I did read your theory but perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my comments, as the various points seem to have escaped you. I am terribly sorry. Allow me to elaborate.
You are claiming that it is because of the pendant that Marle can be subject to the grandfather paradox.
No I'm not. Read my posts. I'm saying that Marle is the victim of a Time Crash, that the pendent negates.
I did read your post. By your theory the pendant is the acting agent, the element that allows an individual to either be subject to or free from TTI (via "negating" the Time Crash). Thus, it is
because of the pendant (as an item that can "negate" your proposed effects of a "time crash") that Marle can be subject to the grandfather paradox, by either having or not having it.
Your theory hangs on the power of the pendant. By your theory, she can only be free of TTI as an explanation of the paradox if she time crashed and Chrono didn't. That can only be if the pendant has the powers you are applying to it.
The problem with this is that the technology behind the time crash and Marle' disappearance are inherently different. It would be paramount to saying that adding the pendant to a horse could turn it into a space shuttle!
First of all the word your looking for is 'tantamount', and secondly, no it isn't. The pendent is a preventative of the Time Crash effect, not the cause of TTI.
Quite right, I did mean tantamount. Thank you. However, my analogy still stands; you are claiming that the presence or absence of the pendant can alter the nature of the time travel (the absence of it allowing TC, the presence of it negating it). This is quite similar to supposing that one could add something to a horse and turn it into a space shuttle. Normal time travel and time crash are fundamentally different occurrences; it is a very large leap to suppose that the pendant could be the deciding factor over which would occur. Therefore, your evidence needs to be correspondingly large.
This is only further underlined by the differences in technology; the Counter-Time experiment took decades to prepare with technology that is over 1000 years more advanced than Lucca had access to. It isn’t like similar machinery malfunctioned to create similar results; it is like saying that a horse malfunctioned and shot someone to the moon.
I'm going to assume that you didn't read my first post properly. Allow me to quote the relevant part:
And that is exactly why there is that old saying about the dangers of “assuming” things.
Anywho, you still didn't address how your theory, lacking the Frozen Flame which caused/fueled the real Time Crash, can still function.
Marle and Chrono didn't 'time-travel' perse, but rather, their space-time was swapped with space-time in 600 AD, similar to what the Time Crash did with the Sea of Eden. However, as opposed to the Sea of Eden, which includes an area of sea surrounding Chronopolis, Marle's displacement is equal to that of her body mass.
Now see, that just it. The Time Crash did not "swap" time/space from two time periods; read the Principles of Time and Dimensional Travel article on the Compendium. The Time Crash placed Chronopolis outside normal time, allowing Lavos to do the actual transporting into the past. At best, the Time Crash "swapped" the area around Chronopolis with an area outside of time. Thus, at best, your proposed time crash "swapped" the area comprising Marle's body with an area outside of time. In the real Time Crash, Lavos then pulled Chronopolis into the past; it was a two-step process. Thus, in your time crash, something would need to play a similar role to Lavos.
Additionally, looking back over the Time travel article to be sure I had read it right (specifically, “Time Crash revisited”), even assuming that everything happened exactly as you have proposed and Marle was swapped for the same space in 600 AD, " passing through [the Time Crash] boundary is exactly like time traveling through a Gate or in a vehicle. Time is Conserved and travelers become immune to timeline changes." Thus, as soon as Marle moved from the spot that was swapped, she should have become subject to TTI (as at that moment she would have then performed “normal” time travel). Or are you claiming that the swapped area (and thus the time crash boundary) moved with her? Or perhaps you are claiming that only time traveling with a fancy device like the pendant, gatekey, or epoch will actually grant TTI?
There are several possibilities to explain this, the most likely being that Marle had a convieniently present gate, which took her to 600 AD. The Sea of Eden didn't. Also, I'm not sure that even states that the Sea of Eden was lost 'outside time' in CC. It may have been travelling to any location, and still have been pulled to 12,000 BC. In this case Lavos was an intervention more than a direct cause.
I don't recall if Chronopolis was outside of time via CC canon either, but it is indicated so in the Principles of Time and Dimensional Travel article, thus my point. Perhaps the article is wrong in that regard.
But now your theory seems to be getting even more convoluted. Not only did your proposed Time Crash swap space between two specific times, it swapped space through a normal gate; is that what you are saying? If so, wouldn't the entire swapped space then be subject to TTI, since the entire reason you brought up Time Crash was for an alternate means of time travel that might not inherently include TTI as travel via gate includes TTI?
As Crono 99 pointed out, the time crash created a black dome in CC; Marle, however, went through a standard blue portal. Thus, even the physical appearance of the two circumstances appears to not be the same.
I refuted this back in my reply to Crono 99 post.
No, you addressed this in your reply to Crono 99 by speculating a possible answer; you did not refute. If you had refuted it, I wouldn't have brought it up. The Epoch notably does not use gates to travel through time, which is why it can travel through time from any spatial location to the same location in a different time period (gates seem to be tied to specific locations). Thus, lack of a blue portal for the Epoch is irrelevant.
As for the color of the gate being dependant on the gatekey, which is based off the telepod, you seemingly have forgotten that in CT we see a cut-scene with the Guru's in the Ocean Palace; lacking any telepod/gatekey/pendant, blue portals open and take the guru's to different times. Additionally, in the battle with Magus, despite not using the gatekey/telepod/pendant, a giant blue portal opens. Thus, the standard color of gates seems to be blue. The real Time Crash, being black, does not seem to be a standard gate (and indeed, this is born out by how it behaves). Marle’s “time crash” however is blue, thus indicating it is a normal gate and not really a time crash. But if the time crash happened through a normal gate anywho, as you speculated above, I suppose that would then also explain the color.
Once again you need to read my posts more carefully, Not once did I say she can ascertain the process merely by watching it: She herself said that she figured it out based on data from the telepod. But that data would have been useless without the pendent's reaction. It was this reaction that Lucca used to create teh Gate Key. Since that's the nly way she could of.
Actually, I read your posts with all due care.
I never claimed that Lucca could “ascertain the process merely by watching it,” nor did I claim that you claimed this. Yes, she used data from the telepod… a device that was not meant to detect, measure, understand, manipulate, or even notice temporal disturbances. Therefore, any reading that she did gain from the telepod would have told her nothing about what the portal was, just how the telepod (what the readings would have been “reading”) interacted with it. Think of it like a black hole; Lucca knew what it was by observing how something else interacted with it but she would have not had a single reading about the portal itself, or of the pendant, or of the pendant's interactions with the portal. Thus, deduction (well, induction really). I am sorry that this meaning was not clear; I will try to be blunt in the future.
It still remains that it is incredibly unlikely that Lucca could duplicate the special Time Crash negating properties that you are ascribing to the pendant based on what she saw and what she deduced (from the data).
Furthermore, the pendant is made from dreamstone, the gatekey is not. The pendant needed the telepod reaction to cause the gate to open, the key can open it on its own. These two objects are different in almost every regard.
This isn't even a refutation. I never said they were the same. What's your point?
Well of course it isn't a refutation; I am not refuting your theory, I am pointing out the various problems with it that I see. If such problems can be addressed, then there is no reason not to keep your theory. If, however, such problems cannot be addressed (and so far they have not been), then yes, your theory will have been refuted.
And yes, you never said that the two were the same; however, you did essentially claim that they were similar:
Concidering that Lucca' Gate Key was probably based on whatever readings came from the Telepod as a result of the Telepod/Pendent reaction, she would still gain TTI.
Two objects, if similar, can be expected to behave in a similar manner. Two objects, if dissimilar, can be expected to behave in a dissimilar manner. If the pendant and gatekey were similar, they could be expected to behave in a similar manner. They are dissimilar, so they can be expected to behave in a dissimilar manner. Thus, unless indicated otherwise, it is more reasonable to conclude that the gatekey would not allow Lucca to "still gain TTI" if gaining TTI is based on a property of the pendant.
I heard you the first time. Thanks for the english lesson, but a theory is just something thats theoretical. It has nothing to do with past, present or future. Scientists theorise about past events all the time. But yes, this theory is also an explaination like most theories of the past are.
Oh good, I would hate to think you were deaf. And yes, by definition a theory is just something that is theoretical, just as a democracy is democratic, computers can compute, woodchucks chuck, and so forth. That isn’t much of a definition, however.
Scientists do not theorize, they hypothesize; it is the scientific method. They observe a natural phenomenon, create an explanation of what they think is causing this (a hypothesis), they then run an experiment, rework their hypothesis based on the outcomes of that experiment, and retest. Eventually, if a hypothesis is confirmed enough times through repeated experimentation, it can be considered a theory (science, of course, has no facts though theories are often as good as).
For past occurrences, scientists find an example of a phenomenon, hypothesize about it, and test it by looking at other examples.
The Marle Paradox is such a phenomenon. You haven't created a valid hypothesis because there is no way for it to be tested in another example. To be fair, part of what makes the Marle Paradox so annoying is that it is unique in the games, thus any "theory" explaining it can't be easily tested. But your "theory" is so tailored to a specific situation that even imagining a legitimate way to test for it is nearly impossible.
