Comments on: Theory of compossibility

By: miss_angelus

miss_angelus — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:00:10 +0000

Just to add to the “pasties” comment. I’m from London, and everytime I read it – I see the phonetic, “Pass-ties” like a cornish pasty – or multiple cornish pasties even. (Pastry filled with meat and veg) Took me a while to realise you meant “past-ies” lol – sorry *sheepishly realise I haven’t added to the discussion…my bad*

By: highbrow

highbrow — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:53:16 +0000

Yeah, it’s funny. My girlfriend likes to go out to dinner or movies or to see friends on the weekend… it

By: kimberly

kimberly — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:08:54 +0000

Highbrow…I don’t know if a “new timeline” would have to be created at every point in time. I will think about why. But come back and join in the discussions. Geez…what, do you have a life or something?

By: A.E.S.

A.E.S. — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:10:27 +0000

HIGHBROW!!!
Can you please read the ‘how many watches?’ theory…
please…my mind is breaking from it, for all the wrong reasons…

By: highbrow

highbrow — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:03:41 +0000

It’s been raining off and on all day here A.E.S. I hope Karen has her umbrella…

Kim, I think of that every time I type “pasties”. You can’t make me stop.

As for multiple timelines… If at every point in time a new timeline is formed for each possible decision that can be made at that time then, guess what… the timeline where Ben dies and the DI never gets purged already exists! Nobody has to do anything to bring it about! So in that case, changing the past is kind of pointless…

By: willis

willis — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:15:24 +0000

Another example covered by this theory is The Titanic. Theoretically, a person could travel to the Titanic and rescue certain passengers onto a lifeboat before it sinks.

If the person placed in the raft did not originally die when the Titanic sank, everything will continue and the survivor can go about his/her life. If the person originally died when it sank, that person would have a heart attack, stroke or something because they were supposed to die at that given time.

As Compossibility states, One CAN save a person from the Titanic because it is physically possible to put someone on a raft. However, One CANNOT do this because it is logically impossible to time travel and change the past and because that person dies at that given time in history.

This is significant for Michael, because if he did not originally die on the same day the freighter exploded, maybe he is still alive? Maybe this is why JIN is alive as well?

This theory may require multiple timelines, loops (or maybe both?) but my line of thinking is that Michael could not die until the date/time the freighter exploded or after because he originally did not die until after that date. That would also explain why Jin was on the deck of the freighter when it exploded, yet he floated safely to the island, seemingly unharmed.

As I remember, it was a huge explosion and Jin was standing only a few yards above the bomb. Yet he landed on a piece of wood and floated to the island without injury and without memory of what exactly happened.

Let me know what you think. Does this make sense?

By: willis

willis — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 20:56:47 +0000

Kimberly, I thought the same thing first time I saw ‘pasties.’ Reminds me of a case I read in law school/Constitutional Law on obscenity. Justices said obscenity isn’t something we can define, per se; but you, “Know it when you see it.”
Back on topic, I think this confirms time travellers cannot change the past. However, I believe Desmond(et al.?), through Faraday’s research and experiencing high levels of electro-magnetic forces, CAN change the past by sending information into the past and/or sending one’s consciousness into the past.

By: kimberly

kimberly — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 05:19:36 +0000

I really shouldn’t read and comment late at night when I’m ridiculously tired.

This really is a great discussion. I almost wish there was section that posts could go as reference points. I know that is somewhat the purpose of Lostpedia…but not really when it comes to theories and the foundations of certain theories.

By: kimberly

kimberly — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 05:17:58 +0000

Nice discussion here boys.

Just one point to make amidst all this good, on track thinking…

Highbrow: Please, don’t refer to the Losties/316ers/815ers/Freighter misfits/whoever as “Past-ies” without the hyphen as you did in an early comment …because without the hyphen it is “pasties” (as in ‘paste-eez’) and I completely was juvenile and cracking up for about 5 minutes…and then I had a hard time paying attention to all the smart things being said. I know, it’s my problem and all…but still. Wow…it was funny.

By: A.E.S.

A.E.S. — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 00:58:40 +0000

Right, someone…special…that the rules you, I and even highbrow have discussed, dont apply to.
What scares me, is going by by other theory…what if its Ben?