SHARE:

Not what happenend happenend but what will happen will happen

ok for starters i used to be a big fan of the something big is gonna change idea but lately i have been starting to sway towards the whats happend happend idea i will explain.
so the losties are now stuck in the past but its not their past now isit its their present so hence the title its not what happenend but what is gonna happen. I read in someones theory a while ago (sorry cant remember who posted it, if its you please take credit) that they think the only reason the losties have been sent back is so the producers can show us first hand what happened in the dharma days otherwise what was the point of all the series so far if they are gonna change the past so none of it ever happened i think that would piss off a lot of viewers. I like this idea iand i think it is probaly true the incident WILL HAPPEN and we will see it first hand, the purge WILL HAPPEN everything thats happened will happen and end results will all lead to 2007 or whatever the year lock and sun is in now without anything changing.
But hold on people will be saying the change will happen after 2007 i no you cant change the past but you can change the future.
Well i dont beleve that either lets say im going to the pub on friday but i change my mind then go on saturday is that me changing the future no its just what is gonna happen happening. you cant change the future it will happen as it comes and another thought isnt my future gonna end being someone elses past and if you cant change the past how can i change the future.
Sorry i no im talking jibberish its hard to put it on paper
Ok as for the futer we already no that the survivers of flight 316’s future has partly been written we no that at some point in time a group of people will chase sawyer and co in the boat that will happen it happened so it it will and whatever else happens on the show will happen exactly how it should no change involved. people keep saying about corse correction but i dont beleve that i just think it happens how it does. When des kept saving charlie he wasnt changing the future it was just playing out how it was supposed to charlie was supposed to die when and how he did its in the past now what happened happend and before it all started it was the same what will happen will happen
now that dan is back on the island i think he will try to change the future the incident will happen then he will realise more than ever the truth then come clean to chang about the losties and the video will be made to warn the future d.i.
well thats it im sorry if it makes no sence to people i have tried my best to get the thoughts out of my head and on paper and yes i no my grammer and puncuation are terrible

Share with fellow Losties

Written by

Samson

I'm lost can someone please give me some directions

64 thoughts on “Not what happenend happenend but what will happen will happen

  1. while it obviously took you a great deal of thought on this one, i am gonna have to respectfully disagree with you. i dont think that the entire point of(whats gonna be 6 seasons) is just to show what happened with Dharma. it just makes little sense to me… no offense.

    one thing you speak of in this post is the fact that what happened to Charlie was always gonna happen to Charlie.and that Desmond didnt change anything about Charlies death and that you dont believe in course correction. but in fact, if we truly believe that Desmond could see the future,then Charlie was “supposed” to die numerous times before he actually did. therefor by Desmond saving him on those occasions, the course to Charlies imminent death had to be corrected a few times because Desmond was screwing it all up.in my personal opinion that is the very example of course correction.but good thoughts.

  2. I must admit – sorry AES and dabsi – that I am leaning towards Whatever Happened, Happened (or will happen, will happen). The difference I have with the theory here is that I don’t think it is necessarily set in stone as to what is going to happen, because otherwise, why would Eloise have interfered with Desmond’s decision to buy the ring? She had to influence his decision as it was happening. She didn’t change the past, but rather influenced the future.
    There was also a comment somewhere about the major incidents in time being unchangeable, but minor things being able to be influenced. This is also something that resonates as very likely because of Des’ encounter with Eloise. Either way, he gets on the island, whether or not he breaks Penny’s heart. Even if they’d gotten married, he would have gotten a boat and sailed around the world to gain his father-in-law’s approval.

  3. I think some things can change, otherwise how do you explain the changing picture frames in Confirmed Dead. At the very least Desmond can change things in his time jumping. This may very well result in course correction, but I do believe he is “miraculously unique”.

  4. i dont think season 6 will be dharma anymore… and the whole six seasons are not about dharma, just this one. its part of the incomplete story we have in front of us.

    and actually eloise sort of benipulated desmond. after convincing him to not marry penny, he realizes maybe he can change things when he gets hit with the paddle instead of the bartender.

    he wakes up on the island with flashes and since he failed before (cowardice?) now tries to change charlies future. however, doing this leads to charlie allowing himself to die so the frieghter people to come, causing the time travel, causing the past to occur the way we are seeing it now (and always was).

  5. Also I think the writers are going to shake things up by giving us alternative ways of thinking about what we already know happened in the past. For instance, the purge may look very different from a different point of view. There is a lot of wiggle room.

  6. What I’m trying to say is yes some things can be changed but they are not really change because that is what was always supposed to happen, yes I no the pictures changed but maybe they werealways meant to and yes I no hawking tried to change des’s mind but maybe that was always meant to happen he was always meant to live that bit of his life twice

  7. either way you look at it, if you “influence” the future, or change a “small” detail, its all the same thing.whos to say what is a minor or major part of the past or future?something minor my lead to something major.if i walk down the street and find a dollar, although it may seem like a very minor part of my life, what if i take that dollar and go buy a lottery ticket and win 100 million dollars.my point is this, minor or major, an event is an event, and if one is changeable, then everything is changeable.anything you do, and i mean anything,affects something else.

  8. yes. IF you win the lottery. but according to the course correction theory…. the dollar would blow away. or be counterfeit… or ud lose the lottery ticket. it wasnt supposed to happen. THAT is the difference between minor and major. winning a million dollars would change ur life. finding a dollar wouldnt.

    i dont believe in changes though

  9. I don’t think you can say something changed because it was always supposed to. That’s breaking the rules.

    Juletslover, you are very correct. However, the writers can invent this thing called course correction, because this is after all fiction.

  10. I guess I’m saying that there are certain things that aren’t allowed to change. They will not change. The Universe or whatever won’t let it. We get this straight from Elli talking to Des. The whole course correction thing.
    Just like the bus hit Juliet’s boss. That was the universe influencing her future, not anyone changing the past. She was meant to be on the island. She got on the island. No changing it. The minor details in that even, such as how her boss got out of her way, don’t matter. What matters is that she gets on the island.

  11. Who decides what is major or minor? Some magical fairy?

    Both “Whatever happened, happened” and “Course Correction”, which are two different things, are none the less both intellectually absurd.

    But like I said before, this is fiction. So bring on the absurdity!

  12. But maybe that is the rule it always happens how it should and what people see as change isn’t really change at all just what will happen happening

  13. Well … I think it has to do with the forces of electromagnetism being “fate” or what have you. The balance of the universe is due to the forces of electromagnetic energy resonating from certain hot spots, the island being the main one. So if the electromagnetic forces cause things to occur (Thorn, that’s for you!), then that is what decides which major things will upset the magnetic polarity. Hence the major things can be changed and the minor things don’t matter. See my theory The End of the Beginning if you want to know where I am coming from here.
    This may be the craziest thing i’ve written, btw. I invite you to rip it to shreds.

  14. Samson, by that logic. Anything can be changed, as long as its supposed to happen. So if Miles suddenly changes into Charlotte, just like the picture frames, then thats just the way it is. It was supposed to happen.

  15. Samson, I see what you’re saying. But we do see Des mess with time on little incidents. Such as the bartender not getting hit. But maybe his flashes weren’t really flashes, but just someone/thing influencing him to make a choice that he always made, as you said.

  16. No what I’m saying is what people may see as change isn’t really change at all and yes if miles is supposed to turn into charlotte then we very well may see it on the show

  17. lost #s, anything goes on this show, as we know. Moving a whole island sounded absurd, too. It is all in the way you see/say it. The writers will find a way to get away with whatever theory they decide rules the world of Lost.

  18. ok. if you know particle physics (stay with me ill try to make it simple) you know that all particles (which everything is comprised of) are already in motion.

    given the assumption that we cannot “will” particles to change or move, which is not a crazy assumption since its on a microscopic scale, then these particles are moving the way they are now based on previous movements and interactions with other particles.

    and the way they move now determines how they will move/interact in the future. this is a form of determinism.

    read determinism in wiki, its sort of related. also logical determinism based on the problem of future contingents is cool. its all about where you are looking from

  19. I no it’s easy for me to say well that happened because it was always meant to but what I’m trying to get across near the end of my theory is how can you change the future if it happens yet if you think you have changed something you havnt it is just happening how it is supposed to

  20. Samson, I have spoken a lot on my ideas about change, and it hasn’t been without a lot of criticism and debate, I might add.

    Daniel Faraday did not tell the truth, for whatever reason. I am not suggesting he deliberately lied about it, he simply could have been mistaken, as he has been with some of his past experiments.

    I am convinced that we will learn more about this, in future.

    Logically speaking, if anything changes, however remotely minor, it can effect the outcome of a situation.

    I believe both elements have truth to them, but would be hesitant to say that change has no bearing or effect on the final outcome of a situation.

    Throw in Desmond Hume, who is the ‘Variable’, and that can create a different outcome. Desmond definitely changed when and how Charlie would die.

    There would be no point to the entire season, if this were not true.

    This topic was meant for debate, and the writers included in an episode with Miles and Hurley discussing it.

    We have to believe that both elements have an ‘air of truth’ to them.

    Now, highbrow can come along and tear apart my thoughts!

  21. eko – thank you for entering determinism into the debate! There is much debate even on what determinism is, as some reconcile it to mean there is no agency or free will, and others reconcile free will and fatalism into determinism:

    It is a popular misconception that determinism necessarily entails that humanity or individual humans have no influence on the future and its events (a position known as fatalism); however, determinists believe that the level to which human beings have influence over their future is itself dependent on present and past events.

  22. that very description plays well here. Hence Benipulation. E.g. when Kate and Sawyer slept together in the cages. Ben set all of that up so Jack would do the surgery. Yet they had free will, so they could have changed what happened. But they didn’t. They were influenced and what happened, happened.

  23. I missed a lot because of work. Damnit. I still need to read through these comments.

    The “whatever happened, happened” part I definitely agree with. The “whatever will happen, will happen” part I’m not so sure of. If you mean just the stuff that will happen after 1977 but before 2007 then yes, I agree. That stuff will happen in whatever way it needs to happen for things to end up as they are in 2007 as seen by Sun, Ben and Frank. After 2007 is a different story.

    The future can be predicted or at least forecast based on the way things are going but it cannot be changed. The future is made as we go along. All you can do it make certain decisions based on the knowledge and experience you’ve accumulated over time.

    Think about the equation. The equation uses the numbers to predict the end of the world… an event that we obviously want to avoid. Unfortunately the numbers are just numbers so we can’t really relate those to specific choices or events. But if we reword it we can say “Catastrophic event _____ will happen ______ because of ______, ______ and ______.”. Each blank represents one of the numbers. What are the losties doing in the past? Are they there to change things? No, they cannot. What they are hopefully doing is learning through experience what exactly to fill in those blanks with (the meaning of the numbers) so when they get to that point later they’ll be properly equiped to make choices to change our path.

    Did I go a bit off topic? Sorry…

  24. As I said, I’m leaning … although I still hope to find a solution somewhere in the middle. haha.
    I do think that Kate and Sawyer – anyone on Lost – had/has the abilities to make different choices. But they didn’t/don’t. They do what they do, regardless of the little things that may change. Desmond getting hit instead of the bartender doesn’t matter. It doesn’t change the end. That is how I reconcile so far, that whatever happened, happened with there being an element of variable in the small things if and only if certain situations apply. Although I may change my mind. haha.

  25. ok… i understand the basic premise of what all of you are saying, but… does that mean that Whatever happened, happened is not at all reliant on “who” its happening to? Yes, by Desmond getting hit instead of the bartender it didnt change the end,but it did change “who” it happened to. So what all of you are saying is that anyone can step into any situation and live it as someone else did and that doesnt change anything? i have a hard time believing that to be the case. because if i was to relive a situation as someone else had lived it already, then that changes things… if its me and not the other person, then ultimately that persons life is changed, so whatever happened, didnt happen because it was me instead of the other person. am i making any sense or have i just convinced myself that i know what im talking about??? lol

  26. Thanks for all the posts i’ve missed the last few cos I had to tile me bathroom floor but I’m back now. Highbrow that is what I’ve been trying to say you can’t change the past but also you can’t the future because it hasn’t happenend yet so what will happen will happen so all in all nothing can be changed

  27. I have thought about this (whatever happened, happened), wrote theories about it, and commented about it countless times, but everytime I think about it or read a new theory about it I almost want to change my mind…

    But I still think change can occur. Time on Lost doesn’t even really fit into time as we all think of it (past, present future). In order for things to happen the way we have seen them happen time almost has to be one big bubble where everything is happening at once. One change or disturbance in the bubble sends out a shockwave of effect.

    It seems almost impossible that whatever happened happened (or whatever will happen will happen) to me all because of Desmond. In his conscience traveling escapades he interacts with people (Mrs Hawking, his army buddies) already having been in his own future. Time seems like it all one big mesh to me because if whatever happened happened how would Desmond be speaking of his future in his past, a future he could not have known. If you say he always knew his future things just don’t add up to me. All of the events after his first flash to the past would have completely changed.

    I’m rambling now, but basically I think that time in Lost is not linear, it is not a loop, and it is not a series of lines that interconnect at different points. It is one big mesh of everything that has, is, and will happen, and all of these things have, do, and will change with every time conscience jump or time jump that we have or will see.

  28. I just have one question for all of the people who subscribe to the ‘Whatever Happened, happened’ theory.

    When Desmond conscience travels, because of the Swan blowing up, and he encounters Ms. Hawking. What was the point of talking Desmond out of buying the ring?

    He was physically on ‘the island’, right? Therefore, anything Desmond did or didn’t do, would change nothing in the past, present or the future.

    So, why go through that entire exercise of convincing him that he doesn’t buy the ring? Apparently, it wouldn’t matter if we subscribe to your line of thought.

    Rather pointless, if you look at it from that perspective!

    Just a thought!

  29. Because he didn’t buy it. He didn’t buy it because Hawking talked him out of it. She didn’t have to but that’s what she did. It’s hard to explain but, why does anyone do anything? Just because, I guess.

  30. You have just put a thought onto my head their dabs when des wakes up after his little journey through time does he now have 2 seperate memorys of the same part of his life or does he just remember the second time around

  31. Thanks Samson, I am including a little trivia about Ms. Hawking from Lostpedia for you to consider;

    On the Season 3 DVD, Damon Lindelof describes Eloise as “some sort of temporal policeman in place to make sure that everybody who is supposed to get to the island, does.” He says this is related to the grand scale of Fate versus free will.

    highbrow, I think it’s time to call in kimberly, to ‘cool your jets’, a little! lol She’s pretty good at that!

  32. Dabs, your last comments are things I have thought about … and I see where you’re coming from. I still think they relate to both situations and a balance. Eloise ensures everyone does what they are supposed to because it can’t be changed. Why else would you need a Time Cop? If it could be changed, why would she need to influence anyone? They could just change the past.

  33. Samson, I am in the process of trying to work out what I believe Ms. Hawking is up to, and what her true significance and role is, in the story. It is a theory I am working on.

    mojo, like I have always stated to non-believers of change, and highbrow will verify this for you, that those who do not subscribe to change, cannot substantiate those beliefs with any clear cut evidence from the show, by presenting examples.

    People who do subscribe to the notion of change, do present facts and logic from the show.

    While, I do believe there are many different things going on in Lost, change is certainly one of them.

  34. lol Samson, doesn’t your name stem from Samson & Delilah?

    Don’t mind highbrow, aka The muscles from Brussels, he’s ‘all pumped up’ today, from my comment about his ‘broad shoulders’. lol

    Somebody needs to deflate him! lol

  35. But dabs arnt we seeing now that change is not happening when infact the losties are trying to change things with sayid shooting ben and jack not operateing does this not show that change cannot happen leading back to my what happened happens and what will happen will happen

  36. Samson, at present not too much is happening, but I believe we are about to see a ‘shift’ from this state.

    Keep an open mind, in terms of this.

  37. Years ago when I needed a screen name their was a pouch of Samson tobacco next to the computer that’s where my name comes from and doesn’t highbrow need to be wrong for once befor we deflate him lol

  38. Samson, here is another little tidbit for you to chew on.

    When Desmond has a time flash to the past, aboard ‘the freighter’, he contacts Penny , and asks her to be please at home Christmas Eve, because he will call her.

    Low and behold Penny is at home on that night to receive Desmond’s now famous phone call. It is because of this phone call and conversation, that Penny sets sail to find Desmond, and subsequently rescues the ’06’.

    Did Desmond change something? I think the answer to that would be yes.

  39. But nothing changed for penny this happens as it always did for her and when des settled back in present time nothing had changed he rang penny and she answers he didn’t ring her and no answer change the past then rang her so she did answer this was the first time he rang

  40. wow dabs, i cant believe you made such a blind sweeping statement as change people have evidence, and non changers dont. you must be blind.

    there has been no proof that anything has changed. we have never seen an event or time period happen twice, with two different outcomes or anything being different at all.

    you can’t prove no change happens unless there is no change shown. which is all i have seen.

  41. sorry about the tone. i didnt mean it when i wrote it. and i havent read all the comments since middle of today… so sorry if this was covered.

  42. ekolocation, the last time I looked, I wasn’t blind!

    I thought I phrased my debate intelligently. With the theories I have posted on this subject, I have backed up my claims. Whether or not people subscribe to them, is their business.

    I realize this is a hotly debated subject, which always ends up in the same place. I don’t get angry, I debate with confidence.

    I commented on this post, reluctantly, as I knew somebody would eventually take offence. So, I will leave it here.

  43. I still think there’s more to the survivor’s than we think.
    What if before any of these guy’s got to the island all these events had already happened to a previous them.that is to say that there is’nt just one real time line but thousands back to back.If in some previous or original time slot, events that took place were what made the island’s stutus quo as we see it.Then maybe one or two people have already changed things one way or the other permanently during the first possible timeline..It could be that if this is the case then there probably won’t be a repeat of the original events taking place.
    It won’t matter what people do to try and change things because whatever they do they will just be reitterating attepmts at changing things any previous versions of them did.The fact that their doing what there doing means their just doing things the same way everyone who came before them did.
    Basically in the absolute beginning things were changed permanently.It could be something simple which stops people changing things now.For instance imagine what were seeing is just a poor second generation copy of an absolute time line that just can’t be changed because it already has been.here’s an example:lets say in the primary time line ,where time actually began,flight 8:15 crashed on the island just as we’ve seen.We could say things happened slightly differently.Let’s say for instance ethan saved rose from drowning in the sea,and goodwin saved bernard in the same way.This is just an example by the way.Then things played out in the same way that we’ve seen.It could be possible that these two (rose and bernard)have been going back to the day of the crash thousands of times,and each time their other selves drown because ethan and goodwin are dead and unable to save them.D o you see what i mean.Ethan and goodwin could’nt travel back because their dead.Even though they exist in the stories time line ,they just don’t get to save anyone.It could all be a matter of timing on their part. You see the original event can’t be copied because of all the changes that were made in the history of the island.It’s as if everything that happened in the very first time line worked out perfectly,but now because of all of the time perversions people are creating, things can’t possably turn out the same again……I’ve just used random names to explain my idea.

  44. I’m late for all the fun…

    In regard to the theory: I agree that our mysterious, Egyptian-laden, Smoke Monster infested, ageless Richard occupying, whisper filled jungle island show isn’t going to exactly be all about “what happened in the DHARMA days.” Sure, we are going to be getting a ton of backstory on WHY they were there and what they were trying to do, but not exactly all about them and how the Losties were woven into the past and future of DHARMA’s experiments.

    (That doesn’t mean that I rule out the emergence of DI3000 or whatever Highbrow named it.)

    I am still with Dabs on this one.

    The Miles/Hurley debate was no misplaced, “coincidental” conversation. The writers knew this is exactly where we would all be, choosing sides, black vs. white, fate vs. free will, etc.

    Why have Desmond Hume (and Eloise Hawking and Matthew Abaddon) in this show if there was not the possibility of change or perhaps, “redirecting” the desired outcome of events?

    It doesn’t mean that change has happened YET. (Although, I tend to think that it has.)

    It means that we are coming to the place where timelines are ‘off’ – for crying out loud we have people living their SECOND 1977s! So there has to be something CRAZY and illogical and science-fictiony like “change is possible” in where we are headed as the timelines potentially ‘realign’. Or, I guess Kate, Jack, Sawyer, Juliet, Jin, Miles, Hurley and Daniel all die somewhere in their ‘second round’ of 1977 after they did what they were there to do that they always did.

    That’s why I think the idea of change, although uncomfortable, is no less impossible than all the other crazy things that happen.

    And we wouldn’t have any real, necessary storyline ‘tension’ if we weren’t toying with it, right?

    Otherwise it would just be blah blah blah why does Kate have such huge shoulders and we never see her doing push-ups? blah blah blah why is Jack’s ego bigger than Hurley’s chin? blah blah blah is Juliet the devil? blah blah blah…

  45. Kim, push-ups work the pectorals, biceps and triceps much more than the deltoids. Another Lost mystery explained!

    Why does the Hurley/Miles conversation have to point to change? It simply serves to point out a major unsolved mystery and to make fun of us, the viewer/theorist/fanatic. Besides, Miles won that debate.

  46. Miles is as stupid/gullible as anyone that believes him. I love how everyone meets a character for 5 or 6 episodes and goes, “Miles is the smart one, he is correct, he caused the incident and is the key to Lost” We should definetly believe Miles, hes been on for ALMOST a season and judging by all the questions he asked upon first timetravelling, obviously knows exactly what is going on.
    Ill be keeping an eye on Miles…so that I wont miss his death by the end of the season, that will occure in a manner most likely from him being a (wrong) crybaby that will parish because he cannot let go of his daddy issues…
    Miles is a schmuck, and blind by his own ego, and does…have a much worse ‘power’ than Hurley…
    Cant wait for Miles to be dead so all Miles Club can stop posting pointless Miles remarks…
    Highbrow, please show US all some PROOF that CHANGE WONT OCCURE…Im curious, where did they SHOW that….hold on….

    I want to pick up the cricket bat that Desmond was hit with on his timetraveling journey into the past in which he changed what already happened…wouldnt want you to trip on that….

  47. I don’t think it has to be one way or the other. This show is all about combining science and faith, fate and free will, all kinds of religious and mythological beliefs, etc.
    Maybe it will boil down to things are not supposed to change, but in the end determination, just like Locke’s persistence, leads to some minor change ending in a butterfly effect larger change. Maybe the electromagnetic energy prevented change, and now that it has been tampered with, a change will occur. Maybe that is the incident.

    Just like there IS faith and science in this show, but you can argue forever they can not mutually exist, I think whatever happened happened and course correction are going to coexist on this show. Somehow.
    can’t we all just get along? 😉

  48. AES, I’m not getting into this again. I’m tired of listening to arguments based on arbitrarily discounting what one character says and arbitrarily elevating what another says. And I certainly don’t appreciate being called stupid.

  49. lol aes. no proof that change will not occur. we have no proof that anything will or will not occur. sigh.

    oh and did you scene with desmond seeing the bartender getting hit with the bat before? no you are simply TRUSTING desmond. but you cant trust miles. or faraday. thats odd

  50. @aes so do you think des has 2 seperate memorys of the same incident with the cricket bat or do you think his second time around replaced the first memory because if he has 2seperate memorys then I don’t beleve you can say he change anything because to him they are 2 seperate incidents in his time line. Does that make sence I’m having trouble trying to get in down on paper so other people will understand what I mean

  51. im with ya AES… the Desmond getting hit with the bat instead of the other guy, im pretty sure “is” proof of something being changed. thats been my point all along on this post. people keep insisting that nothing can be changed, when in fact we have seen things change. and you cant say that he didnt change anything because what he saw had not happened yet… because if you believe desmond is truly time traveling, or conscious traveling to the future, then yes, it does happen. and because it doesnt happen to the person it is supposed to happen to, then that in itself is something that changed. i got your back AES….

  52. Desmond is my anomoly every1 keeps bringing him up but I will find a way to prove it’s not change even if I can’t it’s still fun trying to my problem with desmond is he traveled back into his own body so it’s harder to prove and I have proved it in my head I’m just having trouble getting it out on paper

Leave a Reply