Cyclical Time (CTSU) vs. Cyclical Universe (LTMU) - Let's Get Ready to Rumbleeeee!

[Reply #80 on:]

Oh wow everyone is arguing with TNUK in this thread... Change the title to 'TNUK vs. Everyone'!

[Reply #81 on:]

Since we witness nothing of the sort, that's utter hogwash. The evidence against it is substantial, as well.

Everything down to subatomic particles decays into a zero point state. There is nothing left to coalesce.

That's the very defining point of the Big Crunch. Look it up online; the crushing of all matter into that singularity is the prerequisite for a second Big Bang. The only other need is for some sort of dark energy, or dark matter. If only we had something akin to that in the Futuramaverse, one with no clear purpose but which still managed to make it into our knowledge.  

It isn't actually the defning point of a big crunch. The big crunch sees the universe begin to contract, bringing all matter back to the "centre" again into an enormous black hole. The scenario described in Futurama is heat death, the exact opposite of the big crunch.

Of course the big crunch assumes you need all the matter in place to make the big bang happen. One version of the big bang hypothesis posits that all matter in the universe was created by a random quantum fluctuation, requiring no previous "big crunch". Current measurements indicate that the universe is likely to suffer a heat death rather than start to contract again, which means no future big crunch. Eventually the entire universe will decay to nothing. It's postulated that another big bang could take place within that nothing, replacing the dead universe with a new one. Time starts over, in effect.

[Reply #82 on:]

Since we witness nothing of the sort, that's utter hogwash. The evidence against it is substantial, as well.

Everything down to subatomic particles decays into a zero point state. There is nothing left to coalesce.

That's the very defining point of the Big Crunch. Look it up online; the crushing of all matter into that singularity is the prerequisite for a second Big Bang. The only other need is for some sort of dark energy, or dark matter. If only we had something akin to that in the Futuramaverse, one with no clear purpose but which still managed to make it into our knowledge. 

It isn't actually the defning point of a big crunch. The big crunch sees the universe begin to contract, bringing all matter back to the "centre" again into an enormous black hole. The scenario described in Futurama is heat death, the exact opposite of the big crunch.

Of course the big crunch assumes you need all the matter in place to make the big bang happen. One version of the big bang hypothesis posits that all matter in the universe was created by a random quantum fluctuation, requiring no previous "big crunch". Current measurements indicate that the universe is likely to suffer a heat death rather than start to contract again, which means no future big crunch. Eventually the entire universe will decay to nothing. It's postulated that another big bang could take place within that nothing, replacing the dead universe with a new one. Time starts over, in effect.

Looks like I stand corrected. I still hold issue with 'time starting over'; because we see the crew traverse the space between generations of the universe, I still think about this linearly.

My above diagram must be changed to Heat Death/Big Bang, but the Universes still progress forwards. Time is subjective, and we only perceive this current Big Bang to be the first because it is the first we can know of. My improper vocabulary use is a shame, but it doesn't change the deeper structure of my argument. My apologies for my inadequate preparation.

[Reply #83 on:]

One version of the big bang hypothesis posits that all matter in the universe was created by a random quantum fluctuation, requiring no previous "big crunch". [...] It's postulated that another big bang could take place within that nothing, replacing the dead universe with a new one. Time starts over, in effect.

Fridge Horror: Suppose one of these quantum fluctuations occurs before the universe reaches heat death.

While we're still here.

[Reply #84 on:]

One version of the big bang hypothesis posits that all matter in the universe was created by a random quantum fluctuation, requiring no previous "big crunch". [...] It's postulated that another big bang could take place within that nothing, replacing the dead universe with a new one. Time starts over, in effect.

Fridge Horror: Suppose one of these quantum fluctuations occurs before the universe reaches heat death.

While we're still here.

OH GOD.

Eldridge abominations from a bygone era, assemble!

[Reply #85 on:]

I guess I overestimated your ability to understand things. Read what I said again. Similar to my manner of answering shown earlier in this post, I try to allow my opponent to put together themselves what I am saying by giving them all the evidence of the sure possibility. If Roosevelt was known by the Professor, it makes the most sense that there is a major overlap between the four cycles. Svip understood completely.

Svip's diagram actually contradicts yours. You fail to understand svip's diagram.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to use this again:



You also don't seem to understand the following terms:

• Big Crunch
• Singularity
• Cycle

Oh wow everyone is arguing with TNUK in this thread... Change the title to 'TNUK vs. Everyone'!

I think you'll find that's actually not what's happening. Chives is arguing with the CT model.

Looks like I stand corrected. I still hold issue with 'time starting over'; because we see the crew traverse the space between generations of the universe, I still think about this linearly.

My above diagram must be changed to Heat Death/Big Bang, but the Universes still progress forwards. Time is subjective, and we only perceive this current Big Bang to be the first because it is the first we can know of. My improper vocabulary use is a shame, but it doesn't change the deeper structure of my argument. My apologies for my inadequate preparation.

Thinking about this linearly is where you're going wrong, and the deeper structure of your argument is totally unsound. CU only makes a limited amount of sense to begin with, and as you begin to analyse it from the POV of RTEW, TWOF and BBS, it begins to break down.

CT holds up well within the framework of the entire continuity.

I really don't know how many times it's possible for me to say this before I start daubing it on the walls with the blood of those who disagree.

[Reply #86 on:]

I don't think Svip's diagram is contradictory; I accounted for overlaps, and all he did was further explain them. If there is some major issue at hand there which I can't see, please enlighten me.

You never did say what was precisely wrong about any of my personal rationalizations for RTEW, TWOF and BBS, either. I explained why they would stay within their available universe, and how a linear structure works. What deeper structure is unsound? CU holds up well within the framework of the entire continuity, as soon as you let go of the idea that everything has to be completely intertwined. Fact of the matter is that the two sets of examples are two differing methods of traveling through time.

One, TLFJF, is outside the timeline looking in. It watches from a point outside the relevancy of the universe somehow. As for how, ask The Professor. His ship moves the universe around it's engines, his Forwards Time Machine moves around the universe instead of inside it. This is WHY it can only move forwards; it doesn't alter time in any way, it only allows a person to witness it.

The other three episodes deal with time travel on a scale within the universe, and as such only can effect that one universe. In all three cases it is Universe 1 on my diagram, but it would work equally as well in any of them. These methods can travel to any point within the universe, but can not traverse the barrier at either end; the birth and death of the universe both involve compacting and destroying these methods, hence rendering them useless.

As for my blood on the walls, we'll see. Maybe you should cover the walls in your latest .gif; it would have the same visual appeal and be appropriate to boot.

[Reply #87 on:]

A linear structure doesn't work. It just doesn't. It just doesn't work. I've already explained this multiple times in other threads, and at least once in this one (go on, read carefully through it).

Pretty much everything you're saying in the post above mine is wrong.

I don't think Svip's diagram is contradictory; I accounted for overlaps, and all he did was further explain them.

No, you didn't. Svip's diagram actually shows the "current" futuramaverse with Roosevelt's status as "Killed". Look at it. Look at yours. Look carefully, look closer, and look again. Ignoring concerns for the moment whether CU or CT is represented, your timeline is wrong.

If there is some major issue at hand there which I can't see, please enlighten me.

Timeline splits, alternative timelines, parallel universes, paradoxes, temporal inertia, predeterminism, stable time loops... there isn't just one issue. Linear progression through a series of distinct and seperate universes just doesn't work. The repetition of time itself, the cycling around of time and the universe like a VHS tape on a permenant loop (subject of course to a small percentage of static), and the joining of time at both ends doesn't actually run into any of these issues. In fact, the CT framework holds them neatly.

You never did say what was precisely wrong about any of my personal rationalizations for RTEW, TWOF and BBS, either.

Well that just shows you're not reading what I'm typing, or not comprehending it. Go back and look at the two diagrams showing temporal inertia and the effects of changes to the timeline in a CU model.

I explained why they would stay within their available universe, and how a linear structure works.

Which would be fine if it weren't wrong. It'd be fine if a linear structure actually worked. Which it doesn't. See my previous posts. I'm done repeating myself for the moment.

What deeper structure is unsound?

Some time ago, I posted the internal circular structure of the time travel within BBS. Find that picture. Y'see, that doesn't work without the CT framework. In fact, when we get down to the base level, the CU model is subject to too much interference from time travel to ever be stable. Timeline splits have been shown not to occur in the Futuramaverse. Timeline splits are one consequence of the CU model. CU works for things like Back To The Future. It doesn't work within the Futuramaverse.

CU holds up well within the framework of the entire continuity, as soon as you let go of the idea that everything has to be completely intertwined.

No, you can't let go of that. It's the entire fucking point. It's a continuity, one thing follows on from another. And because it's a continuity involving time travel, one thing sometimes follows on from another thing that happened after the thing that will follow on from it. Which, again, will only be able to occur if there is a cyclical momentum (temporal inertia again) acting on the timeline. Random, tiny fluctuations (static on a TV screen that doesn't interfere with the whole picture) may occur in any iteration, but each iteration of the space-time continuum is essentially the same. It's a cycle. It repeats within a closed framework. It's not a linear progression.

Fact of the matter is that the two sets of examples are two differing methods of traveling through time.

Two differing methods of exploring the same continuum. It's the same flow of time that these methods (which aren't actually so different) are interacting with. You can't discard one and examine the other to come up with a contiguous model.

One, TLFJF, is outside the timeline looking in. It watches from a point outside the relevancy of the universe somehow. As for how, ask The Professor. His ship moves the universe around it's engines, his Forwards Time Machine moves around the universe instead of inside it. This is WHY it can only move forwards.

This does not affect the relevance of the CT framework. In fact, I've said the same thing in other threads to explain why the time machine was able to cross the "bump" between the end and the beginning of time. Also, it's TLPJF.

The other three episodes deal with time travel on a scale within the universe, and as such only can effect that one universe. In all three cases it is Universe 1 on my diagram, but it would work equally as well in any of them.

So? They only affect the timestream in the same iteration of the universe, but it's the framework of the universe (CT) that allows them to work.

These methods can travel to any point within the universe, but can not traverse the barrier at either end; the birth and death of the universe both involve compacting and destroying these methods,

. Oh dear God, no. No, no, no. There is no "barrier". They cannot travel past the beginning of the universe because there is nothing to travel to before it. They cannot travel past the end of the universe because they are backwards methods of time travel. There is no "compacting and destroying" at either end. Really, I'm starting to think there's a much longer list of terms you don't understand.

As for my blood on the walls, we'll see. Maybe you should cover the walls in your latest .gif; it would have the same visual appeal and be appropriate to boot.

It would be appropriate for me to cover your walls in "wrong", yes. However, I'm not sure you understand exactly why.

[Reply #88 on:]

People should be made to study the knowledge in this thread.

[Reply #89 on:]

Constantly, time and time again, you call me wrong while you are agreeing with me on so many issues. First off, because of overlapping, 1st and 3rd can be the same. The only difference is that we witnessed 1st, and so we can not be sure of our assumption that they are even though many different sections of evidence point to that conclusion.

Internal backtracking DOES work within a linear model. It's as easy as understanding that there are TWO kinds of time travel here. The first kind is the kind which we see in BBS, TWOF, and RTEW. It is the kind which we usually think of as time travel. You say there is no barrier, yet I was only using the word barrier as a substitute for the idea that there is no traveling past big bangs because there is nothing there. You are supporting that idea.

The second kind of time travel, which is seen in TLPJF (typo earlier), can hardly be called time travel at all. It is a time acceleration; the Forwards Time Machine somehow leaves the usual space of the universe and moves quickly into the constant future, only moving forwards, as the universes break and reform before it.

It's not a difficult concept. I explained the individual occurrences in my earlier post; reexamine with the truth in mind that we are dealing with two methods of travel here.

Finally, let me say this; every universe is the same. In every universe, or at the very least Universes 1 and 3, TWOF, BBS, and RTEW happened with no incident. They are contained within their universes because the method of travel which they use is unable to move beyond the birth or death of a universe. Linear progression does not contradict any past ideas, but only serves to better explain why both methods of travel can work.

In terms even easier to understand, the Forwards Time Machine is well named. Why can it only move forwards? It leaves the confines of space and time and watches as the universe progresses naturally forwards. A device which is able to perform this feat can ONLY move forwards, because time only moves forwards. Other examples of time travel use physics we do not and can not understand, but we do see plainly that they are only present within the universe itself, allowing the travel to work as it does.

[Reply #90 on:]

Constantly, time and time again, you call me wrong while you are agreeing with me on so many issues.

I'm not sure what you consider "agreement" here.

First off, because of overlapping, 1st and 3rd can be the same.

There's no "overlapping". It's one universe, one timeline, repeated again and again. There is no "overlap", because there's nothing to overlap with.

The only difference is that we witnessed 1st, and so we can not be sure of our assumption that they are even though many different sections of evidence point to that conclusion.

This is so bad I'm going to ignore it. I don't know where to begin beating you over the head with it.

Internal backtracking DOES work within a linear model. It's as easy as understanding that there are TWO kinds of time travel here. The first kind is the kind which we see in BBS, TWOF, and RTEW. It is the kind which we usually think of as time travel.

Which doesn't work within a linear model.

The second kind of time travel, which is seen in TLPJF (typo earlier), can hardly be called time travel at all. It is a time acceleration; the Forwards Time Machine somehow leaves the usual space of the universe and moves quickly into the constant future, only moving forwards, as the universes break and reform before it.

It would end with the rest of the universe if it did that. It's basically outside of the continuum, allowing the heat death of the universe to result in the end of time and the cycle to repeat. Were it present, the heat death of the universe would be incomplete. It's more of a "standing still whilst time moves past it" machine.

It's not a difficult concept. I explained the individual occurrences in my earlier post; reexamine with the truth in mind that we are dealing with two methods of travel here.

None of this makes the CU model any more valid. Sure, there are two different kinds of time travel used... but both of them within the same space-time continuum, and that framework needs to support both.

Finally, let me say this; every universe is the same. In every universe, or at the very least Universes 1 and 3, TWOF, BBS, and RTEW happened with no incident. They are contained within their universes because the method of travel which they use is unable to move beyond the birth or death of a universe. Linear progression does not contradict any past ideas, but only serves to better explain why both methods of travel can work.

Don't make me post the .gif twice on the same page, sparky. The time travel in these three episodes doesn't work within a linear framework... only within a circular one, where temporal inertia is present.



In terms even easier to understand, the Forwards Time Machine is well named.

Why can it only move forwards? It leaves the confines of space and time and watches as the universe progresses naturally forwards. A device which is able to perform this feat can ONLY move forwards, because time only moves forwards. Other examples of time travel use physics we do not and can not understand, but we do see plainly that they are only present within the universe itself, allowing the travel to work as it does.

What the fuck does that have to do with the price of bread? Seriously. That's got no effect on the framework of the mechanics used. Where's my facepalm smiley?



Look, in this CU linear progression, there's nothing to ensure that events play out the way they're supposed to, which splits the timeline and thereby prevents paradoxes from occuring. The very fact that paradoxes occur means that the timeline does not split, and there is temporal inertia acting on events within the Futuramaverse, which supports the CT model. The CU model is inherantly unstable when backwards time travel is involved. Not only is CT more stable, it's the only logical conclusion when you put everything from Futurama's established continuity together.

[Reply #91 on:]

The missing factor is context. A linear timeline may be something that happens in real life (or maybe not, we don't know) but, within the context of the series, a cyclical timeline fits the known facts and explains the events therein better than a linear timeline. Your basic popperian scientific method demands that the hypothesis that most closely fits the known evidence be accepted. In the case of Futurama's time travel, the cyclical time hypothesis most closely fits what we know. Again, in the context of the series.

Context is everything.

[Reply #92 on:]

*claps*

I've been convinced. Recent further examination of TWOF was the nail in the coffin; I see that CT works much better with it, something which I suppose I missed in my earlier disillusioned grandeur.

Now that I've admitted wrongdoing, and this huge offtopic discussion is over, I wouldn't mind saving what little face I can and see a return to the original point of this post, which was (in case anyone forgot)...

The amazing ability of the FTM to live life in a different way than we would without it.

[Reply #93 on:]

Yeah, it'd be nice to be a functionally-immortal omnipotent god. Of course, there are a few problems. You can't have sex with too many of history's greatest lovers in one cycle - you'll end up with a far more complex family tree than simply being your own grandfather if you screw enough people in the past. You also can't introduce too much future knowledge, or else you risk people becoming aware of the possibilities for this machine themselves, and either copying or stealing it.

You could have fun hunting or taming dinosaurs, and joyriding through the American south with a space helmet and a rectal probe in the 1980's, I suppose.

I'd prefer a TARDIS and the ability to regenerate, personally. I've the feeling that after a few centuries of cycling and re-cycling through time, rejuvenation at the tar spa, and basically watching everything that ever was and ever will be degenerate into nothing, I'd be slightly jaded by the experience if not outright suicidally depressed.

I'd also be incredibly tempted to use it to win every lottery ever. Just because every time I play, I never win a damn thing.

[Reply #94 on:]

Hey, if you ever get too suicidal, just rig up a contraption to drain memory. If there is a memory-ray to help you remember, I bet there is one to help you forget. Then you can live it all over again.

Personally, I can't imagine ever getting bored. Planets upon planets, each with their own history and cultures to study... I think I'd be entertained for a long time just doing things in everyday life which at first seemed unwise. A little murder here, a couple slight changes to my life choices there.

[Reply #95 on:]

Lotteries are rigged by computers, that's why the only ones you hear winning are some dirt farmers missing teeth in kansas. It's rightly so they should win, I just don't feel like giving away my money to pay for unneeded expenditures here. Maybe it's different in Europe but that's how I see it here.

[Reply #96 on:]

Lotteries are rigged by computers, that's why the only ones you hear winning are some dirt farmers missing teeth in kansas. It's rightly so they should win, I just don't feel like giving away my money to pay for unneeded expenditures here. Maybe it's different in Europe but that's how I see it here.

Thats not true! Most of the people out here in CA are already rich. Me and my cousin who are totally broke used to play the lottery all the time, and our friend played with us. He already has a lot of money...and he won $500 on a scratcher. lol.
I used to play every day...it was awful. The most I've ever won is $11. But someday I will win the jackpot! I feel like we deserve it. I know exactly what I would do with all the money...

[Reply #97 on:]

Buy more lottery tickets?

[Reply #98 on:]

lol, it seems like really old people win the lottery or people that are already rich win it.

[Reply #99 on:]

That was a scratcher, I don't believe those are rigged...it's the multimillion jackpots that they show them picking the balls and then pull away the camera to match the ones that were called.

Well everyone's paranoid on this board, that one is mine.

[Reply #100 on:]

Really?  But it is the most exciting I am about someone picking my balls.

[Reply #101 on:]

Who are you and what have you done with ducky? First fudgepacking now incomprehensible sentences. SNAP OUT OF IT!!

* futurefreak waves Svip back and forth

[Reply #102 on:]

Incomprehensible? It made perfect sense. He likes likes it when the pretty girls on the TV handle his balls, because sometimes it's a winner.

[Reply #103 on:]

Is that what he was saying? I apparently don't read duck.

[Reply #104 on:]

I like shredded duck, give me some now before I go quackers! ...

[Reply #105 on:]

Every time I see you post the smiley it makes me . And that's the third time today I've seen you do that, Otis!

[Reply #106 on:]

Is that what he was saying? I apparently don't read duck.

Change "exciting" to "excited" and it makes perfect sense.

[Reply #107 on:]

It still reads disturbing...grammatically... as does this...

[Reply #108 on:]

I'd do exactly what I do now.  I'd weave tapestries of stories from this fabric spun from threads of reality.

Why wouldn't you?

[Reply #109 on:]

TLPJF was the emotional money shot of the season.  I would say aside from the shippiness, it had a very melancholy feel to it, seeing human civilization constantly rise and fall over the invervening million years, and that one day NNY will be destroyed, and eventually it will be as if it never existed, along with everyone we know and love in the series.  It's funny, but it has a very sobering feel to it. Nothing lasts for ever.  Civilization rises, falls, dominant lifeforms evolve and die out, and eventually the universe comes to an end.

And that's not even getting into the idea that time isn't cylical, they ended up in a completely new universe, and the Leela we grew up with died miserable and alone, and we actually have a new set of characters TDK! onwards. 

[Reply #110 on:]

And that's not even getting into the idea that time isn't cylical, they ended up in a completely new universe, and the Leela we grew up with died miserable and alone, and we actually have a new set of characters TDK! onwards. 

It's good that you're not getting into that, since it's completely wrong and I'd feel the need to step in with a whole slew of worked examples to make you feel foolish for suggesting it.

[Reply #111 on:]

And that's not even getting into the idea that time isn't cylical, they ended up in a completely new universe, and the Leela we grew up with died miserable and alone, and we actually have a new set of characters TDK! onwards.  

It's good that you're not getting into that, since it's completely wrong and I'd feel the need to step in with a whole slew of worked examples to make you feel foolish for suggesting it.

I've read your things about it, but I still can't shake off the impression the ending gives me.  The writers really should have tightened up the writing to make the ending more clear, because I'm not the only one who got that impression that they are in a new universe billions of years into the future, not that time reset itself in every new big crunch/big bang, and history repeated itself with the same people and planets, rather then new ones that are just duplicates of the old ones. 

[Reply #112 on:]

-sigh-

I can see I need to go back to this issue once again. Alright, I'll bite. Gimme a few hours to rewatch the episode, prepare evidence for both sides, and produce some sort of easily understandable graphical representation.

[Reply #113 on:]

I love it when tnuk gets his graph head on.

[Reply #114 on:]

I love it when tnuk gets his graph head on.

What's even better is that he's dealing with someone who just skims through Wikipedia in an attempt to pass it off as genuine knowledge in case it comes up on The Weakest Link.  I'm smart like that.    

But seriously Tnuk, I have read all your statements and wotnot and charts and so on about this ending, and I still just can't shake off that interpratation even if you have proven it wrong.  I never said it was justified, just a fault of the writing handling it.

[Reply #115 on:]

I do the same thing, but I don't even use Wikipedia. I use pure thin air and imagination as evidence.

[Reply #116 on:]

I do the same thing, but I don't even use Wikipedia. I use pure thin air and imagination as evidence.

I just use my physical unattractiveness as a means.  People look at me and think: "Someone that ugly has got to have smarts to make up for it."

It works!  Now if you excuse me, I need to go apply overpriced goop to my disgusting, acne cratered skin and cry. 

[Reply #117 on:]

I think it's quite clear that they writers intended for it to be a newly created universe.

Totalnerduk's entire argument comes down to whether or not it's what they intended, they supposedly portrayed cyclical time, but I'd sooner writer that off as a 'goof' rather than what's canon. But even then, I don't think something not being 100% scientifically accurate in the show necessarily constitutes a goof.

[Reply #118 on:]

I don't think totalnerduk's issue is scientific, rather sense making.  I don't think it is clear what the writers intended.  In fact, it is clear to me that they did not care it is a new iteration of the same universe.  Everything is the same.  You can watch from "The 30% Iron Chef" to "The Silence of the Clamps" without watching "The Late Philip J. Fry" and you won't have missed a significant plot altering event.

Did the sky change colour?  Did the sun set in the east?  No, you have to watch "That Darn Katz!" for the last one.  Nothing changed because of "The Late Philip J. Fry", which strongly argues for the iteration concept rather than a 'new universe'.

Don't misinterpret people's desire to have others watch "The Late Philip J. Fry" as if it is a major importance to the overall plot, but rather that it is a good episode.

[Reply #119 on:]

I know I will have to move these posts to that CT vs. CU thread so I will...I am preparing for it...

It is done, huzzah!