I am glad we agree on that.
Speaking of Tom Riker, poor devil, living the rest of his days in a cardassian prison! What was he thinking?
Harry Kim's promotion... or lack of it.
- Thread starter Kobayshi Maru
- Start date
I am glad we agree on that.
Speaking of Tom Riker, poor devil, living the rest of his days in a cardassian prison! What was he thinking?
I don't know about that, given the high accident rate they seem to have.
Especially, when Chakotay is doing the piloting...
Still, it's preferable to a certain death, isn't it?
Time travel doesn't create duplicates, it's just more you.
What's the difference between a mirror universe and a divergent timeline?
An identical copy of duplicate is not the same as the original.
(Some #### here once argued that copied keys are identical and the original is the same as the copy and that they're both the original. #### that guy.)
In Farscape when Crichton was twinned, it seemed as if the twinning process destroyed the original to create to equally false copies that are better than nothing but just as loud as the now lost original.
What's the difference between a mirror universe and a divergent timeline?
An identical copy of duplicate is not the same as the original.
(Some #### here once argued that copied keys are identical and the original is the same as the copy and that they're both the original. #### that guy.)
In Farscape when Crichton was twinned, it seemed as if the twinning process destroyed the original to create to equally false copies that are better than nothing but just as loud as the now lost original.
Arguably, the you of ten minutes ago is a different person from the current you.
In a divergent timeline you can pinpoint the exact moment when things started diverging.
In a mirror universe, things have always been different except with people with the same genetic make up, magically reappearing again and again and again...
So if you from ten minutes ago was magically murdered, you'd be fine?
The trouble is... at some point there must have been a point of divergence, even if it was way back at the creation of the universe(s) themselves... so, we are still left wondering, what creates a parallel 'mirror' duplicate of our universe at the same time as it creates our universe? And why would that divergence lead to a reality that is substantively different to our own, but also startlingly so similar in it's genetic make-up? Would it be as simple as somebody like Q unzipping his fly and pissing in the proto-matter? In which case, Picard was wrong and Q *is* God.
I guess a theory can be found, in that maybe the mirror universe was created at the big bang with a negative charge as opposed to a positive charge... and that each universe split at that point. But then, you wouldn't have the established Star Trek past being full of things like Khan Noonian Singh and the Nuclear Winter. One would assume that everything in the history of the positive universe would have been positive, and everything in the history of the negative universe would be negative.
And of course, Quantum Physics is a head-ache. Far from there being a single 'mirror universe', there are probably actually infinite iterations of the mirror universe, as many as there are inifinite iterations of our own, and the DS9 crew just lucked out in miraculously managing to get themselves stuck in the exact same quantum reality that Kirk visited all those years before. Unless, the positive and negative universes are inextricably linked together...
"Moi 'ead 'urts, mam."
Last edited:
Remember Lexx? They called our Universe The Dark Zone, a place of complete evil.
In that novel where TNG meets mirror TNG, regular Picard is reading Billy Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice from the Mirror Universe, and in it, after her impassioned speech about how you can take a pound of flesh but not an ounce of blood, the ruling was "#### that, somebody get a knife."
Picard's conclusion, after that, was like yours Lance, that there was just more evil in the Mirror Universe and that there always had been.
In that novel where TNG meets mirror TNG, regular Picard is reading Billy Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice from the Mirror Universe, and in it, after her impassioned speech about how you can take a pound of flesh but not an ounce of blood, the ruling was "#### that, somebody get a knife."
Picard's conclusion, after that, was like yours Lance, that there was just more evil in the Mirror Universe and that there always had been.
Well, it would still be the death of someone very close to me but better him than me.
Let's say you and your other you were trapped in a room with the certainty that only one of you can get out of there alive, wouldn't you prefer that it would be you?
Well it all depends if I'm still connected to me.
The older me could have been trapped in that situation already with the older me when he was the younger me.
Happens all the time.
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTO0ogdNMdY[/yt]
(17 minutes, but hilarious.)
The older me could have been trapped in that situation already with the older me when he was the younger me.
Happens all the time.
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTO0ogdNMdY[/yt]
(17 minutes, but hilarious.)
I am not talking about paradoxes. I am talking about you and another you from an earlier time being both freed from any "temporal contingency". We were talking about temporal duplicates, remember?
I think O'Brien's situation is a good example of a 'temporal duplicatation', given the short time frame in between O'Briens and how they interact with each other. Both O'Briens (just O'Brien?) seem/seems fine with the idea. It just takes the surviving O'Brien the concluding scene to get over it being uncomfortable.
Given the shit he's gone through in his career though, temporal replacement's really just a pebble in the pond.
Given the shit he's gone through in his career though, temporal replacement's really just a pebble in the pond.
O'Brien's situation is oddly similar to Kim's. The one that lives on is not the same one that was there initially. That one is dead.
BTW, the Earth moves much faster than that. He should have been hundreds of miles away, if not in outer space or somewhere inside the Earth itself. If we are to follow the logic of this little opus.
Just as an example: The Earth orbits the Sun at about twenty miles a second, if you go back in time say one minute you should land about 1200 miles from your point of origin.
No, I am thinking about Deadlock, Kim dies and then is replaced by his double from the other Voyager. The one that died is still dead though, same thing with O'Brien. ( Come to think of it, O'Brien even dies twice in that episode, nay three times!!!)
In Timeless it's the whole reality that is replaced by another one.
My assertion is that there is no such thing as temporal duplicates if there is only a single immutable timeline.
You from ten minutes ago is you from now.
(But that's not how Star Trek works.)
A great 20th century philosopher once said "I yam what I yam" which just about covers all my thoughts on the subject completely, and yet I continue...
They are connected, your future old self will not survive the death of his junior if we believe in the one set of rules above another for some arbitrary reason, but even if you factor in divergency and paradoxpfoofness you might as well...
Does it really matter where the timeline branches?
If two yous have a year each of individual history (because of a fork in time) you do not share, are you still the same person? Obviously not, but you're still people full lives behind you and in front of you, although in the Charmed universe, temporal dopplegangers eventually collapse into each other and the memories of their adventures conflate with their bodies, which is probably similar to the crazy shit that happened to Ashton Kutcher's brain in the Butterfly Effect, 20 new years of engrams digging their way through his gray matter right on top of everything thing else he's already got in a few seconds.
The word "duplication" has connotations.
To me at least it implies original vs. copy/copies.
There are after all only 6 real Mona Lisa's in the world, even if they all have "this is a fake" written in sharpee under the first layer of oils any fool with an X-Ray can see.
So yeah, in Star Trek, I BELIEVE (which is not necessarily the truth) that temporal duplicates are real persons who are all still the originals of themselves, who are not copies or dupicates. No one was duplicated, they all got pulled out of their mothers or what ever happens when real men are off playing golf, and lived an exemplary life of an individual no matter how many times that life has been closely mirrored across an infinite amount of Universes.
You from ten minutes ago is you from now.
(But that's not how Star Trek works.)
A great 20th century philosopher once said "I yam what I yam" which just about covers all my thoughts on the subject completely, and yet I continue...
They are connected, your future old self will not survive the death of his junior if we believe in the one set of rules above another for some arbitrary reason, but even if you factor in divergency and paradoxpfoofness you might as well...
Does it really matter where the timeline branches?
If two yous have a year each of individual history (because of a fork in time) you do not share, are you still the same person? Obviously not, but you're still people full lives behind you and in front of you, although in the Charmed universe, temporal dopplegangers eventually collapse into each other and the memories of their adventures conflate with their bodies, which is probably similar to the crazy shit that happened to Ashton Kutcher's brain in the Butterfly Effect, 20 new years of engrams digging their way through his gray matter right on top of everything thing else he's already got in a few seconds.
The word "duplication" has connotations.
To me at least it implies original vs. copy/copies.
There are after all only 6 real Mona Lisa's in the world, even if they all have "this is a fake" written in sharpee under the first layer of oils any fool with an X-Ray can see.
So yeah, in Star Trek, I BELIEVE (which is not necessarily the truth) that temporal duplicates are real persons who are all still the originals of themselves, who are not copies or dupicates. No one was duplicated, they all got pulled out of their mothers or what ever happens when real men are off playing golf, and lived an exemplary life of an individual no matter how many times that life has been closely mirrored across an infinite amount of Universes.
Good!
That's not how it works in nature, when a paramecium reproduces, it splits in two and each new paramecium gets one half of the original one, so neither is a complete original or a complete copy.
