• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Split/Loop Timeline theory

Inflexus

ZDG's Prophet
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Location
California


I would like the commentary and help of the community in this new timeline.

I don't know a few of the Gameboy Games or PH that well so it would be difficult to resolve, but I think this theory is pretty logically sound and it adheres to Nintendo statements.
 

Inflexus

ZDG's Prophet
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Location
California
Well I really don't see how the "reality split" happens, but other than that it seems possible.
The reality split was suggest by a developer in an interview who said that Windwaker and Twilight Princess happen in parallel universes, and both TP and WW take place 100 years after the events of Ocarina of Time.
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Location
Colorado
Adult
vvvv
/- TWW- PH
OoT
\- MM- TP- ALttP- OoX - LA- TMC- FSA- LoZ- AoL
^ ^ ^ ^
Child

TWW (and the flood) happen in the Adult timeline, since there isn't a Link in the Adult timeline. Reason why is because Link was sent back to the past (Child timeline) by Zelda at the end of OoT, thus creating an alternate timeline (like in Back to the Future), and making it so that there is no Link in that timeline. That is also why the Link in TWW (and PH, of course) are said to have no relations with the Hero of Time (OoT Link).


TP places with the Child timeline for a few reasons.
If TP were to occur in the Adult timeline, then it would have to happen in between OoT and TWW where the great flood occurs. That isn't possible, because we know the Great Flood happened because Ganon/dorf came back and there was no hero to beat him, but in TP there was a hero.
The other reason, is because it showed the Sages capturing Ganon/dorf and sealing him away...in the Adult timeline, Ganon/dorf was sealed away after Link beat him. The Sages capturing Ganon/dorf means that when Link was sent back, he informed Zelda about Ganon/dorf's scheme before he was able to carry it through. Another note able mention is in TP when it says "By some evil prank, he was able to get the Triforce of Power". We all know that Ganon/dorf got the ToP in the Adult timeline after Link opened the Door of Time, so them saying Ganon/dorf got the ToP by other means supports TP being in the Child timeline.

Questions?
 

Inflexus

ZDG's Prophet
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Location
California
This isn't a question of the split timeline theory, I understand that. The question is where the split takes place. Ocarina of Time is capable of resolving it's own time paradox and therefore an entire alternate universe must be created.

Having a seperate universe for 7 years in the future is not likely because it would force OoT into not being able to resolve it's own time paradox. So with that being said, either Link and his decendants have to keep reliving the same 7 years(which doesn't happen obviously) or they have to move on in the same universe.

Questions?
 

Mases

Lord of the Flies
Administrator
Site Staff
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Location
Morton Grove, Illinois
Inflexus, I think you really need to clarify a few things before we can even begin to possibly debate specifics about this theory.

1) Most importantly, explain (In great detail) exactly what the paradox in Ocarina of Time actually is. Also, can something truly be considered a paradox if it inevitably corrects itself? Explain what you think is the paradox and how it relates to your theory.

2) Explain the logic behind the reality split. I can only assume that you believe that there is ONLY ONE possible ending to Ocarina of Time. You reject the split theory, but put forth a reality split theory. I understand parallel worlds, but that statement is in support of what many believe is the split timeline. If it is not the ending of Ocarina of Time, then what event actually caused this 'reality split'.
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Location
Colorado
Ever seen Back to the Future PT2? It's sort of like that. I'll make an image since you don't understand words.

Oh, and what Mases said.
 

Inflexus

ZDG's Prophet
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Location
California
Inflexus, I think you really need to clarify a few things before we can even begin to possibly debate specifics about this theory.

1) Most importantly, explain (In great detail) exactly what the paradox in Ocarina of Time actually is. Also, can something truly be considered a paradox if it inevitably corrects itself? Explain what you think is the paradox and how it relates to your theory.
The Paradox created in Ocarina is simple enough. Link jumps 7 years to the future and seals Ganondorf(the resolution), then he is sent back to the past before the events that killed Ganondorf took place.

Now that he is in the past, Ganondorf still exists and needs to be sealed. The resolution can not be reached because Link is caught in a never-ending 7 year loop trying to seal ganondorf, go back in time, then go through the events that make it necessary to seal him again.

Ganondorf curses Link's decendants in the end, so we know that Link has a family and will yield generation after generation of heroes, so we know that Link's conciousness has to escape the 7 year loop.

The most rational explanation is that Zelda lies in wait and bides time for 7 years, Link goes off and does the events of Majora's Mask. He gets back and finishes waiting.

Not to say that Majora's Mask happened promptly after he got back from slaying Ganondorf, because Young Link could ride Epona and use a bow and Hylian Shield. So we know because of that that Link has matured, I'd guess at least 3 or 4 years, but that's besides the point.

The Majora's Mask events happen while waiting for the 7 years to be over, so Link doesn't go into a slumber and yield the triforce to Ganondorf. Link then, at age 17, claims the Master Sword, seals Ganon, and has successfully forwarded his conciousness in the simplest way possible.

It sounds like more speculation and assumption than it actually is, but it is logically sound.

2) Explain the logic behind the reality split. I can only assume that you believe that there is ONLY ONE possible ending to Ocarina of Time. You reject the split theory, but put forth a reality split theory. I understand parallel worlds, but that statement is in support of what many believe is the split timeline. If it is not the ending of Ocarina of Time, then what event actually caused this 'reality split'.

I believe the split happens somewhere else because the Paradox created in OoT/MM is resolved. Therefore, the split happened most likely around TP and WW/PH, since both TP and WW take place(and I quote Nintendo)"a hundred years after the events of OoT". If they happened then, it would force a split before then, either in the hundred year gap or at that point. The split would not be created by the events of OoT, abolishing the child/adult timeline idea.

This post was a mouthful, I hope it makes sense.
 

Mases

Lord of the Flies
Administrator
Site Staff
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Location
Morton Grove, Illinois
Now that he is in the past, Ganondorf still exists and needs to be sealed. The resolution can not be reached because Link is caught in a never-ending 7 year loop trying to seal ganondorf, go back in time, then go through the events that make it necessary to seal him again.
There is not a time loop. Nintendo didn't exactly do the 'going back in time' thing like most modern time travel theories. For example, we can only assume there was never TWO Link's in the same time period. There are two possible solutions here.

Once Link is sent back in time, all thought of what happens in the future is erased. The future doesn't exist. Thus, the course of events happens, Link is sent back in time, the events happen, etc... This isn't a loop, since the events only happen once. It is not a continuous process over several time loops, but just one event. Therefore, there is no way that Link could realize that this is a never ending cycle since it would be completely natural for him.

The other, what seems to be more rational scenario, based on the evidence of the game is the following. Princess Zelda sends Link back in time so that he can live through his childhood. It seems to be inferred that she isn't sending Link back JUST to repeat the same process over again. It seems clear that young Link and Princess Zelda somehow work together to prevent Ganondorf from gaining power and seal his power. If ANY sort of paradox ever occurs, it is right here. Since if Ganondorf is vanquished, then the future would never take place. Perhaps one could look at it on a linear path. (Events happen in the future, but still have occurred in the past... meaning prior to the current events). Another argument is that, is that Link knows of the future because it happened. However, once he seals Ganondorf with Princess Zelda, that future never occurs. Link doesn't just vanish since there is only 1 Link in this time zone. Thus, all the events of the future (Adult Link) never exist at all.

This would create a split, so to speak. The endings CANNOT happen simultaneously. In fact, if one happens, it more or less means that the other CANNOT.

The most rational explanation is that Zelda lies in wait and bides time for 7 years, Link goes off and does the events of Majora's Mask. He gets back and finishes waiting.
This argument seems to be out of the scope of the storyline. It relies too much on radical assumptions and little evidence. Basically... instead of waiting in the Temple of Time for 7 years, he just goes off on his Majora's Mask quest? Why would he just go off wandering? Out of pure boredom?

Not to say that Majora's Mask happened promptly after he got back from slaying Ganondorf, because Young Link could ride Epona and use a bow and Hylian Shield. So we know because of that that Link has matured, I'd guess at least 3 or 4 years, but that's besides the point.
I do agree, somewhat. There seems to be some maturity in Link. It's clear that the events of Majora's Mask do not take place... days after, what I believe to be, the 'Young Link' ending of Ocarina of Time. Perhaps just months or even a year. (Maybe roughly 2 years, given the release date differences between Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask). Although that might be a bit far fetched.

I believe the split happens somewhere else because the Paradox created in OoT/MM is resolved. Therefore, the split happened most likely around TP and WW/PH, since both TP and WW take place(and I quote Nintendo)"a hundred years after the events of OoT". If they happened then, it would force a split before then, either in the hundred year gap or at that point. The split would not be created by the events of OoT, abolishing the child/adult timeline idea.
This also has way too many assumptions and very little evidence. It's hard to base a 'split' theory off of what you believe to have no actual evidence. Sure the events take place in what seems to be parallel universes, (given the arbitrary dates that were given to the games). Just stating that 'some unknown event' caused the split seems a bit... odd. Especially when there appears to be an obvious and somewhat logical reason for a split (Ending of Ocarina of Time).




There are just way too many plot holes for this type of argument to be plausible. Given the lack of evidence, or in some cases, evidence that refutes certain theories, it's hard to come up with a theory that it sketched in stone with absolutely no plot holes. So when coming up with a theory, its popularity is based less on factual evidence, but more on the 'lack of holes'.

I think this theory, perhaps has some potential, but it relies on so many unknown events to happen. In my opinion, it has way too many assumptions and inferences as well.
 

Inflexus

ZDG's Prophet
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Location
California
There is not a time loop. Nintendo didn't exactly do the 'going back in time' thing like most modern time travel theories. For example, we can only assume there was never TWO Link's in the same time period. There are two possible solutions here.
My theory doesn't suggest that there is more than one Link at any given time. Rationally, Link's conciousness can only exist in one place at once because as the gamers we need to be able to play as him.

Meaning similtaneous existance in another world, while technically valid, could only happen between games, not direct prequels/sequels, etc. and not during the same game.


Once Link is sent back in time, all thought of what happens in the future is erased. The future doesn't exist. Thus, the course of events happens, Link is sent back in time, the events happen, etc... This isn't a loop, since the events only happen once. It is not a continuous process over several time loops, but just one event. Therefore, there is no way that Link could realize that this is a never ending cycle since it would be completely natural for him.
This is impossible because he goes on to meet Princess Zelda promptly after leaving, and Navi left him in the Temple of Time. What this would indicate is that Link and Navi were both conciously aware of what had happened in the future.

The other, what seems to be more rational scenario, based on the evidence of the game is the following. Princess Zelda sends Link back in time so that he can live through his childhood. It seems to be inferred that she isn't sending Link back JUST to repeat the same process over again. It seems clear that young Link and Princess Zelda somehow work together to prevent Ganondorf from gaining power and seal his power. If ANY sort of paradox ever occurs, it is right here. Since if Ganondorf is vanquished, then the future would never take place. Perhaps one could look at it on a linear path. (Events happen in the future, but still have occurred in the past... meaning prior to the current events).
Right. We know Ganondorf could only be defeated with the master sword, and that the sages would need to seal him. The most logical and rational option for Zelda and Link to take is to awaken the Sages during the 7 years it would take for Link to be able to pull out the mastersword without falling asleep. Then Link simply seals Ganondorf as quickly as possible and has resolved the paradox that has been created.

This requires Link to be aware of what the future would have been, and given what happened at the end of the OoT, it would be the most rational option.

Another argument is that Link knows of the future because it happened. However, once he seals Ganondorf with Princess Zelda, that future never occurs. Link doesn't just vanish since there is only 1 Link in this time zone. Thus, all the events of the future (Adult Link) never exist at all.

This would create a split, so to speak. The endings CANNOT happen simultaneously. In fact, if one happens, it more or less means that the other CANNOT.
Woah... Link never sealed Princess Zelda. He went back in time so that he could erase the events and write a new future. What this indicates is not that Zelda would live in a seperate reality 7 years later post-war or anything, but rather that Link altered that reality and it is merely 7 years ahead, no split is needed or even probable.

This argument seems to be out of the scope of the storyline. It relies too much on radical assumptions and little evidence. Basically... instead of waiting in the Temple of Time for 7 years, he just goes off on his Majora's Mask quest? Why would he just go off wandering? Out of pure boredom?
At the beginning of MM, it says that he is looking for "an old friend" in the Lost Woods. Many believe this to be Navi or Saria, and with my theory either of those would make sense because he needs to either awaken a sage or find a guide, and so he makes a trip to the lost woods that goes horribly wrong.

It's evidence being taken as far as I can take it. In essence if there is something to be inferred or forced by logic I will take it there, because with the limited amount of evidence there is a limited amount of information I can gain. However the evidence must tie into itself, therefor I will analyze and conclude and argue to the best of my ability.

I do agree, somewhat. There seems to be some maturity in Link. It's clear that the events of Majora's Mask do not take place... days after, what I believe to be, the 'Young Link' ending of Ocarina of Time. Perhaps just months or even a year. (Maybe roughly 2 years, given the release date differences between Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask). Although that might be a bit far fetched.
I don't think we ever got a solid answer for how old Child Link was in OoT, but most of us presumed 10 years old, I think. At least I did, not that it matters too much.

This also has way too many assumptions and very little evidence. It's hard to base a 'split' theory off of what you believe to have no actual evidence. Sure the events take place in what seems to be parallel universes, (given the arbitrary dates that were given to the games). Just stating that 'some unknown event' caused the split seems a bit... odd. Especially when there appears to be an obvious and somewhat logical reason for a split (Ending of Ocarina of Time).
Except I have refuted the split for the "multiple endings" of OoT. I know that Nintendo said the games happened in multiple universes(TP and WW) and I know that no solid cause can be given for the split yet if the Child/Adult Split is refuted.

In essence I have proven my theory to be the most likely and most accurate out of all of the options, but it is still a theory as opposed to law or fact. Until Nintendo publishes something, this theory, like any others, is fair game.

There are just way too many plot holes for this type of argument to be plausible. Given the lack of evidence, or in some cases, evidence that refutes certain theories, it's hard to come up with a theory that it sketched in stone with absolutely no plot holes. So when coming up with a theory, its popularity is based less on factual evidence, but more on the 'lack of holes'.
Once again, I take the evidence and I use deduction to produce what I feel is the best theory.

I think this theory, perhaps has some potential, but it relies on so many unknown events to happen. In my opinion, it has way too many assumptions and inferences as well.
Inferences are valid but arguable. Assumptions, if they are confirmed to be actual fact, are not arguable.

Simply put the theory and it's assumptions throw in an if/then statement. If X then theory is true/false.

I'll restate in a way that will prove my theory beyond a shadow of a doubt.

If Nintendo releases a game or document confirming the reality split, then my theory is true.

And once again, it is merely a theory that I feel is the most logical. Therefore I will amend it with time, and if it is disproven somehow I will produce a new theory.
 

Mases

Lord of the Flies
Administrator
Site Staff
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Location
Morton Grove, Illinois
You still haven't clearly presented what you think happens at the end Ocarina of Time. To me, it is just rambling and you are not getting a clear cut point across. You claim to have refuted the split timeline theory, meaning you think there is only 1 ending of Ocarina of Time. (The OoT ending thread is more arguable for this debate). However, I think you aren't understanding the full context along the ending of Ocarina of Time.

Also, you are wrongly using the term paradox. You cannot have a paradox and then undo a paradox. All that means is that there is never a paradox to begin with.

Ganondorf can only be 'defeated' or 'killed' with the master sword, but the split timeline doesn't exactly infer that young Link uses the master sword to defeat him. It is unknown how exactly young Link and young Zelda go about sealing Ganondorf. (BTW, I didn't say Link sealed Princess Zelda, I meant, along with the help of Zelda, they sealed Ganondorf.)


When I stated that it isn't the 'classic time travel theory', I meant... look at the movie Back to the Future for example. When Marty goes back in time there are TWO Marty's at one given time. In this case, we can only infer that there is only 1 Link. I believe that this means, all along, it is the same single Link. Meaning that, he lived in the Kokiri Forest, Gathered the 3 Spiritual Stones, Grabbed the Master Sword, grew 7 years older, defeated Ganon, and now is back as a child. Those events are still in his memory, but don't happen until the future. (He is living in the present, but has memories of the future).

When Zelda sends Link back in time, we assume that the future still happened as is and Link knows of the future. Knowing of the future, he speaks with Zelda, they together prevent Ganon from ever gaining the power that he does. (This isn't in the game/story, but is a strong assumption). You are inferring WAY TO MUCH if you believe that in order for Link and Zelda to 'seal' Ganon, he still has to go and find the sages... and in the process goes on his journey to Termina. That is way out of the scope and has too many plot holes and poor assumptions.

However... even if THAT radical theory is somehow plausible, there was still the Adult Link ending. After Link is sent back in time, in the future, Ganondorf has still been defeated and time continues in the future. What the split timeline infers is that there are TWO POSSIBLE endings, NOT two SIMULTANEOUS endings. I think this is where you are getting a bit mixed up. Regardless of what you believe happens AFTER Link returns to his child life, the Adult life happens. Perhaps the word 'parallel dimensions' is wrong, since they cannot both happen and neither is considered 'correct'. They are separate dimensions.

Based on the game/storyline and, based on what Nintendo has said there are clearly two possible endings to Ocarina of Time. The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess happen 100 years afterwards, but based on the seperate endings.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom