How can the original timeline still exist?

[Prologic9]

If you could travel back in time in your own universe, you could create a grandfather paradox. You can't resolve this paradox (that's why it is one), so logically, you simply can't travel back in time in your own universe, just like you can't divide through zero. If they didn't say so on the show, maybe the characters weren't aware of it. After all, they often complained about migraines in connection with temporal mechanics...

Every time you think you are timetraveling, you are actually hopping universes, emerging at a point in that universe's timeline that is analogous to a certain point in time in your original universe, so that it seems you traveled "back". Actually, you're still in the present, only that the original universe's present and the parallel universe's present aren't the same.

And for people who feel the need to remind me that this is fiction: I know. But when discussing things inside that fictional universe's reality, I'm not going to insert "fictional" after every other word, because it would make the post unreadable. Just assume that I'm not that deluded to think we're discussing our reality.

Perhaps I should make this my sig. Would save a lot of typing in every third post...

Fictionally, in Star Trek, that's not how it works. Because we've seen the timelines altered before our and our characters very eyes without them traveling at all.

They get around the grandfather paradox by 'cutting' an imaginary time thread connected to the characters. Usually the act of time travel is what causes this cut, so that alterations to the timeline won't effect them. They often go to the trouble of explaining the 'cut' with techno-babble.

A really sloppy example is Back to the Future. Marty has to set things straight so that he doesn't cease to exist. So obviously changes he makes in the past effect his personal timeline. But then when he does return home his life has changed, his family members now all successful in life and Biff their car-washing lackey. Yet his personal existence remains unchanged. It's completely contradictory. (don't read the previous paragraph if you haven't seen BTTF)

They further screw things up in BTTF2, where Biff changes the timeline but somehow it doesn't take effect until Doc and Marty return to 1985. And Marty no longer has to worry about his own existence at all. (^ditto)

I bring all that up just to point out how it doesn't matter that they get all the time-traveling 'wrong,' they're still great stories.
---

Now in the real world, assuming timetravel is even possible, a paradox of that nature would never happen because there is only one sequence of events. The past can never be changed, it can only play out the way it played out. If someone goes to the past and does something, then it's already happened. There is no 'original sequence' so to speak. There is no Back to the Future.

 

[ALF]

There's no such thing as an original timeline. That would presume the absence of time travel. Since Trek is dripping with time travel...

It's easier to use Back to the Future as a handy reference. The original timeline there would be the one where Biff smashed up the McFly truck, George worked for Biff and his mother was a drunk. Then, after a dozen or some time travel sessions, the timeline got splintered leaving one obvious original timeline.

 

[Traveller]

Fictionally, in Star Trek, that's not how it works. Because we've seen the timelines altered before our and our characters very eyes without them traveling at all.

??? What episode was that?

They get around the grandfather paradox by 'cutting' an imaginary time thread connected to the characters. Usually the act of time travel is what causes this cut, so that alterations to the timeline won't effect them. They often go to the trouble of explaining the 'cut' with techno-babble.

That's why I said they're probably unaware of the universe-hopping; you can't tell by its appearance, just like people in the past couldn't tell if the Sun revolves around the Earth or vice versa.

IOW, their explanation doesn't convince me.

Back to the Future was comedy, they didn't even try to make sense.
---

Now in the real world, assuming timetravel is even possible, a paradox of that nature would never happen because there is only one sequence of events. The past can never be changed, it can only play out the way it played out. If someone goes to the past and does something, then it's already happened. There is no 'original sequence' so to speak. There is no Back to the Future.

That's exactly what I was saying: You can't travel in time - it would only seem that way.

 

[Shazam!]

They say it's an alternate reality in the movie.

And the reason they know they're in an alternate reality is bacause of all the time-travel bollocks.

 

[Penhall99]

I don't understand why some people get bent out of shape when someone poses a question on a Trek forum. We're here to discuss things, right?

Anyway, I do view it as 2 separate timelines. And if it wasn't, Spock Prime would probably use the slingshot effect to go back in time and stop Nero from messing with the timeline. Since he does not do this, it leads me to believe that Spock Prime realizes this is an alternate timeline/reality and decides to stay and help things along.

 

[Prologic9]

Traveller,

I think it is still traveling in time. It would just dramatically alter the way we approach what time is I guess.

Anyway, in City on the Edge I believe we see the crew stranded on the planet as the Enterprise and the federation, everything they know is removed from existence. It sets up the whole dramatic arc for the show.

Same with ST:First Contact. We see Earth turn into Borg Earth while the Enterprise is trapped in... chromaton particles? Something like that. Their thread is cut.

And, again, Yesterday's Enterprise is pretty much incontrovertible. With both versions of history overlapping and informing one another.

 

[Traveller]

You can still explain all three examples with universe-hopping. Even Yesterday's Enterprise could be them traversing several universes. They wouldn't end up in their original universe, but in one infinitely similar to it. Practically it's irrelevant if you can't tell them apart, but theoretically, it nicely takes time travel paradoxes out of the equation.

 

[JoeFromEarth]

As long as I can still watch any of the "prime reality", or whatever you want to call it, TV shows and movies, the prime reality still exists.

 

[Traveller]

^Sure it does. All universes continue to exist.

 

[EJA]

Look, if we want to have ST XI and all those past Trek episodes/movies with time travel, then the simplest thing to do is disregard the idea that the XI reality was created by Nero and Spock Prime, and apply the "In A Mirror, Darkly" scenario, i.e. travel into the past of a totally separate universe. If we do this, it becomes much easier.

 

[Mytran]

Not that it seriously matters, but what I'd like to know is this: If the Hobus supernova was a natural event that was going to either (1) go off and gradually destroy the civilizations of the Milky Way or (2) be shut down via red matter in a chain of events leading to the end of that timeline, where did the several future eras we saw in Enterprise and Voyager come from? They were never going to have a chance to occur...

This is still out there and hasn't been answered. That's the trouble with galaxy-destroying phenomena, they complicate issues

 

[Traveller]

^In those universes the Hobus star simply didn't turn into a Supernova. In those "several future eras" no destruction of the Romulan Empire was mentioned, either.

(...and could we stop calling it a Supernova? It clearly was something else, because no Supernova can destroy a whole galaxy, as was stated in the comics)

 

[Geckothan]

It still exists because it's the superior timeline.

 

[Mytran]

^In those universes the Hobus star simply didn't turn into a Supernova. In those "several future eras" no destruction of the Romulan Empire was mentioned, either.

That's fine for the "multiple realities/timelines" camp, but what about those who postulate a single timeline? Voyager's Captain Braxton, for instance, came from Voyager's own future, one where apparently the galaxy didn't get destroyed by Hobus. So did Spock need to take action or not? Would the outcome still have been a safe galaxy if he'd stayed in bed?

 

[EJA]

I'm more concerned about what will happen in the Mirror Universe when (and IF) the Hobus star explodes, cos there's no Spock there to stop it.

 

[Yeoman Randi]

In reality, the way it is done in the movie, it is the same timeline. However, the writers specifically have Uhura say "an alternate reality" and have Spock confirm this. For me, that's enough. I am perfectly happy living with the original timeline existing and this new 'alternate reality' (in otherwords, 'timeline') existing.

It is fiction after all.

 

[Traveller]

That's fine for the "multiple realities/timelines" camp, but what about those who postulate a single timeline?

They have to give up their delusions and bow to the superior intelligence of those of the "multiple realities" camp.

 

[EJA]

I'm just going to treat the new universe like the mirror universe. That always coexisted with the prime reality with no trouble.

 

[Prologic9]

You can still explain all three examples with universe-hopping. Even Yesterday's Enterprise could be them traversing several universes. They wouldn't end up in their original universe, but in one infinitely similar to it. Practically it's irrelevant if you can't tell them apart, but theoretically, it nicely takes time travel paradoxes out of the equation.

You can explain none of them because they didn't go anywhere, whether it be through time or dimensions. We see the realities altered from exactly where they are.

And you can't explain away Yesterday's Enterprise because Guinan knows the timeline was changed. She's informed of a single existing reality The entire point of the story hinges on the Ent-C's sacrifice to restore the timeline. If it were just dimension hopping then their deaths were pointless.

 

[Traveller]

You can explain none of them because they didn't go anywhere,

"Traveling" doesn't imply actual movement, since it's just a metaphor.

whether it be through time or dimensions. We see the realities altered from exactly where they are.

Is the Sun revolving around the Earth or is the Earth revolving around the Sun? You can't tell from where you're standing. The reality altering around you is the same as you changing realities. Without moving a foot.

And you can't explain away Yesterday's Enterprise because Guinan knows the timeline was changed. She's informed of a single existing reality The entire point of the story hinges on the Ent-C's sacrifice to restore the timeline. If it were just dimension hopping then their deaths were pointless.

I'm not trying to explain anything away. IIRC, Picard challenges Guinan about this "original timeline". He says something like, who's to decide which one is the "proper" time and she answers, "well, I do." It's a purely subjective thing. She prefers one reality over the other, there is nothing implicitly "more correct" about that reality that would set it up as a standard against which all other realities are measured.

And of course she would call it a "screwed-up timeline" - she wants Picard to take certain actions to bring about a result she's interested in. Agreeing that all universes are created equal would be a bit counterproductive.