Would future time cops head for the MU after Ep14?

[Burning Hearts of Qo'nos]

Well, for what its worth in the books the Time Cops only seem to interfere with contemporary time travel happenings if it directly affects their established present (or our future). All other time travel incursions 'happened' as is shown in the shows where Time Cops don't appear and are part of their 'history' so there is no reason to go back and police them. But when ppl contemporary or in the future of them attempt to alter the timeline that would alter their relative present (our future), then they have to intervene, not so much policing all time travel, just travel that threatens them.

 

[F. King Daniel]

If you try and make greater sense of Star Trek's time travel than this chart, you're doing it wrong.

 

[The Wormhole]

Well, for what its worth in the books the Time Cops only seem to interfere with contemporary time travel happenings if it directly affects their established present (or our future). All other time travel incursions 'happened' as is shown in the shows where Time Cops don't appear and are part of their 'history' so there is no reason to go back and police them. But when ppl contemporary or in the future of them attempt to alter the timeline that would alter their relative present (our future), then they have to intervene, not so much policing all time travel, just travel that threatens them.

That's implied to be the case with the 29th century guys, although they still got involved with the events from Timeless despite the fact that wasn't connected to the 29th century at all.

Daniels and his people can get involved with anything regardless if it's connected with the 31st century or not.

 

[Arpy]

The spore drive has nothing to do with time travel, and was developed completely independent of time travel.

It doesn't matter why or how it was developed. It time traveled the Discovery crew 9 months into the future.

The existence of spore drive does not require the involvement of the time cops or even 23rd century DTI at all.

That's for the DTI to decide![/DTI Agent Emmett Brown] I think they're going to be real interested in the Defiant and the time traveling abilities of the spore drive.

But as nothing in this storyline involved time travel, all this exists outside of the purview and jurisdiction of the time cops.

The story has to do with further ramifications of the future Defiant traveling to the past.

I saw this thread and only had one question:
Can we please get JCVD for season two?

Could you imagine a special guest captain every season? After JCVD goes down in foot-to-foot with a Section 31 Gorn, Admiral Cornwell calls in Bruce Boxleitner...or Michael Ironside...or...?

My point is that when one has the power over time, even in a "policing" role, then the chances that that power will be abused rises exponentially. And unlike any other job, the fact that you can even be tried for crimes you haven't even committed yet, despite the fact that you're supposedly the "good guy," is quite frankly insane. I would think that every single person living in the 29th century would be a paranoid schizophrenic.

Yeah, that's an interesting point. Reminds me of Minority Report. Thing is though, he was going to do it. The problem in MR was that the PreCogs (or whatever they were called) got it wrong. 29th Century Time Cops, I'm sure, never do -- teeheehee. Maybe the problem with the VOY ep was when they nabbed Braxton. If they arrested the version of him that had committed to the action, it would have been okay, but early Braxton could have gotten a push in another direction in life?

If they ever do a DTI series, an episode could be about getting Sisko's face out of the history books. Maybe they could do a flashback episode to the DS9 episode like DS9 did in "Trials and Tribble-ations."

Actually, I don't think Sisko was always going to be Gabriel Bell (I'm sick of predestination paradoxes), but maybe that's the kind of minor temporal flub-up that wouldn't warrant intervention. ...blowing up the Terran Empire, on the other hand...

 

[The Wormhole]

It doesn't matter why or how it was developed. It time traveled the Discovery crew 9 months into the future.

Then it's the problem of whatever temporal authorities exist in the 23rd century. A time fleet in the 29th century aren't going to give a damn about a ship six hundred years in the past jumping nine months ahead into its own subjective future.

 

[Dukhat]

Yeah, that's an interesting point. Reminds me of Minority Report. Thing is though, he was going to do it. The problem in MR was that the PreCogs (or whatever they were called) got it wrong. 29th Century Time Cops, I'm sure, never do -- teeheehee. Maybe the problem with the VOY ep was when they nabbed Braxton. If they arrested the version of him that had committed to the action, it would have been okay, but early Braxton could have gotten a push in another direction in life?

If they ever do a DTI series, an episode could be about getting Sisko's face out of the history books. Maybe they could do a flashback episode to the DS9 episode like DS9 did in "Trials and Tribble-ations."

Actually, I don't think Sisko was always going to be Gabriel Bell (I'm sick of predestination paradoxes), but maybe that's the kind of minor temporal flub-up that wouldn't warrant intervention. ...blowing up the Terran Empire, on the other hand...

I never saw Minority Report so I can't speak for that. But as far as Braxton is concerned, yeah, I think that if you lived in a society where you could be arrested for crimes you commit in the future even though at the time you have no intention of committing those crimes (or even knowing what it is you're going to do), then wouldn't it make more sense to just let you know what you do (and the fact that you get caught) so that you don't go down that road? I mean, what does arresting an essentially innocent man really accomplish? Does your "evil" future self just disappear? Or does he continue in an alternate universe, in which case what's the point of "policing" anyone if it doesn't affect your personal timeline? And wouldn't arresting someone who didn't do anything essentially start that person down a path to negative behavior and the actions that end up causing the problem in the first place? Again, nothing seems to make logical sense to me about this.

As far as Gabriel Bell is concerned, again, if Sisko was always destined to be Bell, then the future timeline shouldn't have changed when the original Bell got killed. But it did, and Sisko had to take his place for the timeline to "right" itself (and "right" is in quotes because the timeline doesn't actually go back 100% the way it was before, just 99.999999%.)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

if Sisko was always destined to be Bell, then the future timeline shouldn't have changed when the original Bell got killed.

Yes it should, because Sisko actually has to DO the deed for the timeline to be what it is.

 

[Dukhat]

Yes it should, because Sisko actually has to DO the deed for the timeline to be what it is.

Huh? If the real Bell always died and Sisko always took his place, then why did the timeline change in the 24th century? Bell's death shouldn't have affected that at all.

 

[Nebraxis]

Huh? If the real Bell always died and Sisko always took his place, then why did the timeline change in the 24th century? Bell's death shouldn't have affected that at all.

Because Sisko hadn't done it yet?

 

[The Wormhole]

That didn't matter while the original Gabriel Bell was alive. It was his death that created an alternate timeline. Had Sisko and Bashir never ended up at the Sanctuary District, he wouldn't have been killed defending them in a brawl, and then he'd fill his historic role in the riots.

 

[Nebraxis]

Ah, but maybe they were always meant to be there... Time travel gives me a headache...

 

[Farscape One]

I have a question.

Will DISCOVERY end up doing some time travel, accidentally of course, to undo the 9 months of war that has been disastrous for the Federation?

That would explain why so many of the events happening here don't really appear in previous shows... for example, if Starfleet and the Federation did lose that many people to the Klingons, you really think humans during the original series run would not be as antogonistic toward them, since that takes place less than a decade after DISCOVERY?

War and its survivors have a long memory... a decade is too short a time for the wounds to heal.

 

[Dukhat]

Ah, but maybe they were always meant to be there... Time travel gives me a headache...

Well, no, because had they not been there, Bell wouldn't have needed to try to help them and end up getting killed in the process.

 

[Attentiveluke]

The MU depicted in mirror, mirror may have been altered by the USS defiant travelling back but the DS9 MU wouldn’t have been changed as it happened after the tholian web episode. If that’s the case and it was changed back, maybe the Terran empire survived and thrived into the 24th century and beyond. That I would like to see.

 

[Nebraxis]

Well, no, because had they not been there, Bell wouldn't have needed to try to help them and end up getting killed in the process.

It's been a while since I saw the episode, but according to history from the perspective of the DS9 crew, has Bell's picture always been Sisko, or do they recognise that it has changed? If the original Bell had survived, would the riots have happened? Or did Sisko take his place purely because 24th century history books says that Gabriel Bell was a catalyst for the riots, thus fulfilling some kind of paradoxical destiny? I hope what I have written makes some kind of sense. These kind of timey-wimey conversations are bad enough when sober, but i've had a couple of drinks which makes it worse!!!

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

It's been a while since I saw the episode, but according to history from the perspective of the DS9 crew, has Bell's picture always been Sisko, or do they recognise that it has changed?

We never saw anyone look at a picture of Bell before the events of that episode, so I guess we have no idea. They only look him up in the records after it's all over.

 

[The Wormhole]

It's been a while since I saw the episode, but according to history from the perspective of the DS9 crew, has Bell's picture always been Sisko, or do they recognise that it has changed? If the original Bell had survived, would the riots have happened? Or did Sisko take his place purely because 24th century history books says that Gabriel Bell was a catalyst for the riots, thus fulfilling some kind of paradoxical destiny? I hope what I have written makes some kind of sense. These kind of timey-wimey conversations are bad enough when sober, but i've had a couple of drinks which makes it worse!!!

Sisko and Bashir spend over a day or so at the Sanctuary District and 24th century life continues on same as always for everyone else. Then Sisko and Bashir get into a fight while in the food line-up, Gabriel Bell comes to their defense and intervenes, getting killed for his trouble. After Bell's death, the timeline is dramatically altered where the Federation doesn't exist in the 24th century, humanity presumably never developed warp drive, and Alpha Centauri is populated by Romulans. This would indicated that the real Bell was meant to have been the one who did the thing with the riots, protected the hostages, and got killed in the police raid, and had Sisko and Bashir not been there, he would have been the one to do so. Indeed, at the end of the episode when Sisko sees himself in the file on Gabriel Bell, his reaction would imply that last time he looked there, there was either a different picture or perhaps even no picture.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

If Sisko wasn't always Gabriel Bell, then why do the crew return to the same future they left?

Even the slightest deviation from the original history would result in a vastly different future. If you assume Sisko wasn't always supposed to be Bell, he could have replicated the original Bell's actions and words down to the slightest detail and it would STILL make things turn out differently. We've heard of the butterfly effect, haven't we?

And since it would be completely impossible for Sisko to actually DO what I just described...then the fact that there were no changes to the timeline (even after it was fixed) would pretty much prove that it's a classic predestination paradox, and that Sisko was destined to become Bell from day one.

This is also why I believe the events of ST:FC were always part of the timeline. The crew of the Enterprise-E returned to the same future THEY left as well.

 

[Nebraxis]

If Sisko wasn't always Gabriel Bell, then why do the crew return to the same future they left?

Even the slightest deviation from the original history would result in a vastly different future. If you assume Sisko wasn't always supposed to be Bell, he could have replicated the original Bell's actions and words down to the slightest detail and it would STILL make things turn out differently. We've heard of the butterfly effect, haven't we?

And since it would be completely impossible for Sisko to actually DO what I just described...then the fact that there were no changes to the timeline (even after it was fixed) would pretty much prove that it's a classic predestination paradox, and that Sisko was destined to become Bell from day one.

This is also why I believe the events of ST:FC were always part of the timeline. The crew of the Enterprise-E returned to the same future THEY left as well.

This is a far more eloquent way of getting the same thoughts across as I was attempting to. Well done!

 

[Dukhat]

If Sisko wasn't always Gabriel Bell, then why do the crew return to the same future they left?

That's what I've been trying to tell you. They don't return to the same future they left. They return to a future that's 99.9999999% like the future they left.

The events of the episode are exactly like what happens in Back to the Future:

1. In the original timeline, Marty's dad is a weakling pushover to his boss Biff. His mom is overweight and unhappy with her life. His brother and sister have shitty jobs. In the original DS9 timeline, Gabriel Bell was responsible for the Bell Riots.

2. Marty goes back in time and inadvertently changes history by interfering in how his parents originally met. Sisko and Bashir inadvertently change history by attracting Bell's attention and accidentally getting him killed.

3. While not instantaneous, Marty's actions change future history by causing him and his siblings to not be born. In DS9, history is immediately changed from the Defiant's crew's perspective.

4. Marty carries out a plan to get his parents back together in order to "right" the timeline, although the circumstances behind that are now different. Sisko assumes Bell's identity in order to "right" the timeline.

5. When Marty returns to 1985, despite his actions to "right" the timeline, things have changed for him and his family (for the better.) But the rest of the world at large seems to be no different than it was before. When the Defiant crew returns to the 24th century, history now has a photo of Sisko as Bell, even though the rest of the world (or universe) at large seems to be no different than it was before.

Plus, if someone in the 21st century was able to take a photo of Sisko and have it survive to the 24th century, then it stands to reason that that same photo of the real Bell was taken in the original timeline, and Sisko et. al would have recognized him. It's not like anyone said, "well, no one actually knows what Bell looked like, so we wouldn't be changing history by having you impersonate him."

Even the slightest deviation from the original history would result in a vastly different future. If you assume Sisko wasn't always supposed to be Bell, he could have replicated the original Bell's actions and words down to the slightest detail and it would STILL make things turn out differently. We've heard of the butterfly effect, haven't we?

Sorry, that's not how things work in the fictional universe of Star Trek (at least until nuTrek.) Take the Mirror Universe for example. Based on what we saw in ENT, the earliest that the two universes diverged was in the 20th century (it could have been even earlier, but that's not really important for this example.) So by the 22nd-23rd-24th centuries, as you say, things should have diverged so much that there would be no way that someone in the prime universe at that time would have an exact duplicate in the MU. But they all have duplicates. It makes for good storytelling, but the logic behind the idea is faulty.