Timeline for dummies


Feeling confused about the number of Hectors that were present at any point in time? Can't grasp the order in which events really happened? Look no further.



Hector 1 >---------------------------------------
Hector 2 -----------------------
Hector 3 --------------------------------->

^^^ ^ ^ ^
ABC D E F


A: Hector 1 arrives at his house with the groceries
B: Hector 3 gets out of the tank
C: Hector 2 gets out of the tank
D: Hector 1 sees the girl undressing in the woods
E: Hector 1 gets in the tank
F: Hector 2 gets in the tank

It should now be clear to everybody that there is only one initial Hector. For the most part of the movie there are 3 Hectors, and after point F there is only one Hector again. Simple as that.

In fact, this is an extremely easy to follow time travel movie, with a clear beginning and a clear end to the loop part. If you feel that you're ready for something more complex, check out Primer and Triangle.


reply

and what's your explanation for beginning of loop because movie starts with loop already in place and it's never explained, that's hardest part to understand, not timelines

but i am glad Hector 3 got out of loop and had happy end except one minor accident and explaining to police what happened in his house

reply

and what's your explanation for beginning of loop


The scientist turning on the machine.

When the scientist turns on the machine, Hector 3 pops out with memories of what he experienced as Hectors 1 and 2, then Hector 2 pops out with memories of what he experienced as Hector 1.

Then the 3 Hectors go through their individual experiences over the next few hours, until Hectors 1 and 2 get in the machine, and Hector 3 sits out in the yard with his wife.


Hector got caught up in the time travel adventure due to proximity and personality. If he wasn't near the machine, he would have never got into it, and if he didn't have a certain personality, he wouldn't have got involved in the events he found himself in.

reply

There is no beginning. It's a plot hole/paradox/impossibility

reply

It's not a plot hole. It's also only a paradox/impossibility if you believe that time is created on the fly, which is really only your perception of it because you're a 3-dimensional being traversing a 4-dimensional body.

To make that idea clearer, think of it like an MRI. The scanner can only ever see a single 2D slice of the person in it at once. It can't see the whole thing, but that doesn't mean that the body isn't there, or that it is created as the picture is taken. That's only how the MRI experiences it, so to say.

Now, we're the MRI, only ever seeing a single 3D slice of the 4D body Time at once. We can't see the whole thing, which makes it seem like it only comes into existence as we experience it, and that our actions and choices create and shape the slices to come. But they don't. Just like the person being scanned by the MRI, time already exists, your choices in it already exist, and the path you'll walk in life already exists just like the veins in your body already exist.

That's why there's no beginning for the time loop and there doesn't need to be. It simply exists, and always has. It's not created by anything, no particular action causing it. It's just there.

Now if you wanna talk impossibilities, that would be time travel itself. Even if you could reposition your scanner over a previous time slice, why would that look any differently than it did before? How could you be there as anything other than the exact same person, in the exact same position and situation, with the exact same thoughts and knowledge as you were the first time? You couldn't insert an older, more knowledgeable you in a previous moment, same as your wrist wouldn't show up in your shoulder, no matter how many times you go back.

But that's a rant for another day.

reply

It is an impossibility. We are active agents. You can't apply the Self-consistency to intelligent agents.

Let's say I buy into that, the movie logic still fails. If everything Hector did was an accident, it would be something interesting to watch but Hector deliberately tries to recreate things. Everything just falls into place because it is convenient for the script.

Like I said, you can't apply the Self-consistency to intelligent agents. It falls apart.

There is something called simulations where you can have access to the whole timeline of something, watch different time snapshots at the same time and even manipulate it. That happens just fine following some simple logical rules.

You can only access one point at a time.
You erase everything from that point on to be recreated.

So I don't like the machine being used while we still have an outside ongoing POV. We should always follow the traveler. It is a proper loop in all senses of the word. What should happen is no one enters the time machine to prevent infinite loops.

A time machine's job description is basically to break the casualization, only for its moment of travel off course. After the travel, temporal clones will have to live on while still being subjected to all casualization. They have to learn to live.

reply

I really don't understand why people seem to have such a hard time following the events. There were not 5 Hectors, or 6 Hectors. There were only 3.

The order you show, A--B--C--D--E--F is the order in which the events happen for an outside observer's point of view, say ... his wife (and the rest of that universe). BUT Hector does not experience the events in that order, because it seems that his life is not linear. The order HE experiences the events is:

A--D--E--C--F--B


I also don't understand why people have problems understanding what a causality loop is and how it works. It has no beginning and there was no original timeline. Hector actions were their own cause. They always have been and they always will be inside the loop.

reply

For me, the film makes the most sense seeing this as a convoluted, but single loop.

reply

no there were only 3 hectors, its so simple...

reply

Yep, this (post by BadCash) is the single most helpful explanation about this vexing movie. Until reading this timeline, I was under the impression that Hectors 1 and 2 were still around after F.

Thanks!

reply


I was under the impression that Hectors 1 and 2 were still around after F.


Of course H1 and H2 aren't "still around" after leaving this position in space-time. H3 is unique in that he has lived a portion of space-time 3 separate times.

But...

The case many of us make is that when H2 makes his jump back in time ahead of H1's jump back in time (earlier arrival) there is ALREADY an H3 moving forward in the F-position.

Basically, H2 cannot possibly become an H3 without H3 already living forward in F-position.

So, if Hector can have three distinct now(s) and the Universe doesn't break, "infinite probable now(s)" rears its ugly head.

The director has gone on record as saying this isn't Many Worlds... But honestly, nobody knows definitively how this all should/could work. Primer's director was much wiser in zipping his lips. Often saying, "I don't know, how could I?"




Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.

reply

> H3 is unique in that he has lived a portion of space-time 3 separate times.

By that logic, H2 is has lived the same time span 2 separate times.

reply

Worse, it implies that for space-time to be ripped/torn at all, an infinite loop is required. H1 and H2 forever spinning (adiabatically isolated) else no1 could possibly exit the time-machine from whence whenever they came.

I subscribe to Many Worlds and Supersymmetry. I'm no fun at parties.




Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.

reply

Thanks BadCash this is a very good explanations of things. However, as had been brought up by previous posters, there is still a question of how this loop began. For all this to happen, Hector 1 must get into the tank, he only does that if Hector 2 exists in his reality - the point D where Hector 2 forced girl to strip, etc. If there was no stripping incident then Hector 1 needs to get into the tank via a different sequence of events. Movie seems to imply that Hector 1 seeing girl stripping and seeing Hector 2 wrapped up face as mandatory for Hector 1 to get into the tank.....and if Hector 1 did not get into the tank, Hector 2 & 3 won't exist. and if Hector 2 didn't exist, Hector 1 won't get into the tank. Chicken and egg......maybe doesn't really matter, which comes first as we know both chicken and egg exist.

Nevertheless a very entertaining and thought provoking movie.

reply

That's the big problem. All of the characters need to act for reasons that don't involve merely a higher-numbered Hector recreating parts of a timeline that he remembers from his experiences as a lower-numbered Hector -- there need to be other causes for the actions that are recreated.

To salvage the situation you need some sort of far-fetched scenario, but it can be done. What if, in the absence of interference by higher-numbered Hectors, there would have been a non-Hector assailant who intercepted the girl after she passed the point of the traffic accident, brought the girl back to the woods, had her strip and left her naked (as seen by Hector 1), who then stabbed Hector 1 in the arm, and eventually chased Hector 1 to the silo? The presence of Hector 2 interrupts this chain of events, forcing Hector 2 to recreate as best he can what Hector 1 sees (whether or not Hector 3 affects things), in an attempt to produce the same effect or result, at least as regards Hector 1.

reply

That's the big problem. All of the characters need to act for reasons that don't involve merely a higher-numbered Hector recreating parts of a timeline that he remembers from his experiences as a lower-numbered Hector -- there need to be other causes for the actions that are recreated
Personally I don't see how that is a problem. It's a time travel story. A boostrap version.

Action comes before cause. That's the point of this type of story. Again imo.

Scientist turns on TT-machine, Hector 3&2 jump thru with memories of time and events that have yet to happen from a regular bystander perspective. No multiverse, one reality only.

reply

It's called a bootstrap paradox for a reason. And it is a paradox unless you're willing to do away with causation as we know it. (In that case, what say you of the idea that the cause of you writing your previous message was me writing this reply to it?)

reply

Thanks BadCash this is a very good explanations of things. However, as had been brought up by previous posters, there is still a question of how this loop began. For all this to happen, Hector 1 must get into the tank, he only does that if Hector 2 exists in his reality - the point D where Hector 2 forced girl to strip, etc. If there was no stripping incident then Hector 1 needs to get into the tank via a different sequence of events.

True - it's probably a question that is difficult/impossible to answer, though, as Hector 1 wouldn't have a reason to get in to the tank the "first" time around.

I think that's why time travel can't really happen!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAIJ3Rh5Qxs

reply

How has no one used the word paradox yet lol

reply

this is GARBAGE -- much better is PREDESTINATION and LOOPERS.. check em both out, those have high production values and danged good scripts

My only regret in life is that I'm not someone else - Woody Allen

reply

And what does this have to do with the timeline? Start your own thread.

And having seen both Predestination, Looper, Primer, Project Almanac, Triangle and lots of other time travel movies, I don't agree that this movie is garbage. In fact, I found it refreshingly good compared to the somewhat stereotypical action packed american time travel movies. This one felt more realistic in some sense, almost like it "could happen to anyone" (as long as they happen to walk into a time machine) :)

reply

i thought Predestination was poor. But why does everything have to be a contest ? it was a great debut film but a talented director. time travel is hard to pull of and he did.

anyway, i see Timecrimes similar to the first Terminator with the whole Kyle Reese / John Connor being his father paradox thing

reply