Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Cous

Pages: [1]
1
My personal point of view about Marle's paradox is this :

The TTI is not absolute !

When an entity goes back through time in the past, he/she/it creates a new timeline in which there is inevitably a Time Bastard of himself/herself/itself in the future. This Time Bastard disappears when his/her/its age reaches the age the original version had when this one appeared in the past, in order to respect the convervation of energy in the universe.
The fact is that a same entity can't exist in two different points of the timeline at the same age !
BUT, at the same time, each age of this entity has to be reprensent at least once during the entire timeline ! This can be interpreted as another consequence of the conservation of energy.

This assumes the existence of a link between the original and the Time Bastard, as the two are here considered as a same entity.

Once could object to this that, if Marle creates a timeline in which her time bastard will never be born, it will be all the matter that composed her which will disappear in the future. Howerver, we can say that it's easier for the universe to "delete" the original in the past rather than to delete in the future all the scattered atoms of "Marle". This is for me a similarity with the principle of attraction forces. When I fall, even if the force I exerce on the Earth is identical to the one the Earth exerces on me, I'm easier to move, so it's me who moves toward the Earth and not the Earth that moves toward me.

I think things can work like this...

2
Time, Space, and Dimensions / Re: A little issue about Time Bastard
« on: August 07, 2009, 06:04:53 am »
I found another issue about Time Bastard in Chrono Trigger DS (although it's not really related to my previous question...).

Here it is :

In the Lost Sanctum, Crono first places a blue stone in the village in 65 000 000 BC.
After that, he goes in 600 AD to pick up the stone in this era and then goes back in 65 000 000 BC to have 2 stones. So here we agree to say that the stone from the prehistoric era is a Time Bastard, and the stone which comes from 600 AD is the original one. (It's like the blue vest and the blue plate for instance)

Then, Crono fuses the 2 stones to create a big stone ! Hum...well, ok. In this case, half of this big stone is a Time Bastard and should disappear in 65 000 600 years. Actually, the big stone should morph back in a simple blue stone....

But it's not the case !!!
Because after that, Crono leaves the big stone in 65 000 000 BC to pick it up then in 600 AD, when the sun charged it in power !

How could we explain that ??

3
Time, Space, and Dimensions / Re: About the "Lavos Pocket Dimension"
« on: August 06, 2009, 03:50:37 am »
What do you mean by it takes care of the Guardian paradox ??

The Guardian paradox is the question about Ayla's time travels and the result on Marle, right ?

4
Time, Space, and Dimensions / Re: Issue: Lavos pulls back Chronopolis
« on: August 06, 2009, 03:44:44 am »
Whoo !
Pretty impressive !

5
If Lavos ceases to exist in 12 000 BC, is that not a problem for Chronopolis to come to this era ??

6
Time, Space, and Dimensions / Re: A little issue about Time Bastard
« on: August 05, 2009, 06:59:47 am »
So if we follow the history of the original Crono, he would depart from his own era, and then he would arrive in a past which is not the past of the timeline he comes from.
He will arrive in a past which was created by another version of himself that he created by the fact he time travelled !!

This can lead to very strange and extremely complicated scenarios :o...........

7
Time, Space, and Dimensions / Re: About the "Lavos Pocket Dimension"
« on: August 02, 2009, 01:07:36 pm »
Well, thanks for the compliment  :D

8
Time, Space, and Dimensions / A little issue about Time Bastard
« on: August 02, 2009, 12:56:00 pm »
So, if I understood all well, Time Bastard and TTI theories say this :

Let's take Crono.
If Crono departs from 1000AD to go to 600AD, he creates a new timeline.
In this new timeline, a new version of himself, a Time Bastard, will grow up and will finally disappear when his personnal age will reach the age of the original Crono when this one traveled in the past.
Indeed, it's said in the Compendium that the disappearance of a Time Bastard is based on his/her/its personnal time (espacially for Kid's pendant).

Thanks to this, we can imagine a scenario in which a Time Bastard travels to the future.
In our example, let's say that Crono traveled from 1000AD to 600AD when he was 18. So that, his Time Bastard will live in the new timeline during 18 years before he fataly disappears. But it's not impossible that this Time Bastard, when he is only 16, travels through time as well !!

If he goes in the future : OK ! I will live here during 2 years and then disappear...
But now, what happens if this Time Bastard, before he dissapears, travels in the past and change history ?
Let's say that the Time Bastard of Crono, before his disappearance, travels to 300 AD !
What happens to him ?
And what happens to the original Crono supposed to arrive later in 600AD due to Time Traveler's Immunity ??

9
Time, Space, and Dimensions / Re: Issue: Lavos pulls back Chronopolis
« on: August 02, 2009, 08:59:04 am »
Pretty nice picture !  8)

Right, I'm ok with this

10
Time, Space, and Dimensions / Re: Issue: Lavos pulls back Chronopolis
« on: August 02, 2009, 08:42:00 am »
For my point of view, I would reverse the problem :

It's not really Lavos from 12000 BC who pulls Chronopolis back to this era, it's Chronopolis which, after the Time Crash was triggered, "lands" to this era due to the troubles in the space-time continuum Lavos did provoke here.
In the timeline in which Chronopolis exists in the future, Lavos previously created a kind of wormhole in the 12000 BC period after the new Ocean Palace incident. This wormhole will serve as a "landing point" for Chronopolis.

However, I wish to ask something.
In Chrono Cross, it's said that Chronopolis departed from 2400 AD to go 10 000 years in the past. So wouldn't the city arrive in 7600 BC rather than 12000 BC ??

11
Time, Space, and Dimensions / About the "Lavos Pocket Dimension"
« on: July 31, 2009, 02:58:34 pm »
First of all : Hi everybody !
I am new on this forum and I also have an other particularity : I am french ! So, don't be surprised if my english is not so well, because it may be. I apologize for this.

I discovered this website a few days ago, just after playing Chrono Cross for the first time (yes, the game actually was never released in Europe so it's not easy for us to play it...) and here I fell in love with the article "Principles of Time and Dimensional Travel" ! I am one of these who love that kind of reflection. I have always been one of the big fans of Chrono Trigger to.

So I'm currently still reading this amazing article (I have not finished yet), but I thought about an explanation of the problems raised in the article by the theory of the Lavos pocket dimension. Here is my theory :

Actually, Lavos would not be in a pocket dimension !
The fact that his shell is still broken in 12000 BC if Crono destroyed it previously in 1999 AD in the game is explained this way : when Lavos faces opponents, he sends them in 1999 AD to fight them here, where his power is maximum. It is possible because we know that Lavos can create time portals. However, the only moment where he doesn't do this is during the Ocean Palace incident. So that, it also explains why his shell is not broken at this moment, even if Crono broke it in 1999 AD earlier in the game.
But then, you would obviously ask me why Lavos can emulate the Guardian robot from the future. Well, the answer is quite simple actually. This robot (as probably the most big part of the robots) is created by men BEFORE 1999 AD ! (Crono will just fight him later in the future, where he still exists.) We can also observe that during the Ocean Palace incident, Lavos does not emulate the Guardian.
Finally, this theory also explains why, if we lose during fighting Lavos, the scene is always the same scene of 1999 AD (except when we lose during Ocean Palace incident, but here it's normal ^^). And it's an easier conception to.

Does it seduce you ?

Pages: [1]