The Butterfly effect is completely dismissed - Timeless (2016) Discussion

The hindenburg event that was changed would completely create huge ripple effects in the timeline continuity.

And another Time Lord wannabee heard from.

It's a made up pretend story with made up pretend physics that does whatever the writers want it to do. You have no way of knowing what the results of their actions would have been. All you have is an opinion based on some other made up pretend story using some other made up pretend physics.

reply

[–] luis-pinto-1 8 years ago

Even in made up stuff, like fiction, some plausibility should exist. This is just weak writing...

reply

[–] Caribbean_Smurf 8 years ago

It is plausible enough. Remember:

In chaos theory, the butterfly effect is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later state

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

CAN result. It doesn't have to result in big changes. It had a direct impact on Lucy's life, so no, it wasn't dismissed. It just didn't result in the Nazi's winning WWII or anything major like that.

reply

[–] starwolf 8 years ago

In chaos theory, the butterfly effect is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later state

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

Ahh, Wikipedia.

Do you know there was a study about 5 years ago in which a number of writers for encyclopedias evaluated articles in Wikipedia for accurateness? The result was they found Wikipedia agreed with their encyclopedia articles better than 95% of the time.

Just saying.

By the way, I had a huge argument at work (I am a mathematician) with another guy (geophysicist) about chaos. He kept arguing it was random and I kept arguing it was deterministic but unpredictable from initial conditions. (In other words, you can't look at a result, change the initial conditions in a small way, and predict a small change in the effect, but you can determine what the effect would be by working through the nonlinear equations.)

As to the OP, since we can't actually change time, saying the effect on the timeline is wrong is so much posturing.

reply

[–] [email protected] 8 years ago

I think the geophysicist has missed the whole point of chaos theory.

However is he using "chaos" in the mathematical sense or in the "my kids created chaos" sense?

reply

[–] starwolf 8 years ago

However is he using "chaos" in the mathematical sense or in the "my kids created chaos" sense?

Fair question, although I think you meant it somewhat tongue in cheek.

We were discussing noise in instrumentation readings. We were debating whether the noise was random or something we could predict and filter.

He was interchanging the use of chaotic and random, which led to the discussion.

reply

[–] [email protected] 8 years ago

Fair question, although I think you meant it somewhat tongue in cheek.

Not really tongue in cheek. I supposed I could have phrased it differently. But I've wasted far too much of my life in arguments with people where it turned out that we were using the same word in different senses.

In the case of "chaos", it gets worse because the popular literature has represented chaos theory as being the notion that some things can't be predicted--see "Jurassic Park" for one example.

Agreeing on definitions is important in reasoned debate of all kinds and is often overlooked. Sometimes confusion over definitions is even exploited by the unscrupulous.

reply

[–] luis-pinto-1 8 years ago

I have to disagree about the origin of the Chaos. It's not definetely random. Everyone knows it's created by software engineers, being me one of them, and we do it in a very deterministic way

I agree with the "we can't actually change time".. the sentence itself "change time" is actually nonsense. Time is actually the thing that allows change, being it physical, phycological or anything that could be observed and acted upon by a conscious entity (maybe call it the perceptual time). Regarding "traveling" in time, we are actualy already doing it currently, into the "future"..

My theory, (if we can call it that).. Is that all events in the timeline, toguether with all its particle states might be recorded in the fabric of the space time (call it a space time recording tape). If you would be able to replay that tape from a given point ("traveling" to the past), you would still be travelling forward, but from a diferent state and anything that comes after that point would be completely affected by the simple act of replaying that point of the "recording".

But as everything, this "theory" is as valid as the one from the writers of this show :D

reply

[–] starwolf 8 years ago

I have to disagree about the origin of the Chaos. It's not definetely random. Everyone knows it's created by software engineers, being me one of them, and we do it in a very deterministic way

I am not sure who was arguing about the origin of chaos math but you have me curious what you mean.

As far as I know, chaos mathematica was first formalized by Lorenz (he of the famous Lorenz Transformation) and he was a physicist.

Perhaps you are thinking of one of the first visual representations of chaos and fractal theory, the Mandelbrot Set (by Benoit Mandelbrot?) Since then, of course, there have been all kinds of interesting mathematical representations using computers (like some strange attractor stuff).

But I would like to know what you mean.

reply

[–] luis-pinto-1 8 years ago

The chaos part.. was just a joke :)

"There was a doctor, a civil engineer, and a computer scientist sitting around late one evening, and they got to discussing which was the oldest profession. The doctor pointed out that according to Biblical tradition, God created Eve from Adam's rib. This obviously required surgery, so therefore that was the oldest profession in the world. The engineer countered with an earlier passage in the Bible that stated that God created order from the chaos, and that was most certainly the biggest and best civil engineering example ever, and also proved that his profession was the oldest profession. The computer scientist leaned back in her chair, and with a sly smile responded, "Yes, but who do you think created the chaos?"

reply

[–] starwolf 8 years ago

Aha!

Well, label me a literal ninny.

I like the joke.

reply

[–] [email protected] 8 years ago

"There was a doctor, a civil engineer, and a computer scientist sitting around late one evening, and they got to discussing which was the oldest profession.

When I heard that one it was a doctor, an architect, and a lawyer.

reply

[–] sleepingtiger (712) 7 years ago

Speaking of the Hindenburg, here's a recent interview with one of the last remaining survivors of the actual Hindenburg crash---he's 88 years old, and he was on the Hindenburg traveling with his family as a child when the disaster happened while they were on board:

http://people.com/human-interest/last-survivor-of-hindenburg-disaster-speaks-on-eve-of-80th-anniversary-of-the-crash-the-air-was-on-fire/

reply

[–] DonWNY2 8 years ago

Well said. Theoretically it CAN cause major changes. And who says it hasn't altered history in ways we haven't seen yet. Maybe someone else won the World Series last year. Maybe there IS no World Series anymore. Is Elisabeth II still the queen of England? Is England still a monarchy? No one's brought it up yet.

reply

[–] nyarlath 8 years ago

Butterfly effects are minimized for the same reason the Star Trek Universe has a preponderance of humanoid aliens. Budget. Some travel stories imagine changing the past is impossible while others imagine catastrophic changes with one squashed butterfly. Some are in the middle treating the flow of time like a web that can survive a lot of cut threads before it completely collapses. Science fiction requires a certain suspension of disbelief. I'm willing to let the writers have mine as long as they don't abuse it.

For my part I remember the Hindenburg exploding before landing so their changes didn't affect me.

reply

[–] Quentin36 8 years ago

Where does 'Butterfly Effect' come from?

reply

[–] avnrulz 8 years ago

It comes from a Ray Bradbury short story about time travelers ("A Sound of Thunder", by Ray Bradbury); a time-travel business goes back in time and finds animals about to die naturally, and brings hunters there to shoot them right before that event (they even remove the bullets).

There is a 'ribbon' which shows them the path to take to prevent any change in the fabric of time, so as not to affect their 'present'. During the trip highlighted in the story, a hunter stumbles off the path, but they all return to their time, to find it changed. They can't understand why until a butterfly is found crushed under the boot of the stumbling hunter. Thus, the death of that butterfly had untold changes through the passage of time, and has since been called 'The Butterfly Effect'.

MAGA!

reply

[–] Quentin36 8 years ago

Thanks Avnrulz, I was being somewhat of a smart a** because I know that Ray Bradbury story very well. One of my favs from a great writer. It just that people say the butterfly effect like it was a scientic study and not just the imagination of brilliant writer

reply

[–] cigar95 8 years ago

While true, one can certain believe that small changes, even as simple as the presence of a butterfly, can potentially cascade over time.

reply

[–] horrorfan000 8 years ago

The Butterfly effect is completely dismissed

I was going to post the same thing.The writing is kind of ridiculous in this respect.It doesn't take a genius to know that even the slightest alteration in the past could have drastic unforseeable effects on the present.Possibly even wiping yourself out of existence.Yet in one episode the supposedly intelligent scientist on the team talks about saving Lincoln as if it's no big deal.

reply

[–] old-skool101 7 years ago

They didnt save Lincoln....

Jeeeze....no wonder imdb is gettin rid of the message boards. We have to correct this timeline as soon as possible.

reply

[–] brucedgo 7 years ago

It doesn't take a genius to know that even the slightest alteration in the past could have drastic unforseeable effects on the present

I don't know. Maybe it does take a genius. It seems that most ordinary people can't figure it out.

reply

[–] luis-pinto-1 7 years ago

Yeap.. is actually the major flaw of this show. It behaves as if the time travel subject was never portrayed in any other movie or media before, and it's done in a very naive way! Is asks a lot from the (now much more mature) audience to disconnect the brain in order to enjoy the story.

reply

[–] brucedgo 7 years ago

Refreshing post. It's rare that someone actually thinks about the ramifications of travel to the past.

Another "fact" to point out -- which would seriously change the possible storyline -- I just looked in on several minutes of the show. They were discussing sending someone back to prevent someone else from changing something. The problem with that is, the change is already done!

Okay, say it's year 2000 and someone goes back to 1000 and makes a change. Whatever change results has already been affecting the timeline for 1000 years from the perspective of people still in 2000. The change would appear instantaneously upon the traveler embarking on a trip to the past.

reply

[–] puzzledresearcher 7 years ago

The problem with that is, the change is already done!

Yes. And the writers keep hanging a lantern on this problem on every episode. Even tonight (epi 15) yet again the characters act like something done 80 years prior is "now".

Timeless is one of the worst time-travel shows I can remember, as far as dealing with the basic premise of the show.

reply

[–] CardinalsBaseball 7 years ago

Yep. The rules of time travel on this show are incredibly stupid. If you were to travel back in time to 1865 and spend three days there, you should return at the moment you left, not three days later!?!

reply

[–] teatat 7 years ago

Unless they are doing that on purpose to keep the passengers physically in sinc with the amount of time they have lived through. It avoids "time lag".

reply

[–] cigar95 7 years ago

Plus, it's plausible that the time travel paradigm in the show is such that current time is linked in some fashion with past time - hence the passage of time will remain the same. Since they haven't told us the physics/technology of how they're doing it, we can't say it's wrong. So much of the criticism we read comes from a notion that there's only one way to "do" a time travel model.

Reality is - it may well be impossible to do a time travel story that is both self-consistent in its approach to the science - even its own internal fictional science - and produces a story that is watchable in a one-hour-per-week television format.

Hence, I watch the show and don't worry about all the little nits they "got wrong". Life's too short, especially when most of it is already behind you.

reply

[–] astateofmind (19) 7 years ago

Not only that ... but they have to do the jump NOW every time ... no delay at all. NO sleep, no rest. It has to be NOW. And they always land AFTER Flynn ... wtf?

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 7 years ago

Since backwards time travel is impossible, any attempt to extract logic from a time travel story is, by definition, an exercise in futility.

😎

reply

[–] CoD (26) 7 years ago

It seems that this show operates under the model that there is a great deal of "temporal inertia". As has been said, this is a fictional show with a fictional physics, but it does make some level of sense. If the timeline is changed too much (as it would be under butterfly effect) the time machine might not be invented, and our heroes might not be born. So, any change that would have that as an effect would lead to a paradox. Under large inertia model, those changes simply do not occur.

reply