The Official LOST Season Five *No Spoilers* Thread

[LuvBaloo]

I enjoyed last night's show, particularly the time travel discussion with Miles and Hurley. It wasn't a real exciting episode, but it was nice to get some answers.

It definitely looked like Aaron was being taken out of the store by the blonde lady. I agree with PP that Aaron will play into this some more.

I liked the scene at the end where Ben woke up and Locke was sitting there. It was nice to see Ben startled.

 

[harleyquinn]

I'm glad it's clicking for you, because I still don't buy this whatever happened, happened theory. First, we are trying to place logic on an idea that is still in the science fiction arena (Einstein be damned). But what drives me nuts is the concept that the Losties made Ben what he was. If you consider time in a Groundhog Day sort of way, where it is in a constant linear loop, there was a first time into that loop, when we hit 1977, that the Losties were not born yet, hence could not have gone back in time to influence Ben, so Ben does not become evil causing the set of circumstances to make them go back in the first place.

But you do understand it right? You just don't like it? I can understand that, but I think it's painfully obvious by now that they are sticking with the rules.

Miles even said something to the effect of life being about the sequence of the journey, not about changing things.

 

[1LuckyMom]

I'm glad it's clicking for you, because I still don't buy this whatever happened, happened theory. First, we are trying to place logic on an idea that is still in the science fiction arena (Einstein be damned). But what drives me nuts is the concept that the Losties made Ben what he was. If you consider time in a Groundhog Day sort of way, where it is in a constant linear loop, there was a first time into that loop, when we hit 1977, that the Losties were not born yet, hence could not have gone back in time to influence Ben, so Ben does not become evil causing the set of circumstances to make them go back in the first place.

Maybe it will help you to think of just the island in 1977 while the rest of the world is in the present. Just the people back on the island are revisiting the 1970s. Thus the events that happened will still happen and the visiting Losties can not change the outcome of events.

 

[Amy]

If you start, say, where time begins, and get to 1977, you have different ages from all the different losties and yes some weren't born yet. But that is irrelevant because they get to 2004 before traveling back to 1977. When they travel back to 1977 on the island, they are still their 2004 ages with all their life experiences. It just so happens that because they traveled to 1977, off the island 1977 is still happening just as it always did. The characters still age, still move forward in time. It just happens that they get tossed back to 1977. The events in this period are set, they cannot be changed.

GoodFairies - I understand what you're saying, because that's what I think, too. 1977 had to happen ONCE so the Losties could grow up into their adult selves and then travel back in time to 1977.

However, now I'm beginning to understand what everyone else is saying. First of all, you have to remember that in reality, time travel doesn't exist - it's pure science fiction. Whoever is writing the story, can make time travel however they want it. There's the Back to the Future theory of time travel, where you CAN change the past, even to the point where you might cease to exist if you do the wrong thing. (Where Marty starts to fade away in the movie, remember?)

And then there's the Lost theory of time travel, where they say that you CAN'T change the past; you might be able to change the circumstances (like Charlie was supposed to die, just when and how kept changing), but if someone is going to die, they're going to die (like Charlie), and if they're going to live, then they'll live (like Ben). And the Lost writers don't think that time is a straight line, it's more of a circle, so it doesn't progress from 1977 to 1978 to 1979, that if people from the future come back to the past, then that's always what happened.

I hope I explained it so you might understand it. I'm just beginning to understand it myself.

 

[gometros]

If you start, say, where time begins, and get to 1977, you have different ages from all the different losties and yes some weren't born yet. But that is irrelevant because they get to 2004 before traveling back to 1977. When they travel back to 1977 on the island, they are still their 2004 ages with all their life experiences. It just so happens that because they traveled to 1977, off the island 1977 is still happening just as it always did. The characters still age, still move forward in time. It just happens that they get tossed back to 1977. The events in this period are set, they cannot be changed.

You missed my point. I get it the part about tiem being linear in respect to the individual, such that the 2004 Losties are actually older in 1977 then they are in 2004. My problem is the part about the present (1977) influencing the future, when the present precedes the future. I subscribe to Einstein's theory that if you flew into space straight up and returned to Earth, you would come back in some future after all the people you know have died. The part I don't buy is the going backward bit. I have a problem with some future persons coming back into the past and then influencing what happens in their future. It's conflicting logic.

 

[gometros]

But you do understand it right? You just don't like it? I can understand that, but I think it's painfully obvious by now that they are sticking with the rules.

Miles even said something to the effect of life being about the sequence of the journey, not about changing things.

Whose rules? You talk about time travel like it's a scientific reality. It's not. It's fiction. You have to subscribe to the writer's interpretation of time travel and as I've stated, I don't buy into future events affecting the past which then influences those future events.

 

[gometros]

And if you subscribe to the theory that you can't change the past, that you may change the circumstances but the end result is always the same, then Miles was wrong. The conversation he had with Hurley did not necessarily have to happen the same way each time.

 

[debraW76]

Help me! Is this the same guy? Sorry - I don't know how to resize the images to make them the same size

 

[GoodFairies]

GoodFairies - I understand what you're saying, because that's what I think, too. 1977 had to happen ONCE so the Losties could grow up into their adult selves and then travel back in time to 1977.

However, now I'm beginning to understand what everyone else is saying. First of all, you have to remember that in reality, time travel doesn't exist - it's pure science fiction. Whoever is writing the story, can make time travel however they want it. There's the Back to the Future theory of time travel, where you CAN change the past, even to the point where you might cease to exist if you do the wrong thing. (Where Marty starts to fade away in the movie, remember?)

And then there's the Lost theory of time travel, where they say that you CAN'T change the past; you might be able to change the circumstances (like Charlie was supposed to die, just when and how kept changing), but if someone is going to die, they're going to die (like Charlie), and if they're going to live, then they'll live (like Ben). And the Lost writers don't think that time is a straight line, it's more of a circle, so it doesn't progress from 1977 to 1978 to 1979, that if people from the future come back to the past, then that's always what happened.

I hope I explained it so you might understand it. I'm just beginning to understand it myself.

You missed my point. I get it the part about tiem being linear in respect to the individual, such that the 2004 Losties are actually older in 1977 then they are in 2004. My problem is the part about the present (1977) influencing the future, when the present precedes the future. I subscribe to Einstein's theory that if you flew into space straight up and returned to Earth, you would come back in some future after all the people you know have died. The part I don't buy is the going backward bit. I have a problem with some future persons coming back into the past and then influencing what happens in their future. It's conflicting logic.

You all are confusing me LOL!

I understand what's happening in the show.
But-
Amy:
They don't think time is a circle because the characters are always moving forward in their lives and ages, regardless of the year. Time does progress, just like we saw it progress from 1974 to 1977 so far. It appears to be a cycle to the viewer but it's not a circle to the person living it.

Gometros:
Yes I definitely missed your point because wouldn't the present always influence the future? They didn't travel back and impact their own future, otherwise they would have memories of everything. Their traveling back impacts the future of the 2nd "them" on the timeline.

 

[Kycha]

Help me! Is this the same guy? Sorry - I don't know how to resize the images to make them the same size

No. The second guy I recognize as Larry from the Newhart Show. I don't know who the first guy is.

 

[debraW76]

No. The second guy I recognize as Larry from the Newhart Show. I don't know who the first guy is.

Yes, the second guy is larry/Darrly the torturer. The first guy is Widmore's Doorman. I thought they looked a lot alike. You think they are different?

 

[harleyquinn]

Whose rules? You talk about time travel like it's a scientific reality. It's not. It's fiction. You have to subscribe to the writer's interpretation of time travel and as I've stated, I don't buy into future events affecting the past which then influences those future events.

Wait!! No way! Time travel isn't real?!
The writers/creators rules. I have stated many, many times on this thread that I am going by the writers rules--ones that they have stated in interviews are they ones the show is following. Daniel speaks for the writers and Miles did in yesterday's episode. We have posted links to the writers/creators saying this in interviews before. You may not buy into their rules, but I am only obeying them.

And if you subscribe to the theory that you can't change the past, that you may change the circumstances but the end result is always the same, then Miles was wrong. The conversation he had with Hurley did not necessarily have to happen the same way each time.

But the writers don't subscribe to this and that's the only thing that matters for this show. Their conversation always happened exactly the same way.

 

[Kycha]

Yes, the second guy is larry/Darrly the torturer. The first guy is Widmore's Doorman. I thought they looked a lot alike. You think they are different?

They do look a lot alike. But they are 2 different people. Look at their noses. The first guys nose is thin and angular with big nostrils and kinda has a cleft on the end. Larry's nose is wider.

And then look at their ears. Very different.

 

[wdhinn89]

No, they are two different people.

 

[debraW76]

OK. I see that now. It did make me do a second take though. thanks

 

[TheZue]

Wait!! No way! Time travel isn't real?!
The writers/creators rules. I have stated many, many times on this thread that I am going by the writers rules--ones that they have stated in interviews are they ones the show is following. Daniel speaks for the writers and Miles did in yesterday's episode. We have posted links to the writers/creators saying this in interviews before. You may not buy into their rules, but I am only obeying them.


But the writers don't subscribe to this and that's the only thing that matters for this show. Their conversation always happened exactly the same way.

I'm just quoting this because I agree 100 percent.

If anything seems really unbelievable it's the moving of the island, I can live with the rules of time travel as the writers have set it up here. Either way it's fantasy and the writers have outright told us what they are doing in interviews, their reading recomendations, and through characters on the show. Arguing about how time travel should work in science fiction doesn't really apply here since they've established what they are doing but it is an interesting concept.

 

[debraW76]

Sarah, you said you would tell us what you were having after your sonogram? It has been two weeks and I don't know if I missed it or if you just forgot to say but I am wanting to know!! Is the pink color on your time table a hint??

Notice how I am staying out of the time travel arguement this time LOL ***My head hurts and it is storming outside!

 

[gometros]

Gometros:
Yes I definitely missed your point because wouldn't the present always influence the future? They didn't travel back and impact their own future, otherwise they would have memories of everything. Their traveling back impacts the future of the 2nd "them" on the timeline.

You just hit the nail on the head. You're right. It can't affect their future, because the individuals are in the present. But it did affect the future of everyone else left in 2004. That's where it all gets confusing. Since 2004 Losties jumped back in time, their actions will affect the future that they just left. And what happens to them? They cease to exist in the future, which means for now there are two sets of Jack, Hurley, Kate and Sayyid, their younger selves somewhere else off the island and their older selves. So unless the older versions snap back to 2004, there's a paradox at work.

 

[gometros]

But the writers don't subscribe to this and that's the only thing that matters for this show. Their conversation always happened exactly the same way.

That totally contradicts the situation with Charlie's impending death. Desmond kept trying to save him, but he was doomed to eventually die, so we changed how he got there, but the end result is the same.

Do not put too much faith in the writers. They're playing fast and furious with the rules. Everything works one way, except for Desmond, it works another way? I absolutely do not believe that Hurley and Miles conversation happens the same way each time. There's a hole there big enough to walk through, as we look at all the changes that Kate, Jack, Hurley and Sayyid caused by showing up in the past.

 

[debraW76]

That totally contradicts the situation with Charlie's impending death. Desmond kept trying to save him, but he was doomed to eventually die, so we changed how he got there, but the end result is the same.

Do not put too much faith in the writers. They're playing fast and furious with the rules. Everything works one way, except for Desmond, it works another way? I absolutely do not believe that Hurley and Miles conversation happens the same way each time. There's a hole there big enough to walk through, as we look at all the changes that Kate, Jack, Hurley and Sayyid caused by showing up in the past.

Gometros,
I said I wasn't going to get into this but I completely disagree with your last sentence. We are not seeing any changes caused by the losties. This is the way 1977 happened. this is what caused Ben to become evil Ben. If the losties hadn't time traveled to 1977 then sayid wouldn't have shot Ben and Kate and sawyer wouldn't have taken him to the temple (which is going to change him).

If in seasons 1-4 we were shown a flashback to the island in 1977 it would be exactly the same as what we are seeing now. This is what happened on the island in 1977. The writers are explaining to us, the audience, how Ben became who he is in 2004.

I can't believe I am this worked up over a show!!