the contradiction. That's how I saw it. You may have seen it differently.
__________________
"Something I seldom say to a customer, Jim. In this galaxy, there's a mathematical probability of three million Earth-type planets. And in all of the universe, three million million galaxies like this. And in all of that and perhaps more, only one of each of us. Don't destroy the one named Kirk." -Dr. McCoy |
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Commodore
Location: South Dakota
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
Maybe the Gaia colony persists in another timeline where the Defiant simply disappeared from the colony's viewpoint. Must there be only one timeline in this case? |
|
|
|
|
#51 |
|
Ensign
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
|
|
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Admiral
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
In a typical grandfather "paradox", two timelines will keep flipflopping. If you go back to shoot your grandfather, you don't disappear because you were born, once. But the guy who will go back to kill the grandfather will not be born now, so a timeline emerges where the grandfather lives, and the guy will be born and will go back to kill the grandfather. It's self-perpetuating and in no way paradoxical, and all that matters is whether the camera in the past follows the murderous-intent you, or a timeline where no murderous you was present and everything panned out just fine for your grandfather. In "Children of Time", the camera happens to follow a bunch of heroes who vacillate between their intentions. Many of the Mirror Universe stories have the same theme: it doesn't really matter to the heroes, but they have the power to do good, so why not? Timo Saloniemi |
|
|
|
|
|
#53 | |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: Sacramento, CA
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
__________________
One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Ensign
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
1. There is one timeline. If you travel back in time to cause an event, then that event is predestined. You will do it because you've already done it. Any story that has characters change the timeline is contradictory. 2. There are alternate timelines. Any time you change the timeline, you're actually crossing into an alternate one. In this case, the crew can either travel back in time or not. If they choose to, then its a predestined event in their own timeline. If they choose not to, then they are crossing into another timeline where there never was a colony. As you say, this is only possible when characters from the colony timeline interact with characters from the non-colony timeline. This is not contradictory. This is sci fi, so the writers could be using either scenario. If you & Pavonis are correct, then they're using scenario 2 and there's no paradox. The reason I don't believe they are is that the major ethical issue was whether to go home and erase the colony from existence. If there are alternate timelines, then they could just go home and the colony would still exist in another timeline. We know this is true because the colonists in the first timeline must exist to erase the colony in the second. The structure is either a loop back to itself or a cross to another timeline. They chose the second option. But if they've crossed, then they left rather than erased the colony. The colonists still exist in the first timeline, and never existed in the second timeline. So they did no harm by leaving. The ethical issue only arises if they're actually erasing those people. And they're only erasing them with the single-timeline premise. But this is contradictory. Maybe you guys are right and I'm misunderstand the writer's intentions. If that's the case and there are alternate timelines, then what's the ethical dilemma with leaving? |
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Captain
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
Is it that hard to accept that the writers just hadn't thought of Sector 31 at that time and forgot about Children of Time when they came up with the timeline of the infection? It's just a TV show, and every scifi show not featuring Edward James Olmos has plot holes. Second, yeah, there's no reason the skills to mimic a better face would have transferred. Third, before Abrams Star Trek clearly used the one-timeline approach to time travel. Those people never existed. The only scifi before the Abrams Star Trek I've seen which uses the 'alternate universe' approach to scifi is an obscure webcomic called Fans. Edit: And for that matter, why didn't Odo make any attempt to cure Las? Last edited by JirinPanthosa; November 22 2012 at 03:23 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Fleet Admiral
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. |
|
|
|
|
#57 | ||
|
Admiral
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
Timo Saloniemi |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#58 | |
|
Commodore
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
Odo was then re-infected at the beginning of Season Six, when he linked with the female changeling. Seriously, why is there even a debate about this?
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#59 | ||
|
Commander
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
The revelation that Odo was infected at Starfleet Medical, and ultimately by Section 31, hinges on the disease in that sample having uninterrupted progression since before Odo was made into a solid. The plot hole is actually in "When It Rains..." and not "Children of Time."
__________________
"You have been examined. Your ship must be destroyed. We make assumption you have a deity, or deities, or some such beliefs which comfort you. We therefore grant you ten Earth time periods known as minutes to make preparations." Last edited by FKnight; November 25 2012 at 02:26 AM. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Commodore
|
Re: "Children of Time" Plot-hole Question
__________________
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:52 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.

















