The "All things TERMINATOR" thread.

[Bravomite]

Aw man I was only out of the thread a few days and now AJP and Adev are theorizing about complex time travel theory.... but this time, more complexer.

Khev's joker meme from a couple of pages is very relatable again. I'm going to come back later and read this properly and then probably add nothing of value to the discourse.

Have you guys considered taking this up in a podcast: The theory of time travel and terminators

 

[a-dev]

Aw man I was only out of the thread a few days and now AJP and Adev are theorizing about complex time travel theory.... but this time, more complexer.

Khev's joker meme from a couple of pages is very relatable again. I'm going to come back later and read this properly and then probably add nothing of value to the discourse.

Have you guys considered taking this up in a podcast: The theory of time travel and terminators

My contribution to a spoken podcast would comprise ''ehhhhh, ummmm, like, errrrr, uhhhh, dafuq *a-dev has left the chat*''

Besides which, this stuff is better written down to have any hope of keeping track of your own thoughts let alone someone else's.

 

[ajp4mgs]

I actually hadn't even been thinking of Skynet running both past and future strategies simultaneously, I was thinking more that they do one instead of the other. But if they did both - wow.

You gotta stop thinking like a human and start thinking more like advanced AI.

And I still believe that Skynet using TDE to go into the past was only out of the desperation we've talked about. The future is where the true benefits could be harvested from.

Here's my point - if we're talking about a scenario where Skynet is using both time travel into the past and into the future (with the intention of then returning to the 'present') - then according to the rules above the alternate timeline resulting from each would be one and the same.

Nope. Skynet would send one traveler to 1984 (out of desperation) with the aim of creating an alternate timeline where everything branched from 1984 to 2029 would be different/better for Skynet. But sending a traveler to the future (to 2034, for example) would be with the aim of having the traveler's return create a timeline that would branch off from the *original one* at the point of its return.

The future traveler would not return to a timeline with an altered 1984. It would return to the same conditions it "remembers" originally, but would be creating a branched-off timeline because events from that point forward will automatically be different than how things played out originally (and confirmed in the future). And the difference will be to Skynet's benefit.

Branching only happens when your return necessitates a change in how things originally occurred in the timeline you went back in time from.

Skynet cannot know or confirm what changes it has caused in the past of the alternate timeline. Its best laid plans can (and in the movies do) go awry for all it knows. This means it will have no idea what its time traveller returning from the future (of its own knowable timeline) would be returning to in the alternate, unknowable timeline whose branching point was created potentially much further back, say 1984 as in the original film.

So this complicates the idea of Skynet using a dual strategy. Unless I've got something wrong (I always feel I have to add that caveat with this topic)

As we've discussed before, Skynet's "consciousness" can be carried in the neural net CPU of any of its machines. Skynet wouldn't care what goes unknown with any version of itself from the other inferior timelines (including the original one). It could boot back into any version of itself, and be all the better for it if it could do so while also incorporating advanced knowledge from the future. The TDE would provide Skynet with a variety of ways to not only survive, but thrive in the most optimal way possible.

Machines have that advantage over humans when it comes to preserving self awareness. In T2, what Miles Dyson describes about the neural net processor is basically what theoretical quantum computing would involve. In other words, Skynet operates with almost limitless processing capacity. The CPU itself can house and process enough data to create so many wild possibilities for Skynet to benefit from, and those same benefits would exist in *any* timeline it exists in going forward.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Aw man I was only out of the thread a few days and now AJP and Adev are theorizing about complex time travel theory.... but this time, more complexer.

Khev's joker meme from a couple of pages is very relatable again. I'm going to come back later and read this properly and then probably add nothing of value to the discourse.

Have you guys considered taking this up in a podcast: The theory of time travel and terminators

I apologize for how this has come across, but I assure you that I'm trying my best to leave out the true complexity of the time travel scenarios we're discussing. Simplifying this stuff is probably what's been causing most of the confusion.

There are some truly mind-bending aspects to time travel we're not going to touch on here that would make this discussion seem like something even beneath child's play. And some of it isn't just theoretical, but actually practical.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Here's my point - if we're talking about a scenario where Skynet is using both time travel into the past and into the future (with the intention of then returning to the 'present') - then according to the rules above the alternate timeline resulting from each would be one and the same.

Had to think about this more, and started to realize that my reply above doesn't explain why the new simultaneous hypothetical doesn't contradict our rules about how/why Reese would end up in the same timeline with the T-800. Instead of edit the previous reply, I'll just explain here.

If I'm wrong about any this, let me know because you've got me questioning my own logic here.

The terminator returning from the future could create a branched timeline before the 1984 mission even gets put in motion. That terminator could've chosen to return to 2027. If I'm thinking this through correctly, that new timeline would be unavailable for Reese and the T-800 to enter into because it'd be a different 2027 than their original one. By being unavailable to them, it would force a separate branch off the original timeline to be created in 1984.

I hope that logic holds up because I'm gonna be making myself dizzy pretty soon if it doesn't.

 

[a-dev]

You gotta stop thinking like a human and start thinking more like advanced AI.

And I still believe that Skynet using TDE to go into the past was only out of the desperation we've talked about. The future is where the true benefits could be harvested from.

I'm no longer sure it has to be purely out of desperation. The plot to go as far back as 1984, maybe, because that wasn't explicitly about aiding its own development - the main driver of that scheme was to eliminate an adversary from existence. But remember, doing so did end up benefitting the development of Skynet regardless that that wasn't the intention. And even the end goal of travelling into the future is ultimately to return to what from the Skynet of the future's POV will be, yep - the past.

And this goes back to something I raised before

Then again, in the hypothetical scenario we're talking about why would some Skynet from even further in the future need to wait for an old Terminator to reach it from the past when it already has the ability to send a current model Terminator (or whatever) back to its earlier self in the past anyway

^thus time travel into the past is actually key. If Skynet wants a version of itself to benefit from the 'future' it can just as easily think of itself right now as being that future. As long as it has the TDE it can send its latest model Terminator back at any time. So that's where I feel there's a slight 'plot hole' with this hypothetical travelling into the future scenario.

Of course there's nothing to stop Skynet from sending a unit into the future, I just now question why it would need to when - as soon as it develops working TDE - it can start achieving the same end-goal immediately from its current baseline of intelligence and technology - especially if what I was talking about in that long post was correct and viable - the idea of a continual chain of cross-timeline exponential advancement.

Nope. Skynet would send one traveler to 1984 (out of desperation) with the aim of creating an alternate timeline where everything branched from 1984 to 2029 would be different/better for Skynet. But sending a traveler to the future (to 2034, for example) would be with the aim of having the traveler's return create a timeline that would branch off from the *original one* at the point of its return.

The future traveler would not return to a timeline with an altered 1984. It would return to the same conditions it "remembers" originally, but would be creating a branched-off timeline because events from that point forward will automatically be different than how things played out originally (and confirmed in the future). And the difference will be to Skynet's benefit.

Branching only happens when your return necessitates a change in how things originally occurred in the timeline you went back in time from.

I might understand what you're saying, I sense that the part I've bolded is important - but for my further clarity can you answer these

- are we therefore looking at 2 different and independent alternate timelines? A 1984 onwards branch and a 2029 onwards branch?
- what happens if the Terminator returning from the 2034 future is actually sent back to a point prior to 2029? Would it then fall into the domain of the 1984 alternate branch and thus merge with that one?

As we've discussed before, Skynet's "consciousness" can be carried in the neural net CPU of any of its machines. Skynet wouldn't care what goes unknown with any version of itself from the other inferior timelines (including the original one). It could boot back into any version of itself, and be all the better for it if it could do so while also incorporating advanced knowledge from the future. The TDE would provide Skynet with a variety of ways to not only survive, but thrive in the most optimal way possible.

Machines have that advantage over humans when it comes to preserving self awareness. In T2, what Miles Dyson describes about the neural net processor is basically what theoretical quantum computing would involve. In other words, Skynet operates with almost limitless processing capacity. The CPU itself can house and process enough data to create so many wild possibilities for Skynet to benefit from, and those same benefits would exist in *any* timeline it exists in going forward.

Agreed, although it wasn't my intention to go back on or dispute any of that with my previous post.

 

[a-dev]

Ah, you've added another post......

 

[a-dev]

Had to think about this more, and started to realize that my reply above doesn't explain why the new simultaneous hypothetical doesn't contradict our rules about how/why Reese would end up in the same timeline with the T-800.

That is my primary concern. It's an important rule because it allows the movies to happen, we can't contradict it. But you might be right that it doesn't.

Instead of edit the previous reply, I'll just explain here.

If I'm wrong about any this, let me know because you've got me questioning my own logic here.

The terminator returning from the future could create a branched timeline before the 1984 mission even gets put in motion. That terminator could've chosen to return to 2027. If I'm thinking this through correctly, that new timeline would be unavailable for Reese and the T-800 to enter into because it'd be a different 2027 than their original one. By being unavailable to them, it would force a separate branch off the original timeline to be created in 1984.

I hope that logic holds up because I'm gonna be making myself dizzy pretty soon if it doesn't.

Ooofff........man, to think we didn't have to do this to ourselves. We chose this. And I know I still haven't responded to some of your other stuff after going on this particular tangent.....and I completely ignored khev

Alas, it's after midnight here and I want to watch that WandaVision finale and the second Superman & Lois episode before bed so I'm going to discontinue for tonight.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Ooofff........man, to think we didn't have to do this to ourselves. We chose this. And I know I still haven't responded to some of your other stuff after going on this particular tangent.....and I completely ignored khev

Yeah, we can quit now before we twist ourselves into a pretzel that might undo everything we thought we gained. I'll give you what can be my final takeaway if you choose.

The way I see it, a terminator sent to the future of Timeline #1 would always encounter a defeated Skynet beyond 2029. If the TDE is still operable in that future, the traveler could return without any danger of ending up in the branched Reese timeline from T1 as long as it returns *after* the date it was originally created (or "born"). It would be returning in the direction of the events it experienced originally, but has to create a new branch for re-entry because everything will be different going forward.

Same thing from Timeline #2 with a more advanced version of Skynet. Any terminator there would be sent to a future where Kyle's son John (not the original John) shuts Skynet down. If it returns back to a point it could "remember," there'd be no danger of returning to the T2 timeline where Miles Dyson died in 1995 and Skynet never formed.

My conclusion is that Skynet would not be able to visit a future where it wasn't defeated by John in 2029, unless it was a future where John had been eliminated in the past. We know of no such timeline, so its a moot point. No future advancements could be brought back from the future. Only knowledge that John won the war. What Skynet decides to do about that in some offshoot timeline is up to our imaginations. The end.

You da man, a-dev. Great posts all along the way, and I got great food for thought out of it. And at no point did the 3-timeline theory get unraveled for me. A win-win. I can only apologize for all the mess along the way, though.

 

[a-dev]

Thanks ajp - it's been the most intensive and interesting Terminator discussion I've ever had - and you say we didn't even really get into the nitty gritty of the science of it? Dayum.

I may yet return to it if but one does need a break from such a mindwarping topic.

I absolutely think the 3 timeline theory holds up - I have yet to rewatch T1 and T2 with it in mind so that'll be something to look forward to.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Thanks ajp - it's been the most intensive and interesting Terminator discussion I've ever had

You made my day right there.

- and you say we didn't even really get into the nitty gritty of the science of it? Dayum.

From a science perspective? Not even remotely close.

Next time you look at the starry sky, remind yourself that you're looking at some stars that aren't even there anymore - and haven't been there since before you born. Then remember that the fabric of spacetime can theoretically be either manipulated (via velocity) or warped from both spots. Both from the point of view of the star (thousands, or millions, of years ago) as well as from your point of view in the present.

And this is the case in what could very well end being *proven* to be a reality with infinite parallel dimensions to it, all triggered on the quantum level. So also add that to the mix. You're welcome.

I absolutely think the 3 timeline theory holds up - I have yet to rewatch T1 and T2 with it in mind so that'll be something to look forward to.

*crosses fingers in the hopes that a-dev doesn't come across anything that undoes our theory*

 

[toyrewind]

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Can you spot the Terminator reference?

 

[a-dev]

Three timelines yes but not parallel, the second timeline replaced the first and the third replaced the second.

Importing this from the MCU phase four thread because I'm bored.

I don't see how this can work - for all the reasons we even needed 3 timelines in the first place. The most immediate problem coming to mind is this - in a scenario where time travel into the past kind of rewinds time and begins a replacement timeline then the very first time traveller should have that effect the instant he becomes part of the past - the T-800 sent to 1984. Therefore there should be no opportunity for the resistance to send Kyle Reese and we don't have a movie.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Importing this from the MCU phase four thread because I'm bored.

I don't see how this can work - for all the reasons we even needed 3 timelines in the first place. The most immediate problem coming to mind is this - in a scenario where time travel into the past kind of rewinds time and begins a replacement timeline then the very first time traveller should have that effect the instant he becomes part of the past - the T-800 sent to 1984. Therefore there should be no opportunity for the resistance to send Kyle Reese and we don't have a movie.

Yeah, a timeline being erased via time travel has some logic incoherence problems associated with it. It's not just the paradox of erasing a future which needed to happen in order for time travel to the past in the first place. It would also require a practical means for memories to be completely re-written, physical selves to somehow morph, and re-alignment of countless other forms of previous status quo to fit the new one seamlessly.

If I went back to 1984 with screen prints of this thread and killed young little a-dev, these 2021 discussions would still have happened no matter what. My memory of these back-and-forths with adult a-dev (along with the tangible screen prints) would magically need to morph. And if they did morph, what would I remember being the purpose of my time travel trip? Who is this little Irish kid that I just killed? What am I doing here!? WTF!?

 

[a-dev]

All of that even renders my own counterpoint moot because I was permitting not only that the time traveller could be placed into the past from a future that is now erased by his mere being there (let alone him actually doing anything) but that he also retains memory of the future he came from and is himself unchanged in any way.

 

[Khev]

I'm fine with a timeline being erased by a traveler who then has memories of a future that will never be. It makes the whole concept of time travel rather scary (and very fitting within the tone of Terminator 1 and 2, particularly the first one) where if you screw something up you can permanently erase someone (or millions of people) from existence (like the original John IMO) rather than just hopping to another universe.

 

[ajp4mgs]

I'm fine with a timeline being erased by a traveler who then has memories of a future that will never be. It makes the whole concept of time travel rather scary (and very fitting within the tone of Terminator 1 and 2, particularly the first one) where if you screw something up you can permanently erase someone (or millions of people) from existence (like the original John IMO) rather than just hopping to another universe.

Okay, now you're just messing with me and a-dev by basically proposing the same scenario that necessitated the 3-timeline solution in the first place. And I'm dumb enough to bite anyway.

As a-dev already pointed out a couple of posts earlier: In a single timeline where the future is "erased" and re-written by changes made to the past, John wouldn't have a chance to react after the TDE activation in 2029. No chance to call an audible and send Kyle to be Sarah's guardian.

As soon as the T-800 arrives in 1984, 45 years of history thereafter would immediately be re-written using that logic. So, either Sarah somehow survives on her own and John is born anticipating his whole life that Skynet will send a Terminator from the future who will *fail,* or John is never born because the T-800 would've succeeded in killing Sarah.

Under no circumstance would Sarah be saved by a Kyle from the future. John's fate would have already been decided 45 years before he ever got the opportunity to send Kyle through the TDE. If the movie said that John sent Kyle back *before* Skynet sends the T-800, then it's fair enough to at least propose what you're suggesting. But with Skynet being the first? Game over. That's why we need alternate timelines that can't be disrupted by time travelers in the past.

 

[e30ernest]

The most immediate problem coming to mind is this - in a scenario where time travel into the past kind of rewinds time and begins a replacement timeline then the very first time traveller should have that effect the instant he becomes part of the past - the T-800 sent to 1984. Therefore there should be no opportunity for the resistance to send Kyle Reese and we don't have a movie.

I think it still works because both Kyle and T-800 came from the same timeline so both were sent back to the same past with a branching future.

 

[Khev]

Okay, now you're just messing with me and a-dev by basically proposing the same scenario that necessitated the 3-timeline solution in the first place. And I'm dumb enough to bite anyway.

I was with you guys for a while but then came back to the thread and was hit by a taxi and now I've finally regained consciousness.

As a-dev already pointed out a couple of posts earlier: In a single timeline where the future is "erased" and re-written by changes made to the past, John wouldn't have a chance to react after the TDE activation in 2029. No chance to call an audible and send Kyle to be Sarah's guardian.

As soon as the T-800 arrives in 1984, 45 years of history thereafter would immediately be re-written using that logic. So, either Sarah somehow survives on her own and John is born anticipating his whole life that Skynet will send a Terminator from the future who will *fail,* or John is never born because the T-800 would've succeeded in killing Sarah.

Under no circumstance would Sarah be saved by a Kyle from the future. John's fate would have already been decided 45 years before he ever got the opportunity to send Kyle through the TDE. If the movie said that John sent Kyle back *before* Skynet sends the T-800, then it's fair enough to at least propose what you're suggesting. But with Skynet being the first? Game over. That's why we need alternate timelines that can't be disrupted by time travelers in the past.

Good points. Fortunately the T-800 and Kyle going back in time was off screen so I can then say that when the humans stormed the complex they found the TDE, realized what it was capable of and how it worked, saw naked Arnold walking toward the light (let's say his back was to the soldiers which is why Kyle couldn't recognize him,) Kyle sprints toward him while discarding his clothes and effectively dives through at the same time that the T-800 enters. Then they're both basically passengers on the same "trip" but emerge in different locations.

Of course I realize that that explanation really only holds up if only the first film is canon but I've always preferred the perfect and poetic loop of the original anyway. For T2 to work under the same logic I'd probably have to say that there's some kind of lag between when the TDE is activated and when it can actually send travelers through time. Like the first T-800 enters the energy field and is frozen in some kind of impenetrable force field for a few minutes while the machine is charging up or something. The humans see what is happening and send in Reese who also then gets frozen. Skynet sees Reese enter the field and says oh yeah well here's the T-1000. T-1000 enters the field with different entry coordinates, the humans freak out as the machine is almost at full power, reprogram Uncle Bob and send him in right before the TDE hits full power and sends all four travelers at once. Think Starkiller Base with a single blast branching off to different yet simultaneous (so to speak) end points.

During the journey the four travelers exist in bubbles (that we actually see on screen when they arrive) that are temporarily outside of space and time so that if one set of travelers does something that would normally negate the existence of the other travelers then the latter are still protected. Definitely a stretch to include the events of T2 into my scenario but in my mind it works. And just in case it needs to be said in my canon they do *not* create a happily ever after future where no future war exists. So even after Sarah's hopeful speech about the dark highway at night someone still continues Dyson's work, retrieves the arm that Arnold lost in the steel mill, and the war happens just as we saw in the flashbacks of both films.