Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    Re-Check/Weird Scenes    The Late Philip J. Fry Goof (SPOILERS, big 'uns) « previous next »
Author Topic: The Late Philip J. Fry Goof (SPOILERS, big 'uns)  (Read 14038 times)
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 Print
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #120 on: 08-12-2010 23:24 »

I suppose it's possible for every dimension to have three axes, which would make the number of total dimensions divisible by three though... meaniung 12 or 9 or some other number.

Time, Space, Probability, Possibility, Imagination... these could all have multiple axes that we are unable to perceive. I suppose. Still, that's more totally bizzare than I like to get without alcohol.
Aki

Professor
*
« Reply #121 on: 08-13-2010 00:25 »

On dimensions:

We know for sure there are four: Depth, height, width and time. One of them (time obviously) are we forced to move in, at least without accelerating into the speed of light (which in theory would stop time). Going faster than the speed of light, though probably impossible, would make us go back in time. There are theories though, that, as mentioned, these four are mere axes or facets of one "big" dimension. Other dimensions would take place simultaniously at the same place, but cover different axeses and therefore be invisible for us. Ever read Flatland?

On time being cyclical:


edit: Misspelling.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #122 on: 08-13-2010 00:56 »

Your reasoning and conclusion are flawed, for reasons already explained. Time is cyclical.
Aki

Professor
*
« Reply #123 on: 08-13-2010 01:15 »
« Last Edit on: 08-13-2010 01:18 »

Your reasoning and conclusion are flawed, for reasons already explained. Time is cyclical.

Nah. Your one argument is basically "I wish to believe that it is cyclical, and from that belief I can find several lines that support me", ignoring the lines that deny your believes as well as the fact that the they aren't necessarily true just because a character (for example the Professor) says so. Keep in mind that I do not deny a cyclical time, but we didn't witness it in The Late Philip J. Fry. We witnessed one set of events ending, and another beginning. The fact that they were almost exactly the same is irrelevant. If time is cyclical, it is after a number of these events, and ofcourse that could well be, but nothing points towards it. Just like I don't deny the theory that there is a planet far far away from ours that is populated only by gorillas who live on milkshake and rabbits. It could be, but there are no real argument as to why there would be.

You bring an excellent comparison to a doughnut and jelly filling holes. It does work, but a much simpler though more disturbing solution is that the Hitler killing was a throwaway joke. Whether Hitler did die or not maybe didn't matter in the end, or it caused some change over the next few hundred years before civilisation collapsed and it was unnoticed in the 31st century.

Fishful also brings up the paradox ending as proof that they have returned into the same point where they began, and not a further point in time. What he misses is that a time travel paradox isn't necessarily the same as in BBS when the duplicates are doomed. There are not two Frys, two Professors, two Benders, two time machine. There are instead one Fry, one Professor, one Bender and one time machine, as well as people from 20^38 years into the future who resembles them exactly, and a time machine that resembles theirs exactly. They aren't duplicates, they just are (almost) exactly the same. A paradox is something that is a way it shouldn't or couldn't be. There shouldn't be two of each, not because it would make them doomed but because it would be confusing and plain strange, both for those who know what has happened, those who hasn't gotten into the time machine yet, and their families and friends who will never get "who's the real one" Rebirth. Them killing their "future twins" solves this problem, this paradox, and saves them from a lot of troubles and explainings.
FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #124 on: 08-13-2010 02:37 »

Quote
but a much simpler though more disturbing solution is that the Hitler killing was a throwaway joke.
 

Guh, roll eyes we know that... do you have to take the fun out of trying to make a model that fits the futuramaverse? Besides, no matter how hard you try, we will still try to prove that the episode follows CT.  It's like drowning, best not to fight it.... (no one will get the reference but oh well)... anyway... 
 
Now we know that in our 'accepted' CT, our universe's time goes around and around and we follow it.  the time machine creates it's own plane of existence in order to see what is happening without interfering.  the further it is detached from the universe the faster time flows around it.  any questions?... smile  big grin
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #125 on: 08-13-2010 04:25 »

Your reasoning and conclusion are flawed, for reasons already explained. Time is cyclical.

Nah. Your one argument is basically "I wish to believe that it is cyclical, and from that belief I can find several lines that support me", ignoring the lines that deny your believes

There's nothing that might seem to contradict CT that I've not addressed, and in most cases if you think about it, you will see that the CT model fits. There's only a couple of total mindfuck moments, and they also make sense when you manage to grasp the concepts involved.

Quote
Fishful also brings up the paradox ending as proof that they have returned into the same point where they began, and not a further point in time. What he misses is that a time travel paradox isn't necessarily the same as in BBS when the duplicates are doomed.

No, it's not... and I never said that the duplicate crew were killed as a result of a doom-field. However, a paradox is pretty much the same thing however you apply it. Something that should not/could not be, and yet is. In a CU model, there is no paradox, just confusion that can be sorted out and explained. In a CU model, the faux-paradox forms part of an infinite repeating string of identical events, whilst in a CT model, it is a true paradox, and stabilises an open loop, in which things happen, stay happened, an in fact rely on other things having happened in order to happen. The CU model has no such reliance, and thus time travel becomes fraught with the possibility for the destabilisation of the timeline, and/or the creation of unstable paradoxes. Nonlinear time (a timeline with loops, bubbles, and spirals) doesn't work in the CU model. Linear time would apply (time that moves forwards in a line, with backwards time travel itself being a paradox and forwards time travel being akin to a passing loop on a railroad).

We know from RTEW and BBS that nonlinear timelines occur in the futuramaverse, since stable loops and bubbles are formed within the timeline, so a CT model based on nonlinear time would seem to apply.

I feel another MSPaint diagram coming on.
Erdrik

Professor
*
« Reply #126 on: 08-13-2010 05:40 »

...
In a CU model, there is no paradox, just confusion that can be sorted out and explained. In a CU model, the faux-paradox forms part of an infinite repeating string of identical events,
...
The CU model has no such reliance, and thus time travel becomes fraught with the possibility for the destabilisation of the timeline, and/or the creation of unstable paradoxes. ...

Explain. You say CU does not create real paradox, then go on to say CU creates unstable paradox.
And even destabalizes the timeline?!
Unless your specificly talking about backwards time travel?
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #127 on: 08-13-2010 05:42 »
« Last Edit on: 08-13-2010 06:12 by totalnerduk »


Click to expand.

Here. This should clear things up a little. Nonlinear time, displayed in a linear format.

...
In a CU model, there is no paradox, just confusion that can be sorted out and explained. In a CU model, the faux-paradox forms part of an infinite repeating string of identical events,
...
The CU model has no such reliance, and thus time travel becomes fraught with the possibility for the destabilisation of the timeline, and/or the creation of unstable paradoxes. ...

Explain. You say CU does not create real paradox, then go on to say CU creates unstable paradox.
And even destabalizes the timeline?!
Unless your specificly talking about backwards time travel?

No. I said that there is no paradox at point 11. It is a faux-paradox under the CU model. CU would create unstable paradoxes when backwards time travel occurs. See my diagram... in all its majestic MSPainty goodness! tongue
Erdrik

Professor
*
« Reply #128 on: 08-13-2010 06:00 »
« Last Edit on: 08-13-2010 06:21 »

So you do mean backwards time travel creates the unstable paradox in CU.
But neither you or your great and all powerful diagram explains how the
paradox created via backwards time travel in CU is any different than in CT.
They are both "local" events.
In CT it would just create a smaller loop within the larger "from begining to end of time" loop.
In CU it would still just create a small loop along the endless timeline.

EDIT: for stupidity about spoiler-ing.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #129 on: 08-13-2010 06:12 »

So you do mean backwards time travel creates the unstable paradox in CU.
But neither you or your great and all powerful diagram explains how the
paradox created via backwards time travel in CU is any different than in CT.

You people are never satisfied. I believe I've addressed this in a previous post.
Erdrik

Professor
*
« Reply #130 on: 08-13-2010 06:19 »
« Last Edit on: 08-13-2010 06:21 »

Ah you mean the smattering of posts you've made between the 2 or 3 topics on the matter?
Ive read what I can find, and maybe I haven't yet spotted the part that explains "how the
paradox created via backwards time travel in CU is any different than in CT", but so far I haven't read anything that does.

FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #131 on: 08-13-2010 06:49 »

like i stated earlier, Erdrik, best not to fight it... laff 
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #132 on: 08-13-2010 07:22 »
« Last Edit on: 08-13-2010 07:45 by totalnerduk »

Ah you mean the smattering of posts you've made between the 2 or 3 topics on the matter?

Yes.

Although I'd say it's more than a "smattering." So far there've been a couple of different threads on the matter, and I've been one of the most active participants in both.

I'll review them myself, and if I can't find what I'm referring to, then I'll post something more in-depth than "see previous posts".
like i stated earlier, Erdrik, best not to fight it... laff  

Indeed. The reason being, CU is wrong.

Edit: I see I've not addressed how CU paradoxes in backwards time travel would be different to CT paradoxes. MSPaint graphic to come. Expect it maybe tomorrow. I'm tired.
FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #133 on: 08-13-2010 19:08 »

Yay!  big grin An another Tnuk MSpaint!!! to make everything make sense!!! 

... is it just me, or am i beginning to sound like a fangirl... confused  wtf?
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #134 on: 08-13-2010 19:42 »

And here it is.


Click to expand.
Erdrik

Professor
*
« Reply #135 on: 08-13-2010 22:58 »
« Last Edit on: 08-13-2010 23:00 »

Your graphic only shows that you believe there is a difference, but does not show how or why.

CT is a big loop starting at the big bang and ending when all matter decays, right?
Thats a big honkin' loop. If we look only at the backwards time travel events the timeline appears just as straight as a CU. (Just as the earth appears flat to the person standing on it)

Whether it is CU or CT the effect of that time travel should be the same, since it occures only within that local era/pocket of time.
The only time it isn't is in TLPJF when they travel forwards in time to new/restarted universes.
Since this is the only time any time travel event crosses path with the begining or end of a/the universe, then this is the only time in which there could possibly be a difference.

And in CU as you said there would be no paradox(and no destabilisation of the timeline) since it is essentialy still just forward time travel.

totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #136 on: 08-13-2010 23:17 »

Your graphic only shows that you believe there is a difference, but does not show how or why.

CT is a big loop starting at the big bang and ending when all matter decays, right?
Thats a big honkin' loop. If we look only at the backwards time travel events the timeline appears just as straight as a CU. (Just as the earth appears flat to the person standing on it)

Whether it is CU or CT the effect of that time travel should be the same, since it occures only within that local era/pocket of time.
The only time it isn't is in TLPJF when they travel forwards in time to new/restarted universes.
Since this is the only time any time travel event crosses path with the begining or end of a/the universe, then this is the only time in which there could possibly be a difference.

And in CU as you said there would be no paradox(and no destabilisation of the timeline) since it is essentialy still just forward time travel.



Since time itself forms a stable loop, events are stable. The effect of time travel is to create a stable loop, since things have a natural tendancy to work out a certain way. Not so with the CU model. There's no natural tendancy, because there's no curvature to follow. Anything can happen/all bets are off once somebody travels backwards in time. Just because there's only a small "section" of the greater timeline involved doesn't mean that the effects are the same. The entire forward timeline from the point of arrival in the past is compromised. In CT, the natural tendancy to follow the event curve irons out any deviations... allowing backwards time travel and interaction with the past to form stable loops and spirals within the closed circle of the timeline.

CU therefore destablises the established continuity. Like I said, the diagram is grossly simplified. I did try and put more in there, but it ends up far too messy/complex to read. Remember, forward time travel still would work in a CU model, but I'm not just working from TLPJF here. This is a theory that preserves continuity and canon. The CT model works when applied to all Futuramaverse time travel.

So I put in the minimum detail, and relied on the intelligence of the observer. To be honest, I thought once I had gone over it in my head a couple of times that the differences between the two models were self-evident.

As I've said before, I have no problem with the concepts involved here. I realise that some people just don't "get" certain parts, and I'm trying to explain here, but I really do feel that at this point I'm just going over and over what I've already said.

More MSPaint graphics are probably not the answer, since for every diagram I post to explain something, somebody like you (recently, just you) will ask a silly question that either I've already answered, or is just plain stupid. The how/why part is encapsulated in the green box.

I get the feeling that you might just be following through with your earlier promise to try and "irk" me at this point. Consider me irked. Mission accomplished. However, the CU theory is still completely and utterly wrong.
Erdrik

Professor
*
« Reply #137 on: 08-13-2010 23:39 »

Firstly let me just say if you feel my posts are in the area of badgering you or harrassment/trolling/ect, that is not my intent.
Irking may be a small part but that is only in jest.
If so let me know and Ill tone it down.

Mostly I just like these kinds of discussions. If we were person to person I suspect it would have been resolved much sooner, but post to post returns can seem a bit ... extended?
Anywho...

At this point I get what your saying about the "event curve irons out any deviations"
This is represented in the show as the Doom-Field.
The problem Im having is that the same principle can be applied to CU.
In its most basic form what Im saying is that the flow of time, whether curved or not, would smooth out any problems.
Just as a curved path would enforce certain flow of time, so too would a linear path.
Like how a curved or straight river both have an enforceing flow of water.

In which case there would be little to no local difference between CT or CU.
FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #138 on: 08-14-2010 04:56 »

I think what he's trying to say is that, if time doesn't cycle on a large scale it won't want to cycle on a small scale...
in example:
 in a cyclic time model, i go back in time and stop myself from buying a full Futurama season 6 set on dvd... my past self instead gets it for a birthday present, because time needed to have continuity in orde to be able to go on properly... the me that was in the past is now the present me...who goes back to tell himself to not buy it... then that past self gets it as a b-day present, and it cycles through again... thus we have a stable loop!  big grin

in a cyclic universe model i go back in time and stop myself from getting futurama season 6 on dvd... this time i don't get it for my birthday... back in the future i may or may not have it... i most likely don't but i still have memories of having them from going back... or maybe i don't... i also have no reason to go back and stop myself from getting them...  so i don't, but then i do get them in the past and the  cycle continues...  time doesn't need the continuity in order to continue... thus we have an unstable loop...  eek

Did i explain it right, totalnerduk?  confused
Erdrik

Professor
*
« Reply #139 on: 08-14-2010 06:11 »

Why would they not give you the DVD gift as a birthday present just because its CU?
There is no reason the same effect wouldn't apply to a CU.
Both models have a flow of time that would enforce and dictate continuity.

If the continuity dictates you end up with a season 6 DVD of Futurama, then its gunna happen whether its CT or CU becuase of that flow of time.
Fnord
Starship Captain
****
« Reply #140 on: 08-14-2010 08:42 »

Since this has turned into a "cyclic time?" thread, I may as well throw this into the mixture: Cyclic time (or a cyclic universe) isn't compatible with Christianity, since Jesus (according to a big book) died for all the sins of Mankind, past present and future. There'd be no need for him to be crucified twice; the purpose would have already been fulfilled.
SweetZombieJesus

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #141 on: 08-14-2010 14:48 »

Wow... there are waaaaaay too many intelligent people on PEEL. This thread just makes my brain hurt! smile
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #142 on: 08-14-2010 17:03 »

Since this has turned into a "cyclic time?" thread, I may as well throw this into the mixture: Cyclic time (or a cyclic universe) isn't compatible with Christianity, since Jesus (according to a big book) died for all the sins of Mankind, past present and future. There'd be no need for him to be crucified twice; the purpose would have already been fulfilled.

Cyclic time would be compatible with that, just not cyclic universes as the event would only happen once within cyclic time, just you'd see it again and again.

I'm still on the cylic universes side of this debate, however.
Svip

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #143 on: 08-14-2010 17:54 »

cyber_turnip, I think he is trolling.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #144 on: 08-14-2010 19:20 »

I'm pretty sure they were just making a jokey comment and I felt the need to get all sciencey.
FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #145 on: 08-14-2010 22:49 »

Wow... there are waaaaaay too many intelligent people on PEEL. This thread just makes my brain hurt! smile

I've reached my limit on intelligence cry ... i can't explain it any better than i did before... and where is totalnerduk... i can't go on alone...
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #146 on: 08-15-2010 03:27 »
« Last Edit on: 08-15-2010 03:33 by Gopher »

It's like the Bender's age debate...
.

But unlike the Bender's age debate, we have a clear path to figure things out from. Regardless of what the writers intended, they have portrayed a CT model. I'll admit that CU is plausible - but only if we totally ignore the events portrayed in BBS and RTEW, and if we assume that the universe they started out from was the first one (otherwise, every crew in every universe gets squished, which is kindof a problem, because then there's nobody able to set off to squish them). There was some talk about this in #fc last night... which this post is basically a recap of.

The guy championing CU hadn't heard of curved spacetime, had no idea what a stable loop was, needed certain things explaining to him in simple terms, but when we'd finally gotten all that sorted decided to disregard it because CU was "cooler" and "simpler" for him to understand, so he believes it's CU until we get a DVD commentary... which I'll admit is possible might contain somebody saying "Oh, just to piss off that British guy who rants about time travel on a fan forum, this is a Cicrular Universe model we were going for."

If that happens, it'll be funny, but kinda irritating.Speaking of irritating... tongue

The problem Im having is that the same principle can be applied to CU.
In its most basic form what Im saying is that the flow of time, whether curved or not, would smooth out any problems.
Just as a curved path would enforce certain flow of time, so too would a linear path.
Like how a curved or straight river both have an enforceing flow of water.

In which case there would be little to no local difference between CT or CU.

I'm saying there's no predetermined curve that events want to cling to in CU, therefore the problems may be smoothed over by events taking a different course, since there is no "inertia" type effect to pull things back in the right direction. CU basically allows the back to the future time travel model (which is in itself inherantly flawed), whilst CT fits into the established continuity of Futurama very neatly.

Like I said, if the writers turn around and say "CU", I'll accept that. But regardless of their intent, they have portrayed CT. If they meant it to be CU, I'll lose a lot of respect for them, their show, and ultimately, some of my favourite episodes.


Since this has turned into a "cyclic time?" thread, I may as well throw this into the mixture: Cyclic time (or a cyclic universe) isn't compatible with Christianity, since Jesus (according to a big book) died for all the sins of Mankind, past present and future. There'd be no need for him to be crucified twice; the purpose would have already been fulfilled.

Actually, it is perfectly compatible. CU isn't. CU means that multiple times in multiple universes, Christ dies for the sins of mankind. CT means that once in one universe, Christ dies. However, it's like a looped cassette tape playing over and over. Once it ends, it begins again, so Christ only dies once, but that death "replays" once the loop reaches that point. Time being circular, it doesn't happen more than once, but at the same time, go forward far enough, and you'll wind back up at where it happened.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #147 on: 08-15-2010 04:00 »
« Last Edit on: 08-15-2010 04:02 »

Is it not possible that more than one type of time-travel exists within the Futurama universe though?

I always took the paradox-correcting time-code to be a special sort of time-travel because of how they treated it. The fact that it was a code, and 'paradox-correcting'. They didn't write that film as if time-travel has a habit of self-correcting paradoxes you make, they wrote it as if this was a special type of time-travel designed to gloss over paradoxes so with this particular type of time-travel you could go mental and do what you want in the past without changing the future.

I mean, The Why of Fry clearly doesn't follow the same sort of time-travel because Fry changes the future by telling Nibbler that Scooty Puff Junior sucks.

So there are already inconsistencies with the time travel or simply different types of time travel and that is why I don't feel as if the past episodes particularly apply to The Late Philip J. Fry. I stand by cyclical universes because I think it's pretty obviously what the writers intended.



Actually, it is perfectly compatible. CU isn't. CU means that multiple times in multiple universes, Christ dies for the sins of mankind. CT means that once in one universe, Christ dies. However, it's like a looped cassette tape playing over and over. Once it ends, it begins again, so Christ only dies once, but that death "replays" once the loop reaches that point. Time being circular, it doesn't happen more than once, but at the same time, go forward far enough, and you'll wind back up at where it happened.
I already said that.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #148 on: 08-15-2010 04:13 »

I mean, The Why of Fry clearly doesn't follow the same sort of time-travel because Fry changes the future by telling Nibbler that Scooty Puff Junior sucks.

TWOF actually follows the same sort of time travel as TLPJF... sort of. It's an event spiral contained within the timeline rather than looping around it.
Is it not possible that more than one type of time-travel exists within the Futurama universe though?

Well, yes. TWOF, TLPJF, RTEW, and BBS all use different methods for travelling in time. However, the mechanics of time travel are and must remain consistent.

So there are already inconsistencies with the time travel or simply different types of time travel and that is why I don't feel as if the past episodes particularly apply to The Late Philip J. Fry. I stand by cyclical universes because I think it's pretty obviously what the writers intended.

There are no inconsistencies once the CT model is employed, and regardless of the intent, the model that they ended up portraying and the one which allows it all to make some sort of jumbled sense is that of Circular/Cyclical Time rather than Cyclical Universes.


Actually, it is perfectly compatible. CU isn't. CU means that multiple times in multiple universes, Christ dies for the sins of mankind. CT means that once in one universe, Christ dies. However, it's like a looped cassette tape playing over and over. Once it ends, it begins again, so Christ only dies once, but that death "replays" once the loop reaches that point. Time being circular, it doesn't happen more than once, but at the same time, go forward far enough, and you'll wind back up at where it happened.
I already said that.

I wanted to have a go at saying it. big grin
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #149 on: 08-15-2010 04:48 »

Must the mechanics remain consistent though? Keeping in mind that the time-code came from a sentient being that may very well be Futurama's God. Is it not possible that it was basically capable of magic or allowing time-travel through methods we don't even begin to have theories for whereas other forms of time-travel we've seen just use the mechanics we know of. It is science-fiction at the end of the day.

I wanted to have a go at saying it. big grin
To give you your dues, I think you put it better than I did.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #150 on: 08-15-2010 05:06 »

Must the mechanics remain consistent though? ... It is science-fiction at the end of the day.
Hmm. It might be science-fiction, but I enjoy the science part of it enough to want the facts within the fiction to be relatively straight. tongue
I wanted to have a go at saying it. big grin
To give you your dues, I think you put it better than I did.

Thanks. big grin Occasionally, I don't suck at explaining stuff.
FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #151 on: 08-15-2010 07:00 »

Yay!!! You're back!!! big grin
Taco Wiz

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #152 on: 08-15-2010 14:50 »

The exact same big bang under the exact same conditions keeps creating the same universe.

Than means nobody has free will inside the Futurama canon.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #153 on: 08-15-2010 18:18 »

I don't think it does, I just think that it means that someone who has the exact same upbringing and biology will behave exactly the same when the exact same things happen to them. If that makes sense.
FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #154 on: 08-15-2010 20:00 »

But they're not all new people... they are the same people, because time is cyclical.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #155 on: 08-15-2010 20:36 »

That's still under debate.

Me and Taco Wiz clearly both subscribe to a cyclical universe theory, so we're discussing the ramifications of that.
FutureJan

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #156 on: 08-15-2010 20:55 »

all right... in discussing the ramifications of a CU universe... the people would not be the same people... they would be similar enough to be able to step into each other's lives, but different enough that when people see them side by side they could tell which one is there own by the way they behave... in  other words there would be slight behavioral differences, Fry from U+0 drinks a ton of slurm while Fry from universe U+1 might drink a ton of diet slurm... just an example...

i still subscribe to the CT theory...
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #157 on: 08-15-2010 22:11 »

That's still under debate.

Me and Taco Wiz clearly both subscribe to a cyclical universe theory, so we're discussing the ramifications of that.

Despite the flaws, despite the problems it causes with canon, and despite the on-screen evidence. Ladies, and gentlemen, that is dedication! The state of Kansas has got nothing on these CU wackos! tongue
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #158 on: 08-15-2010 22:15 »

Says who? Why couldn't they be absolute identical down to the last detail. The universe was almost identical and whilst we know of one key difference (the new one was 10 feet lower than the original), for all we know everything else was exactly the same to a T. Even behaviourally, speaking.

If these people were identical biologically and had the exact same upbringing as their past selves, then surely they would be identical people. It stands to reason.
There are some scientific theories that contradict this, but Futurama has never been afraid of poo-pooing some theories that are very much just theories.


And tnuk, I choose to believe what I think the writers intended us to believe. We're coming at it from different view points, it's  that simple.
As I've said, it doesn't cause any flaws with canon because for all we know the different forms of time-travel behave differently and follow different rules and as for on-screen evidence: you know as well as I do that there's plenty of evidence in favour of a multiple universe theory. I'd say there's more evidence for it from the episode as a stand-alone, it's only when you start comparing it up against past episodes and scientific titbits that I doubt the writers took into account that cyclical time begins to hold water.

In many ways this is like the whole evolution debate. They want to listen to God's word, or in my case, the writers of the show because they are essentially the show's God. The difference is that we know that the writers of the show exist, so I'd say my viewpoint is the intelligent one whereas ignoring the world of God is stupid in this particular case.
Taco Wiz

Delivery Boy
**
« Reply #159 on: 08-15-2010 22:21 »

Wow. The Futurama fans here are so dedicated. Maybe someday when I'm an adult I can put up good debates like you guys.
But they're not all new people... they are the same people, because time is cyclical.
That wasn't how I interpreted it. I don't think time is cyclical (in the Futurama universe), I think the same orgasnims are created again and again and they interact the same way again and again, all because of the eternal chain reaction that starts with the big bang.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.196 seconds with 17 queries.