Year of Hell time ship vs the empire

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-04 11:15am

Darth Servo wrote:This is precisely WHY the parallel time line theory works better. What happened to those time lines in your theory? Vanish into thin air apparently.

Well, yes. That's why time changes. It's a bit subjective.

Why does lack of memory mean it can't just be delusion of character? Do you remember all of your dreams in real life? If at least one person remembers it, then there is that ONE piece of evidence that it exists. If NO ONE remembers it and their records contain no mention of it, then there is ZERO evidence supporting it.

Get it yet? One is greater than zero. "Parallels" has infinity times more evidence of its actual occurance than "Year of Hell" does.

Fan memory is NOT evidence (in this particular case) since we don't exist in that universe. The fans also remember the events of "Parallels" so claiming "fan memory" for "Year of Hell" doesn't solve your problem. The fans also remember the events "Shades of Grey". That doesn't change the fact that we were seeing nothing but Riker's memories. IOW, a mental image of something that was NOT happening at the time, IOW, the same kind of thing we would be viewing if we were viewing a character's dream/delusion. The fans also remember seeing all the events of "Frame of Mind" but that doesn't change the fact that we WERE viewing Riker's delusion.

This opens a huge can of worms. What with the holodeck and Q and various mindscape episodes, how can we be sure anything is real? If we see something presented as real, it's probably real. If we see it presented as a delusion, it's probably a delusion. If it's ambiguous, ("Tapestry", "All Good Things...") we don't really know either way.

Off topic, Riker seems like quite a delusional character, almost as bad as Barkley.

Heh. There is always a character to whom all the really messed-up shit keeps happening. In TOS it was Kirk (split in two, changed bodies w/a woman, etc.) In TNG Riker (many many confusing unreality episodes). In DS9 it was O'Brien. And in VOY it was Harry Kim (until they forgot about him in season 4).

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2003-02-04 11:15am

Eframepilot wrote:Also, where did the time travelers come from in the subsequent timelines? Consider. The first time traveler ("1") goes back in time and kills his granddad. He is now in a new timeline. In the new timeline, another traveler ("2") also goes back and kills his grandfather.. He is now in a third timeline. BUT! In the third timeline, there is now a second version of time traveler 1. Which timeline did he arrive from? He does not have any point of origin. Is this another paradox? And how do the timelines keep duplicating themselves?

What a load of bullshit. Mike's theore never required time traveler "2" to time jump when traveler "1" does. We don't need another traveler "1" to jump from time line "2" into line "3". Don't resort to such ovbious strawman attacks that any third party like myself can pick it out.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-02-04 11:18am

...Except that even in the show nothing can be protected from changes in the timeline. The closest is the Kenim timeship, but they could still observe the situation and the new timelines. The Future Feds never have a chance.

Of course, you're ignoring everything said to you, Eframe. You complain about parallel universes being the same until affected by a time traveller, proving you're more stupid than you look, because that's been addressed. They don't exist until an event pushes them apart, generating a new timeline.

You make up magical immunity to the Cosmic Censure, even when we see it isn't that way...(Future's End, anyone?)

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2003-02-04 11:22am

Eframepilot wrote:
Darth Servo wrote:This is precisely WHY the parallel time line theory works better. What happened to those time lines in your theory? Vanish into thin air apparently.
Well, yes. That's why time changes. It's a bit subjective.

So you admit your theory is subjective. Mike's is objective. Concession accepted.

This opens a huge can of worms. What with the holodeck and Q and various mindscape episodes, how can we be sure anything is real? If we see something presented as real, it's probably real. If we see it presented as a delusion, it's probably a delusion. If it's ambiguous, ("Tapestry", "All Good Things...") we don't really know either way.

Like you said, "All Good Things" was ambiguous so you can't say with any certainty that it was a delusion. Concession accepted.

"Year of Hell" was presented with ZERO supporting evidence that the whole incident ever actually occured. Either you erase an entire universe or it was a delusion. The delusion theory is FAR simpler.

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-04 12:32pm

SirNitram wrote:...Except that even in the show nothing can be protected from changes in the timeline. The closest is the Kenim timeship, but they could still observe the situation and the new timelines. The Future Feds never have a chance.

There's a gazillion things that are said to be protected from changes. Kirk in "COTEOF", the Defiant in "Past Tense", the Future Feds in "Relativity", etc. Of course in Mike's theory they are being shuffled into new timelines.

Of course, you're ignoring everything said to you, Eframe. You complain about parallel universes being the same until affected by a time traveller, proving you're more stupid than you look, because that's been addressed. They don't exist until an event pushes them apart, generating a new timeline.

Sorry, it wasn't quite clear before whether the universes already existed or only came into existence because of time travel in the theory. Metaphysics is a bitch.

You make up magical immunity to the Cosmic Censure, even when we see it isn't that way...(Future's End, anyone?)

Pardon? I don't think I've heard of the Cosmic Censure. Is it related to the concept of cosmic censorship, i.e. "there is no such thing as a naked singularity"?

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-04 12:38pm

Darth Servo wrote:So you admit your theory is subjective. Mike's is objective. Concession accepted.

No, it's a bit subjective whether it is more plausible to have timelines generating for unknown reason or vanishing for unknown reason. Both violate conservation of energy on an incredible scale.

"Year of Hell" was presented with ZERO supporting evidence that the whole incident ever actually occured. Either you erase an entire universe or it was a delusion. The delusion theory is FAR simpler.

Either you accept a mysterious all-penetrating energy field in everything or all of Star Wars is a delusion. The delusion theory is FAR simpler.

Who decides what is "simpler"? Dammit, why do you insist that it was a delusion? Because it didn't make sense? What DOES make sense in sci-fi? You're selectively enforcing suspension of disbelief!

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-02-04 01:03pm

Eframepilot wrote:
SirNitram wrote:...Except that even in the show nothing can be protected from changes in the timeline. The closest is the Kenim timeship, but they could still observe the situation and the new timelines. The Future Feds never have a chance.
There's a gazillion things that are said to be protected from changes. Kirk in "COTEOF", the Defiant in "Past Tense", the Future Feds in "Relativity", etc. Of course in Mike's theory they are being shuffled into new timelines.

Except every time we actually look at them we see that's an out and out lie. They can detect the changes and are influenced by them(Voyager supposedly has temporal shielding, but signals sent back through time reach them, etc). Instead we are told, by a Future Fed, that timelines exist and he has no memory of one set of them(Future's End, which cripples your sad argument).

Of course, you're ignoring everything said to you, Eframe. You complain about parallel universes being the same until affected by a time traveller, proving you're more stupid than you look, because that's been addressed. They don't exist until an event pushes them apart, generating a new timeline.
Sorry, it wasn't quite clear before whether the universes already existed or only came into existence because of time travel in the theory. Metaphysics is a bitch.

Nothing metaphysical about it. Basic temporal physics, explained in this thread, ignored by you in your stupidity.

You make up magical immunity to the Cosmic Censure, even when we see it isn't that way...(Future's End, anyone?)
Pardon? I don't think I've heard of the Cosmic Censure. Is it related to the concept of cosmic censorship, i.e. "there is no such thing as a naked singularity"?

No, moronboy, it's one of the theories about avoiding paradoxs, put forth by Hawking. Again, your entire argument hinges on a misinterpretation of multiple timelines theory as it applies to Trek, so I suggest you bow out with some dignity.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2003-02-04 03:11pm

Eframepilot wrote:
"Year of Hell" was presented with ZERO supporting evidence that the whole incident ever actually occured. Either you erase an entire universe or it was a delusion. The delusion theory is FAR simpler.
Either you accept a mysterious all-penetrating energy field in everything or all of Star Wars is a delusion. The delusion theory is FAR simpler.

The existance of the force in SW can be confirmed through confirmed observation that is not suspect to all the problems and paradoxes that time travel requires. Its precise mechanism is unknown but that does not negate our observations. The Time ship OTOH is on extremely shaky ground right from the start since as it turns out at the end of the episode, it never existed in the first place.

Who decides what is "simpler"? Dammit, why do you insist that it was a delusion?

Because there was no record of it at the end of the episode.

Because Voyager had to divert around a comet to enter Krenim (sp?) space in the first place. How far would that take a ship off course. A few thousand km TOPS, not light years.

Because erasing that comet was said to erase several other civilizations IIRC. A single ball of ice can't possibly cause the creation of life on multiple worlds.

The delusion theory is the only one that fits ALL the facts.

Because it didn't make sense? What DOES make sense in sci-fi? You're selectively enforcing suspension of disbelief!

As DW has said otherplaces, suspension of disbelief means we treat observations as if they were real. It does NOT mean we treat character dialogue as if its infalliable. And when the observations are highly suspect of being inaccurate or a delusion or altered, we treat them as much less reliable.

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-04 07:04pm

Darth Servo wrote:As DW has said otherplaces, suspension of disbelief means we treat observations as if they were real. It does NOT mean we treat character dialogue as if its infalliable. And when the observations are highly suspect of being inaccurate or a delusion or altered, we treat them as much less reliable.

Darth Wong's theory at least explains the weapon ship's actions and our observations. You write them off as a delusion. But the judgement of what is truly illogical and/or impossible in a fictional medium is very subjective. You could also dismiss Q as a delusion, or at least a master of illusion. Different people will find different things too extreme for suspension of disbelief. While no lasting effects of the weapon ship exist, its "erasure" is consistent with both theories of its operation - it would be more correct to say that no evidence of its existence remains in the final timeline. But evidence that it existed in previous timelines is clearly visible, and there are no characters presented as hallucinatory to attribute this delusion to.

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-04 07:22pm

SirNitram wrote: Except every time we actually look at them we see that's an out and out lie. They can detect the changes and are influenced by them(Voyager supposedly has temporal shielding, but signals sent back through time reach them, etc). Instead we are told, by a Future Fed, that timelines exist and he has no memory of one set of them(Future's End, which cripples your sad argument).

Captain Braxton words were, "I have no memory of that timeline." Which would be the case in either theory, since he was from a final timeline without his trip to the past. However there is an older Braxton left in 1996 whom we see in "Relativity". The Future Feds claim to have the ability to reintegrate temporal doubles of people. Obviously older Braxton and ignorant Braxton were merged by this process (or, if you reject it as ridiculous, they lied about it and killed younger Braxton).

Nothing metaphysical about it. Basic temporal physics, explained in this thread, ignored by you in your stupidity.

"Basic temporal physics"? You do realize that no such subject exists in the real world, and that any discussion of the fictional subject twists the English language in ways it was never meant to be used. Besides, the concept that entire universes can come into being due to time travel violates conservation of energy on an unimaginable scale, but the idea that they have always existed does not.

No, moronboy, it's one of the theories about avoiding paradoxs, put forth by Hawking. Again, your entire argument hinges on a misinterpretation of multiple timelines theory as it applies to Trek, so I suggest you bow out with some dignity.

What is the exact description of the Cosmic Censure and how does it apply to "Future's End"? I have seen a couple anti-time travel arguments made by Hawking (bolt of radiation in wormholes, laws of physics prevent violation of causality). I have said that I don't expect anyone to be convinced by my argument. I'm just trying to explain it better so you can reject it for Darth Wong's reason ("it claims the impossible is possible").

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-04 07:28pm

Darth Servo: Here's an analysis that fits all the facts.

Darth Servo wrote:Because Voyager had to divert around a comet to enter Krenim (sp?) space in the first place. How far would that take a ship off course. A few thousand km TOPS, not light years.

Maybe Voyager changed the direction they were heading and continued in a straight line, contributing to a large change in course. Or, Chakotay's a babbling idiot.

Because erasing that comet was said to erase several other civilizations IIRC. A single ball of ice can't possibly cause the creation of life on multiple worlds.

Says Annorax. How do you know he's not lying, or wrong?

And about the lack of records: there are no records left in the final timeline. Consistent with both explanations of the episode. And besides, we, the omniscient observers, have record of it.

The delusion theory is the only one that fits ALL the facts.

Not anymore.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-02-04 08:26pm

Eframepilot wrote:
SirNitram wrote: Except every time we actually look at them we see that's an out and out lie. They can detect the changes and are influenced by them(Voyager supposedly has temporal shielding, but signals sent back through time reach them, etc). Instead we are told, by a Future Fed, that timelines exist and he has no memory of one set of them(Future's End, which cripples your sad argument).
Captain Braxton words were, "I have no memory of that timeline." Which would be the case in either theory, since he was from a final timeline without his trip to the past. However there is an older Braxton left in 1996 whom we see in "Relativity". The Future Feds claim to have the ability to reintegrate temporal doubles of people. Obviously older Braxton and ignorant Braxton were merged by this process (or, if you reject it as ridiculous, they lied about it and killed younger Braxton).

Yet if he was immune to the changes of the timestream, he would remember it quite well(In fact, he'd still be on Earth). Worse still, he makes a flat out statement that such a timeline exists, weakening your case further.

Nothing metaphysical about it. Basic temporal physics, explained in this thread, ignored by you in your stupidity.
"Basic temporal physics"? You do realize that no such subject exists in the real world, and that any discussion of the fictional subject twists the English language in ways it was never meant to be used. Besides, the concept that entire universes can come into being due to time travel violates conservation of energy on an unimaginable scale, but the idea that they have always existed does not.

But such exists in Trek, and we're talking about Trek here, not RL. However, you seem intent to make the idea that we're talking about something fictional as it's some sort of crime..

CoE, I should note, is not violated by multiple universes. Because, of course, CoE applies to the energy of a universe. I've certainly never seen a use of it for multiple universes included, except when dealing with things in the Other Sci-Fi forum.

But you will continue to harp on this possible problem, despite the fact that we plainly see it is the fact in the ST universe(Multiverse?), because it's all you have against the facts.

No, moronboy, it's one of the theories about avoiding paradoxs, put forth by Hawking. Again, your entire argument hinges on a misinterpretation of multiple timelines theory as it applies to Trek, so I suggest you bow out with some dignity.
What is the exact description of the Cosmic Censure and how does it apply to "Future's End"? I have seen a couple anti-time travel arguments made by Hawking (bolt of radiation in wormholes, laws of physics prevent violation of causality). I have said that I don't expect anyone to be convinced by my argument. I'm just trying to explain it better so you can reject it for Darth Wong's reason ("it claims the impossible is possible").

The Cosmic Censure can be thought of as an extension of Fate, or more literally, the fact you're following a script. If you tried to shoot your grandfather, you'd trip and misfire, or he'd duck suddenly, or something. Some have interperated it as some sort of divine-like entity, others as the simple(And remarkably logical) idea that since it didn't happen, it can't be made to happen in a time period that's already past.

And of course no one will be convinced by your argument. It's up against mountains of facts from ST, it's basis is flimsy at best, and it's based off of claims about the Future Feds that were ripped up ages ago.

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-04 08:53pm

SirNitram wrote:Yet if he was immune to the changes of the timestream, he would remember it quite well(In fact, he'd still be on Earth). Worse still, he makes a flat out statement that such a timeline exists, weakening your case further.

But Braxton isn't immune. You're only immune if you have some special device or shield AND if you remember to turn it on. (The Future Feds order "shields up" before sending Seven back into the past. Logically they have similar temporal shields to Voyager.) Daniels in "Shockwave" forgot and his Earth "disappeared," but he was dropped into the new post-apocalyptic timeline.

And finally, Braxton believes that time can be altered and that previous timelines no longer exist, or else he and the Future Feds wouldn't worry about Janeway mucking around in time. So my interpretation of Braxton's words (that the timeline he has no memory of doesn't exist) is correct, whether or not Braxton is correct or not.

But such exists in Trek, and we're talking about Trek here, not RL. However, you seem intent to make the idea that we're talking about something fictional as it's some sort of crime..

CoE, I should note, is not violated by multiple universes. Because, of course, CoE applies to the energy of a universe. I've certainly never seen a use of it for multiple universes included, except when dealing with things in the Other Sci-Fi forum.

CoE isn't violated by the existence of other universes. But it is a central principle of science and held inviolable on this webpage. We can theorize a CoE of the entire multiverse, which WOULD be violated by the spontaneous generation of complete universes.

But you will continue to harp on this possible problem, despite the fact that we plainly see it is the fact in the ST universe(Multiverse?), because it's all you have against the facts.

What facts? In "Parallels" we see that other universes exist, not that they are spontaneously generated through some mysterious agency. The theory that they magically appear literally out of nowhere is speculation.

No, moronboy, it's one of the theories about avoiding paradoxs, put forth by Hawking. Again, your entire argument hinges on a misinterpretation of multiple timelines theory as it applies to Trek, so I suggest you bow out with some dignity.

The Cosmic Censure can be thought of as an extension of Fate, or more literally, the fact you're following a script. If you tried to shoot your grandfather, you'd trip and misfire, or he'd duck suddenly, or something. Some have interperated it as some sort of divine-like entity, others as the simple(And remarkably logical) idea that since it didn't happen, it can't be made to happen in a time period that's already past.

A good theory for the real world but obviously violated in Star Trek. How does this apply to "Future's End"? Voyager was first trapped in a predestination paradox and then broke out of it, in violation of Fate. They couldn't stop the explosion since it had already happened, but they did anyway.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-02-04 09:31pm

I'm sorry, I'm leaving this debate. Your bullshit in the first paragraph is way too close to what I heard GK spout fanatically when I challenged him on nav deflectors(Well, they must not be on if lasers are getting through. Prove me wrong.), and I don't need that cerebral hemmorage all over again. The existance, creation, and destruction of timelines are plainly observed in Trek, and the temporal shields are likewise bullshit(Since you whine about the realism of new universes being created, I would love to see you justify something that can root you in a universe that, once the changes are enacted, never existed.. Or worse, how such a shield can be effectively turned off, since any change in history must propagate forward past a time when your shield was up).

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2003-02-04 11:52pm

Eframepilot wrote:While no lasting effects of the weapon ship exist, its "erasure" is consistent with both theories of its operation - it would be more correct to say that no evidence of its existence remains in the final timeline.

Irrrelevant Nitpick.

But evidence that it existed in previous timelines is clearly visible,

And since according to YOUR theory, those time lines were erased, therefore according to YOUR theory, the thing never existed. If you want to try and use the ship in a debate, you MUST accept the multiple time line theory, which pretty much defeats the purpose of using the ship in the first place. If there is only one time line, the whole event has as much subastance as a giant delusion that was erased from the characters memory.

and there are no characters presented as hallucinatory to attribute this delusion to.

If there is no evidence of somethings existance, the most obvious explanation is halucination. Its the exact same thing we say to alien abduction stories. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to support them and you have zero evidence.

Eframepilot · Post by **Eframepilot** » 2003-02-05 03:19am

SirNitram wrote:I'm sorry, I'm leaving this debate. Your bullshit in the first paragraph is way too close to what I heard GK spout fanatically when I challenged him on nav deflectors(Well, they must not be on if lasers are getting through. Prove me wrong.), and I don't need that cerebral hemmorage all over again. The existance, creation, and destruction of timelines are plainly observed in Trek, and the temporal shields are likewise bullshit(Since you whine about the realism of new universes being created, I would love to see you justify something that can root you in a universe that, once the changes are enacted, never existed.. Or worse, how such a shield can be effectively turned off, since any change in history must propagate forward past a time when your shield was up).

I'm sorry to hear that. I see how you feel that time travel in Trek is utter bullshit, and my arguments really are too. I can't pretend to understand how a timeline can really be changed, let alone something be protected from it. Personally I think that the universe is super-determined, our future has "already happened", but because of uncertainty and incredible complexity it is still unknowable. Unfortunately in science fiction anything can happen, regardless of how much sense it makes.