RIP Faraday

[soulska]

i really hope the island is not done with daniel. he is one of my favorite characters.

[rhythm]

There is no time loop, no circle, no time paradox.  The only loop is one of causation -- essentially, Ellie sent Daniel to the island BECAUSE Daniel had to be on the island BECAUSE Ellie shot him there BECAUSE Ellie sent Daniel to the island.  But a loop in causation is one thing, and a loop in time is something else.  There is no getting caught in a loop -- everything only happened once.  Each person's individual timeline, the journey of their consciousness from birth to death, has a beginning and an end.  No loops.

Now if Daniel's theory is true, and Jack & co. can indeed set off an explosion that will destroy the electromagnetic energy source that brings down their plane -- THAT will be a paradox.

norville: Okay.  I agree and I see now I was using the wrong term.  That is exactly what I believe too.

Boston:  Just to be clear, you are saying that these things will take place again...which is true.  But not in a Ground Hog Day type of loop?  Meaning, as far as the people involved are concerned, these things are only happening once?  Because if so, then I believe we are all saying the same thing, just using different terminology.

[HurleysGirl]

Jack and Juliet, THAT's a pair 'o' docs.

LOL!  Good one, HurleysGirl.

<------- Shamelessly cribbing Robert Heinlein

[SQUIRT199]

If Faraday is dead it sets up a paradox

You must truly love this word because you have been saying it since this time travelling statred at the beginning of the season, I have banged my head off too many walls when trying to convey the theory that the writers are trying to express and have been unable to even comprehend the "logic" you are trying to define.

It could be that your theory is so mind blowing that I just cant grasp it but I don't think so,  you are clearly not understanding what the writers and several posters are trying to explain.

I am not saying Daniel was right or wrong about not being able to change things from 77 forward, he seems to have changed his stance from 1974 to 1977.

There is no loop/paradox, Daniel is living his present in Eloise's (his moms) past. and when we saw him in the flashbacks playing piano as a child that was his present say 1980 and Eloise's future from 1977 she always knew she would shoot him and felt she had to steer him towards the island you could see the pain in her face because she absolutely believed (incorrectly perhaps) that he HAD to go to the island, maybe if she had not steered him to the island she would not have shot him in 77, but she, for whatever reason, assumed that she had to do it, so she did.

I am not finding fun to argue this point anymore I just wish I could understand the "logic" you are using, sadly I do not think I can, it my be too intelligent for me to comprehend, or you are just thinking more abstractly than me.

Perhaps someone else who agrees with you could better explain the stance you are taking.

[Novashannon]

I think you should all look up the definition of "paradox."  It means anything that is self-contradicting.  So, the Losties being in two places at once is, by definition, a paradox.  There can be paradoces that make no difference, and those that change things.  Apparently, being in the same time twice is a non-threatening paradox.  Killling your baby self would be a time-threatening paradox. 

[Floyd25]

I think you should all look up the definition of "paradox."  It means anything that is self-contradicting.  So, the Losties being in two places at once is, by definition, a paradox.  There can be paradoces that make no difference, and those that change things.  Apparently, being in the same time twice is a non-threatening paradox.  Killling your baby self would be a time-threatening paradox. 

YES!

[Madam P]

Thanks for that definition post, Novashannon.  I agree, there are paradoxes all over the place now that this time-travel thing has started.

This reminds me so much of an old comic book I had back in the '70's.  Time-travelling scientist goes back in time to visit -- sneaks into his own house one night for some reason or another -- his "younger self" wakes up, thinks "older self" is a burglar, fight ensues, and "older self" ends up killing "younger self" in the struggle.  Quandry:  What's his status if he goes back to his "normal time" in his time machine?  If he died as a young man in the past, does he still exist as "older self" in the future?

Daniel is shot dead by his mother in 1977.  Daniel comes to the island in 2004 as part of the freighter group.   (I know, I know... one street and someone else's past is someone else's future and all that.)  Still sounds like a paradox to me.  

[Novashannon]

It IS a paradox!  Just existing at two different ages in the same time is a paradox.  IF young self killed older self, it would be harmless.  Old self already was born in the future, lived out life there until coming to the past.
Old self dying changes nothing.  Older self's birth and life have not changed.    He will exist in the future as usual and will not exist from the point of leaving for time travel.  Now, if younger self is dead, that is a serious problem,  because young self can now never grow to be older self.  This could change the future, and is a time-threatening paradox.  Time would change, and we don't know what would happen.

[SQUIRT199]

Thanks for that definition post, Novashannon.  I agree, there are paradoxes all over the place now that this time-travel thing has started.

This reminds me so much of an old comic book I had back in the '70's.  Time-travelling scientist goes back in time to visit -- sneaks into his own house one night for some reason or another -- his "younger self" wakes up, thinks "older self" is a burglar, fight ensues, and "older self" ends up killing "younger self" in the struggle.  Quandry:  What's his status if he goes back to his "normal time" in his time machine?  If he died as a young man in the past, does he still exist as "older self" in the future?

Daniel is shot dead by his mother in 1977.  Daniel comes to the island in 2004 as part of the freighter group.   (I know, I know... one street and someone else's past is someone else's future and all that.)  Still sounds like a paradox to me.  

I see where most of the opposition is going with this, I just dont understand where Boston specifically is going/is/thinks is going on.

I think if for instance Daniel was on the island as a child and the daniel that came back to 1977 from 2004 had killed his younger self that would definately be a paradox, I think the reason most understand that two of the same entity or person in the same space is a paradox due to Einstiens theory of relativity that the same cells or whatever cannot occupy the same spaceat the same time,  but I still think that theory pertains to interaction or actual physical contact.  But the writers are not using Einstien theories.(besides the fact they are just theories anyway).

Had the Daniel that has now just returned from Ann arbor, never gone to the island, he would be living his life in 2007 but since he went back to the osland he somehow ended up in the year 1977, but essentially it would be the same as getting shot in 2007 had he never gone back to the island, but he did go back to the island, so now he id dead.

but the daniel that was playing piano in the flashbacks, and the daniel that had lunch with Mrs hawking has just not experienced his future in 1977 yet.

I don't see how it is at all a paradox.

[KiddyB]

Pity to see Daniel go, but I don't think (or I don't HOPE) that they are fulfilling Daniels Plans. Since the Season Finale is called "The Incident" and you never know what comes next on Lost anyway, it could be that they somehow change the Future (Their past). Butfor me that doesn't sound right. I can't figure out an other solution, but we should bare in mind, that we still have John Locke in the "real" present. So, my guess would be that it's up to him to reunite the Losties, Jack and the others will not do that.
I would'nt be happy with the Faraday solution anyway. I became friends with the idea of Time Travelling but (no offense to Fans) I watched the decline of Heroes and it would be a shame to ruin another great Show by constructing some horrible and illocical storylines, though... (Although the "Heroes" problem would be that they just can't come up with sincere and proper ideas... But, never mind)

P.S.: I'm German, so just in case, sorry for some crazy english!

[SQUIRT199]

It IS a paradox!  Just existing at two different ages in the same time is a paradox.  IF young self killed older self, it would be harmless.  Old self already was born in the future, lived out life there until coming to the past.
Old self dying changes nothing.  Older self's birth and life have not changed.    He will exist in the future as usual and will not exist from the point of leaving for time travel.  Now, if younger self is dead, that is a serious problem,  because young self can now never grow to be older self.  This could change the future, and is a time-threatening paradox.  Time would change, and we don't know what would happen.

But what is your paradox, young self is not dead,  2007 (old) daniel died in 1977???

How is this a paradox :(Just existing at two different ages in the same time is a paradox)

[Novashannon]

Thanks for that definition post, Novashannon.  I agree, there are paradoxes all over the place now that this time-travel thing has started.

This reminds me so much of an old comic book I had back in the '70's.  Time-travelling scientist goes back in time to visit -- sneaks into his own house one night for some reason or another -- his "younger self" wakes up, thinks "older self" is a burglar, fight ensues, and "older self" ends up killing "younger self" in the struggle.  Quandry:  What's his status if he goes back to his "normal time" in his time machine?  If he died as a young man in the past, does he still exist as "older self" in the future?

Daniel is shot dead by his mother in 1977.  Daniel comes to the island in 2004 as part of the freighter group.   (I know, I know... one street and someone else's past is someone else's future and all that.)  Still sounds like a paradox to me.  

I see where most of the opposition is going with this, I just dont understand where Boston specifically is going/is/thinks is going on.

I think if for instance Daniel was on the island as a child and the daniel that came back to 1977 from 2004 had killed his younger self that would definately be a paradox, I think the reason most understand that two of the same entity or person in the same space is a paradox due to Einstiens theory of relativity that the same cells or whatever cannot occupy the same spaceat the same time,  but I still think that theory pertains to interaction or actual physical contact.  But the writers are not using Einstien theories.(besides the fact they are just theories anyway).

Had the Daniel that has now just returned from Ann arbor, never gone to the island, he would be living his life in 2007 but since he went back to the osland he somehow ended up in the year 1977, but essentially it would be the same as getting shot in 2007 had he never gone back to the island, but he did go back to the island, so now he id dead.

but the daniel that was playing piano in the flashbacks, and the daniel that had lunch with Mrs hawking has just not experienced his future in 1977 yet.

I don't see how it is at all a paradox.

LOook up the definition of "paradox" in a dictionery.  Just being a paradox has no bearing on time travel or changing things.

[Madam P]

To change gears a bit...

I was trying to think of how many clues we got throughout the episode that Daniel was going to die: 

Daniel saying to Jack "Any one of us could die anytime."

Eloise writing in Daniel's graduation gift "No matter what happens, always remember I love you."   (I got goosebumps when I read that note...)

I know there were more but my brain is fuzzy.  Anyone else remember some?

[laklost]

Daniel's timeline was this

born -> became a scientist -> went to the island -> time skipped with Locke and Sawyer -> went to Ann Arbor -> went to the island in 1977 -> was shot by mother.

The idea that the events keep repeating is not what is happening in this story.  When Dan said to Jack and Kate that "THIS IS OUR PRESENT" he meant that they so far have lived 2004 -> 2007-> 1977.  Don't get tripped up by the numbers of the years.  The story is airtight contained to the ISLAND, the OTHERS, DHARMA, THE LOSTIES.  The events in question are matters of the ISLAND.  The whole world was not knocked back to 1977 when Sawyer and his group, and then Jack and his group were.  It was just them, just there, just this story.  There is no paradox.

[shadow]

It IS a paradox!  Just existing at two different ages in the same time is a paradox.

It is only a paradox if you apply reality the the "Lostverse".

In reality (as far as we know), time travel does not exist. Therefore a person existing at two different ages at the same point in time is a paradox.

However, in the Lostverse, time travel DOES exist in some fashion. As such, a person that exists at two different ages at the same point in time is NOT a contradiction in itself. Hence, it is not a paradox.