Oni2 talk:Truth Number Zero/Course Of Events: Difference between revisions

Oni2 talk:Truth Number Zero/Course Of Events (view source)

Revision as of 21:32, 10 June 2020

2,526 bytes added , 10 June 2020

→‎Wilderness Preserves: time travel for dummies

Geyser

Administrators

5,391

edits

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 :::::::Forward time travel (as in your case) doesn't have causality issues, and a number of sci-fi writers have gone that way (one-way time-travel only -- ever forward). Then again, we are already traveling "ever forward", albeit slowly, so fast-forward time-travel is really akin to "immaterial hibernation": jump into the Phase, freeze there, and then spring back. Alternatively, if there is a time-freezing "phase flavor", there may also be a time-accelerating one (jump into the Phase, hyperevolve there, and spring back -- as long as you survive the jumps, that can be convenient). --[[User:Geyser|geyser]] ([[User talk:Geyser|talk]]) 13:05, 10 June 2020 (CEST)
 ::::::::To be clear, my idea of the phase veil is that it's a dislocation, not a place. It either transports through time or space or dimensions (in the colloquial "from another dimension" sense of the word). So in the case where it's a time dislocation, it won't be one-way time-travel because anything that comes through the phase veil is being removed from the past. Hence you have a two-way cause-effect where (from the point of view of the past) the future is changing the present, meaning that the usual causality paradox is introduced. Creating a concept of a "Phase" that is a place, like the Phantom Zone of Superman comics, would indeed clear up that problem, or at least give the ''appearance'' of avoiding paradoxes, which is the more important thing. But as I said, my most recent idea was to reveal at the end that it's really just a space dislocation taking place after all — a sort of "the calls are coming from inside the house" twist that, done right, will be much creepier than the alternative takes on the Phase/phase veil. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] ([[User talk:Iritscen|talk]]) 16:11, 10 June 2020 (CEST)
+:::::::::I am not a specialist, but I'd say there are no causality paradoxes for one-way time travel ''as long as the initiative remains in the past'' (i.e., you can't "peek" into the destination and then change your mind and go back). Under those conditions, you can choose to launch things ''into'' the future, or to pull things ''from'' the future without any contradictions. Conversely, you cannot send things to the past or pull things from there (because of how it would affect your present). In the situation that you describe as a problem, i.e., a single "forward launch", things are removed from the past not as a "retroactive consequence" of how they're popping from the phase in the future, but as a ''direct'' consequence of them being pushed in (on the side where the initiative is). Causality-wise, the "past push" and the "future pop" are the same event (one doesn't happen without the other; it either succeeds or fails on both sides "simultaneously"), and the disappearance of the "past thing" does not introduce any ambiguity -- at any future date, up to the moment when it pops back into existence, the past thing is just registered as having disappeared at the moment of the "push" and that's it. For a series of "forward launches", as long as each launch is initiated on the past side and can't be canceled on the future side, the world that you "pop" in is fully determined by the series of past events, including all the "forward launches" (pushes) and "landings" (pops). If you add "backward pulls" it gets a bit more confusing, but still without any contradictions that I can see. So your distant-past "Diluvians" can send entities forward in time, they can follow-up with one-way commands to those entities, and they can even collect information (or samples) by yanking them from our present (their future). All without contradiction, and the only inconvenience is that they're working blindfolded. Future civilizations, however, can't push things into our present (their past), and can't "pull" from our time either. Hope this helped. --[[User:Geyser|geyser]] ([[User talk:Geyser|talk]]) 23:32, 10 June 2020 (CEST)
+:::::::::Point of convergence here -- for me, too, the Phase is something like a "limbo" region of spacetime, and we may never get to see the world(s) that lie "beyond" it (if any). (I'm not keen on having it called "veil", though, except as part of in-universe characterization. It's personal preference of course, but using a recurrent word from actual canon feels tidier somehow.)
 :::::::If it were up to me, I wouldn't keep much of those "[https://3dbrute.com/homunculus-loxodontus/ Waiters]" or their human/Daodan proxies, except for the notion that the Phase is tied to "Gaia", i.e., that you can't do phase tech in outer space. It would explain why Oni's sci-fi-powered civilization isn't actively colonizing Mars or the Moon, and it would keep the plot "Earth-centered" in a [[wp:Ring Around the Sun (novel)|Ring Around the Sun]] kind of way. --[[User:Geyser|geyser]] ([[User talk:Geyser|talk]]) 13:06, 10 June 2020 (CEST)
 ::::::::To me, it would be much more surprising if the world of Oni ''was'' doing anything advanced in space. Where do you think ''we'll'' be in 12 years? Even colonizing the moon? Doubtful (sadly). Oni's world doesn't feel a lot more advanced than ours except for their phase tech, and there's nothing in the canonical depiction of that technology which would aid in settling another world. I would expect Oni's world to be ''less'' advanced in matters of space than ours, seeing as they have some very time-consuming and expensive issues to deal with here on Earth. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] ([[User talk:Iritscen|talk]]) 16:11, 10 June 2020 (CEST)