Time loop theory Part 2
After reading through the many different theories regarding changing the past and future etc. ive tried to tie all these things together with my ideas.
19 thoughts on “Time loop theory Part 2”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Okay, pardon me while I play Devil’s Advocate, but that’s what I do. First, to me it does not seem like Jacob and Nemesis refer to a time loop at all. Just another instance of a group of people coming to the island. Maybe that’s what keeps happening again and again. Jacob keeps bringing people and they are yet to prove his point.
Secondly, to address Locke’s knowledge of the island, I think can be answered with Locke’s very close connection to MIB. Maybe he is even the reincarnate of MIB.
Third, they are in the 1970’s not 1980’s.
Also you seem to be imposing your personal beliefs as it implies to time travel. You have to be careful here, because only the writers rules are supposed to be followed. Until further notice, Whatever Happened, happened is the rule of the day.
Finally a question. If time is indeed looping, let’s say between 1821-2010. Is it also looping for the world at large? For the universe at large?
I_Am_Jacob, very nice interpretation! I think you have substantiated your theory with sufficient evidence that backs it up.
It is hard to argue the point of the conversation between Jacob and his friend. IMO, it clearly points to a ‘loop’.
Another interesting fact is, the symbolism of Jacob weaving at the opening of the episode. The symbolism of weaving can be likened to that of the ‘strings’ in a time-loop.
I love the ‘Cause and Effect’ episode from STNG, as I feel it does depict what we see happening in Lost.
If we subscribe to Faraday’s ‘Variables’, it is indicative that any small change in the original events make a difference in the overall outcome, and the ‘loop’ can be altered to achieve another outcome.
Choice and ‘free will’ are important elements.
Miles making the point to Hurley that this was ‘their’ present, is valid. While ‘the losties’ were living in Dharma between 1974 and 1977, the ’06’ were living on the outside world in ‘their present’ in current time.
I agree with what you say at the end of your theory. Although we don’t know how the writers want to finish their story, I suspect some of the elements you’ve mentioned will come into play.
Great theory!
One problem is that when Esau and Jacob are speaking about ‘it always ends the same’, they’re clearly reffering to a wooden boat. So the loop could be in the repetition of general principles but does not necessarily involve Jack and all the others.
While I get where you’re coming from, and can’t argue against there being significant evidence of a time-loop throughout the show, I think the specific points you’ve mentioned don’t really stand up to scrutiny.
For starters, The MIB/Jacob conversation doesn’t necessarily imply a time-loop…it implies a cycle or pattern. Much like many of the Losties continue to face the same challengs on the Island that they’ve faced off-island(Will Ana Lucia kill again? Will Sayid Torture again?), these themes and challenges are merely that, themes. The same ‘theme’ has been repeating on the Island for years…Eygptians come, Spaniards come, the military comes, Dharma comes, Rousseau’s expedition comes, The Losties come….and all of these groups end up at war. They get corrupted and tempted by MIB, their emotional shortcomings are exploited by him, they turn on one another(purge), and they destroy each other.
Now in 2008, however, the pattern is coming to an end.
Ajira Flight 316 has crashed and almost immediately the passengers were arguing about whether they should stay on the beach or head to the barracks…sound familiar? Cesar gives what is in spirit the same speech as Jack’s Live Together Die Alone speech. But then Cesar is abruptly shot. The cycle is broken. We are all witnesses to the ‘end’ of the vicious cycle, and it can only ‘end once’.
With regards to some of your other points, yes, there are times when John Locke seems to know where to go and what to do….but a great deal of the time Locke is completely aimless and makes mistake after mistake. Rather than a fleeting sense of deja vu, this implies an actual source of information…i.e. ‘I’ve done everything YOU told me to do!’ while pounding on the hatch to the Swan. Locke has been led and misled from episode 1, he is not following his own instincts…if anything Locke has proven that when left to his own devices, he’s more often than not a fool and a failure.
With Regards to Miles’ comment that it’s ‘their present’, and thus they can change the past because they’re in the past, there’s a slight loophole in your logic. They can change THEIR future, but not the Island’s. Their present is predicated on the Island’s past(which is now their present) being maintained. If the Island were to blow up, then how did they ever crash on it? They can’t do anything which changes events they’ve already experienced….sure, they can die, and their corpse could sit right next to them in the caves when they crash in 2004…no paradox there. But they can’t change a future which they’ve already been a part of. Sure, Hurley can have pizza or a hmaburger for lunch, he has a choice and the outcome has no relevance to the future. Thus Hurley can die….which was the point of Miles’ argument…it’s their present, so they still have to be careful and protect themselves.
So yes, there is a time loop as a result of the donkey-wheel and our Losties being thrown to 1974, but that loop has come to an end in 2008. We are now witnessing the ‘end’, as Jacob has carefully orchestrated over all these years.
Dabs, Jj23, risebysin, thanks for your thoughts. I think the great thing about Lost is all the ideas and theories people put down all have some possibility of happening.
risebysin, in response to your point about Miles and not being able to change the future i don’t think that this is necessarily true. Yes, we do see Desmond apparantly saving Charlie’s life over and over again but lets think about another comment from ST:TNG. When picard is taken by the Borg and Riker becomes captain, Guiynan comes to talk to Riker. she says that ‘when a man thinks he is going to die tomorrow, he will probably find some way to make it haappen’. Desmond kept telling charlie he would die so eventually charlie would find some way to make it happen, just like he did. according to Faraday and Desmond, the future has a way of course correcting so yes, you may ultimately die, but if you cheat death many times like Charlie did, the actions you take in the addional time period you get (like Charlie did) may have wider reaching implications and change the future in other ways.
say charlie had died trying to rescue claire, who would have pressed the button in the looking glass seeing as nobody else was a musician?
if, however, it is 100% true you can’t alter the future then i am more doubtful than before that juliet detonated the bomb. if the bomb had exploded, would the area be far to radioactive for the DI people to build a hatch down there? if the bomb exploded, the hatch wouldnt be built, if the bomb didnt explode, the hatch is built so to make sure the future doesn’t change, the hatch must be built.
Faraday make the point of saying ‘you cant change the constants but you can change the variables’. if you knew what the variables were, you could then change the future.
i just think there are equally strong arguments to being able and not being able to change the course of events that have already happened.
risebysin, what you say about a repetitive ‘cycle’ is true. A ‘cycle’ is like a wheel, with no beginning and no end. I believe this is what you are referring to in Jacob and his Nemesis’ conversation. The ‘loop’ is ‘the opening’ in the ‘cycle’ which alters it.
I wrote a theory entitled, ‘The Variables’, which may provide you with some insight. If you are so inclined, give it a read!
I disagre with the premise that detonating the bomb makes it impossible to ever build the hatch.
When the Losties found the hatch, Sayid comments to Jack that ‘the last time he heard of concrete being poured over everything like this was Chernobyl’.
With regards to Charlie’s death and course correction….if Charlie was supposed to die before the looking glass, why didn’t he? Destiny can only be what actually happens. If it doesn’t happen, it isn’t destiny…that’s the nature of destiny.
Also, your summary of events is inaccurate…Desmond didn’t tell Charlie he was going to die until Charlie confronted him, which was after several of Desmond’s visions nearly came to fruition….therefor it was not a self-fulfilling prophecy. Also, it’s important to note that none of Desmond’s visions have been proven to be accurate, they were merely ‘possible scenarios'(how about Claire, Charlie, & Aaron taking off in a Helicopter? Was Desmond lying? Was he wrong?)…since the scenarios NEVER actually happened, how likely were they?
I don’t see Charlie’s ‘extra time’ as ‘cheating death’…..the time between Desmond’s first vision and Charlie’s death is the only reality we can accept, Desmond’s visions were conditional of Desmond not reacting to the information, thus Charlie had only one possible death.
risebysin, you bring up the age old debate of Destiny vs Free Will. I can see what Season 6 has in store for us. lol
Personally, the belief in destiny IMO is, the belief that everything in life is pre-ordained somehow. This logic is flawed however, because as humans we make choices and exercise our free will in life.
If we were to subscribe that our lives are controlled only by destiny, that would make us all sheep, who blindly follow and subscribe to the notion that somebody else is in control of our lives.
If this were true, there would be no point in making any decisions in life or taking any action. We could all just sit back on the couch and let our ‘destiny’ find us!
The choices we make in life, determine the lessons we learn, and decide which path we will follow, given our experiences. In other words, it is about the ‘journey’.
Regardless of whether Desmond told Charlie about his visions or not, did not change the fact that Desmond, altered the time and manner in which Charlie died.
While Desmond could not change the fact that Charlie’s death was imminent and unavoidable, his choice regarding when and how, did make a difference. Charlie’s actions saved them, so Desmond made the right choice.
You can say this was destiny and already pre-ordained, but that is not how the Universe operates, IMO.
John Locke only believed in destiny. Perhaps, if John Locke exercised some of his own free will and made some actual choices along the way, he wouldn’t be dead right now!
Just a thought!
risebysin, at Chernobyl, concrete was poured over it to prevent the release of highly deadly radiation into the atmosphere. people on not allowed within so many miles radius of it anymore due to it being so lethal.
i cannot believe for one minute that if the bomb went off, people (the DI) could actually pour concrete over the pocket of e-magnetism and build quite a complex hatch while at the same time, tackling deadly radiation after only a few years prior to the detonation. it just doesn’t add up. that is the reason nuclear tests are done underground or on remote island because nothing lives there and nobody will go there for a long time.
are we as viewers meant to believe that the DI somehow built a hatch in an incredibly hostile, radioactive environment? i dont think so.
also, i agree with Dabs’ point about free will. it’s very hard to believe and accept that our actions have already been decided for us. who’s to say that the decisions that the losties made the first time round in the 70’s are exactly the same as the ones they have made in the 70’s time period we are watching? maybe first time round they listened to Miles about not detonating the bomb. i think that the bomb not being used is a more plausable scenario which would end in the hatch getting built but that might be just me.
there is a theory in physics that states every different choice we can make (eg. i will eat cereal or toast or nothing for breakfast tomorrow) is played out in what would be an infinate number of universes – highly unlikely but still possible. in this case any number of outcomes would arise because of my various actions.
maybe in S6, we may see what would happen if the bomb wasn’t used, IDK?
a quick point before i go, at the end of S5 when the pocket of EMR is breached everybody is leaving the island, i just wonder who was it that stayed to build all the hatches that we knew of in our time line of seasons 1-5?
IamJacob, nicely thought out theory, with some flaws. Risebysin, great rebuttal–very well written. A couple of questions:
How does Cesar’s being shot end the cycle?
If you can die in 1977, how can you be alive to crash in 2004 and sit beside your own corpse?? Wouldn’t that lead to a new time frame where you don’t exist?
Couldn’t the conflict regarding Destiny and Free Will be oversimplifying things? Why not a combination of the 2? For example, your ultimate Destiny can be achieved via many different paths. In the Charlie scenario, his ultimate destiny was to die on the island, after conquering his heroin habit, and sacrificing his selfish aims to that of Claire and Aaron. He actually accomplished his redemption and self-actualization before Desmond’s visions of his death. (The whole Looking Glass adventure actually led to another whole set of miserable events with the Others and the Freighter.)
Comment: Just because Miles said something doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true!
I welcome your comments!
Think of time itself as a character. It lives forever. When time reached circa 1841, the black rock came to the island. Then in 1954, here comes John Locke and company on the island. Then is 1973, time sees Sawyer, Juliet, etc on the island for the first time. Same for Jack, Kate, and Hurley in 1977.
You see, what we are watching is the first and only time around for 1977. At least according to whatever happens, happens.
Even in Daniels dying moment, he realized he had changed nothing.
Oh yeah, it doesn’t matter whether the bomb went off or not. Because even if it went off, it did not behave like an ordinary bomb.
“Also, it
imisscharlie, thanks, i know there are probably some flaws. im in the process of rewatching the season and have nearly finished 4 so my memory on 5 (with its thousands of events!) may be slightly lacking.
in answer to your question “If you can die in 1977, how can you be alive to crash in 2004 and sit beside your own corpse?? Wouldn
I_Am_Jacob, I like your explanation of how time runs differently on ‘the island’.
This is verified by ‘the payload’ Daniel fired, and there was a 31 minute difference in time to ‘the freighter’. Thus, the reason why the Doctor being killed on ‘the freighter’ and washing up on shore had a time variance.
In Achalli’s recent post ‘The Pendulum’s Business’ he speaks about how ‘the island’ may be responsible for time on the outside world. Perhaps, ‘the island’ is preventing something chaotic from happening on the outside world!
I_Am_Jacob, I don’t think you’re babbling. The time travel issue is tough to deal with. IMO the Island is basically out of phase with the rest of the world by the 31 minutes that Faraday figured out. As Dabs has mentioned I did a couple of posts where I explain my thoughts in better detail. ‘A Quick Little Island Theory’ would be a good place to start and then follow that up with ‘The Pendulum’s Business.’
Dabs, Achalli, thanks for that. i’ll definately check out these theories.
i do enjoy the fact then when someone posts an interesting theory, all the following comments usually develop other ideas from the original and could be theories in there own right!
anyway, as lost has now developed into a sci-fi series i feel it gives the writers more freedom on being able to explain the series of events. as long as it remains believable i think they are on to a winner. time travel and alternate times periods are always good subjects to tackle and i really think that during some point in season 6, we will be shown what may have happened if other events had happened that the ones we have seen.
another show that used the concept of alternate realities was Frasier. in one episode we are shown what would have happened when he did and didnt take a girl to a party. both timelines start the same, very different events happen in each but right at the end, they both end the same. just a thought which relates back to the fact that, enevitably, you can’t change the future, a prospect i’m not really a fan of but a possibilty all the same (this i believe is similar to what risebysin was saying above).
when you start dabbling in time travel, anything can happen!
I_Am_Jacob, I think you might be right about next season showing the other possibilities of what might have happened if things worked out differently.
There is a part of me, that thinks their choices may not bring about total resolution.
I also agree with the statement about time travel. Anything can happen, and we don’t know what the writers intentions are on how they will wrap it all up. That aside, they introduced so many aspects of time travel, it would be difficult for anyone to nail it down, accurately!
Ill caps this because it deserves being spread. The creators have to not only explain whats significant about Time/Island/Healing ect but they also have to come up with a WHY AND HOW!