Three-Branched Timeline Split Explanations

[kroni]

Wow, that's cool that I'm not the only one who noticed this. Although my version is a little different, if you look at this section of his theory:

The Introduction of a Third FRACTURE
Now, many may ask... why the heck would a THIRD timeline make sense!? Isn't time-travel the reason for the split? Not outcomes? Possibilities and plausibilities are hardly good reasons to constitute a split. Correct. If this was the case, we'd have billions upon billions of time-lines. HOWEVER...

There is another time we (Link) time traveled in Ocarina of Time... wasn't there?
In order to gain access to the Well and the Spirit temple we needed to return to the past. However if you recall... this act of traveling creates a SPLIT.
So therefore, it creates a split ADULT timeline. One where Link returned to the past. When you return to the past, that dimension you traveled from continues with you no longer existing...

So wait... in this dimension... Link never defeats Ganon. There is no legendary hero to conquer Ganon... and it is the efforts of the people and the sages that ultimately conquer and seal the Demon lord... causing the events of Link to the Past (JPN: Triforce of the Gods)

So no longer do you have a concrete Adult and Child Timeline... now we have three:

1. Link never returns to Hyrule and Ganon wins- Ganon's rule
2. Link returns to defeat Ganon and brings prosperity- Zelda's rule
3. Link returns to his own time and foils Ganon- Link's rule

Fierce's theory hinges on the idea that time traveling creates a split every time you do it. But this doesn't hold up when you consider that Link travels back to his child form at least twice in OOT (To help Nabooru and to enter the Well) that would create 4 timelines...

My theory rather specifies that the defeated timeline has always existed, and was not created by a split. The split was created when Link goes to the Adult timeline, but traveling back to the past acts more like a portal between the Defeated timeline and the Adult timeline. Link himself cannot create timelines. The sage of time can, and the will of the goddesses can, but not the simple act of time traveling itself. (Otherwise there would be more splits in Skyward Sword)

 

[Clearly]

That's probably one of the most concise explanation's I've read thus far, well done.

However, I still only see two timelines in this 'abandoned timeline' theory that's naturally become so popular in the face of 'Link being defeated'. I'm not saying it's wrong; but I am saying that the math doesn't quite work for me yet. For instance, you say that Link helps Nabooru in the Defeated timeline, but that would actually still be the adult timeline. There's no Link running around in that time after his adventure in the Spirit temple and the Well, because he's still got seven years to be sealed before waking as an adult. The snag seems to be that time travel with the master sword doesn't actually transfer Link through time as he is, or else he'd return in time as an adult. The most popular belief I've heard is that it's sort of his conciousness that's zipped around and his unused body is either held in suspension, or it's reconstituted to match the time.

It's a little self contradictory either way, and Nintendo was a little too halphazard with their treatment of time paradoxes in OoT, so it can be hard to identify what's an actual temporal loophole, and what's a developer's foobar. For instance, I can't identify how Link was able to open the door of time to get out of the temple of time in the ending sequence, as evidently he'd been sent back to before Zelda had fled the castle, and before Link had gathered all the stones.

Weeeeeird.

 

[kroni]

Hmm, well let me see if I can answer that.

First of all, when Child Link went to the Well/Desert in the Defeated Timeline, he caused changes that you could see when you returned to the Adult Timeline. This is because the Adult Timeline is dependant upon the Defeated timeline. When the Adult Timeline was created, it sent Link forward in time. Time traveling to the future is different than the past, which is why the Child timeline, which sent him backward in time, is not dependant on any other timeline. Therefore, if a change is made to the parent timeline (Defeated Timeline) the universe will automatically course correct the history of the dependant adult timeline. So that's how the timelines can affect each other.

To put it another way, if WW Link traveled back to the moment before the 7 year slumber and killed Skull Kid, then the Defeated Timeline and the Adult Timeline's history would show that Skull Kid was dead, but in the Child timeline MM would still happen.

Also, about Link becoming a child when he pulls the master sword, it's because he's being sent to the original timeline. When Link goes to the Defeated Timeline, it is always set at the time that he first disappeared from that timeline. That is the time when Link was a child, so in order for the Defeated timeline to be a consistent parent timeline Link would have to become a child again.

 

[Locke]

Hmm, well let me see if I can answer that.

First of all, when Child Link went to the Well/Desert in the Defeated Timeline, he caused changes that you could see when you returned to the Adult Timeline. This is because the Adult Timeline is dependant upon the Defeated timeline. When the Adult Timeline was created, it sent Link forward in time. Time traveling to the future is different than the past, which is why the Child timeline, which sent him backward in time, is not dependant on any other timeline. Therefore, if a change is made to the parent timeline (Defeated Timeline) the universe will automatically course correct the history of the dependant adult timeline. So that's how the timelines can affect each other.

To put it another way, if WW Link traveled back to the moment before the 7 year slumber and killed Skull Kid, then the Defeated Timeline and the Adult Timeline's history would show that Skull Kid was dead, but in the Child timeline MM would still happen.

Also, about Link becoming a child when he pulls the master sword, it's because he's being sent to the original timeline. When Link goes to the Defeated Timeline, it is always set at the time that he first disappeared from that timeline. That is the time when Link was a child, so in order for the Defeated timeline to be a consistent parent timeline Link would have to become a child again.

Okay, so Ganondorf wins on the "Defeated Timeline", which causes the Adult Timeline's history to show this change, so Ganondorf wins in the AT too. You say that travelling forward in time is different than travelling backward. Can you explain how you reached this conclusion?

 

[Fierce]

I have also devised another take on my theory if you will hear me out...

I will attempt to make it as simple as possible. First Observe this diagram.

Zoom: http://postimage.org/image/4wnug6s43/
This makes the most sense to me. I've really set my mind to this one. I think the first break occurs when you first enter the sacred realm, separating you permanently from the original timeline. Why is this you may ask? It is the same reason the Master Sword forces you to sleep for seven years... Child Link will die against Ganondorf after he obtains the Triforce of Power. I believe that is what the cutscene almost implies when he is talking to you with the white background.

Either way, this is likely where the split occurs regardless of whether young Link dies or just disappears from that Timeline due to time travel. Personally, I find time travel accounting for his absence the most plausible.

 

[clavier223]

Oh, so the moment Link pulls the Master Sword out of the pedestal for the first time in OoT, he creates an entirely new timeline. This further supports my theory that each timeline is built upon each other - Zelda creates a new timeline which was built by Link, Link creates a new timeline which was built by Ganon.

This would also account for all of the progress which you make in Oot as adult Link. In other words, by going back in time to get the Lens of Truth, etc, you wouldn't have to redo all of the temples you had just completed since that isn't what causes a new timeline.

Okay, okay, brief recap:
1st timeline - Ganon's rule, the original timeline from the start of OoT.
2nd timeline - Link's rule, the timeline created when Link pulls the Master Sword out of the pedestal for the first time in OoT.
3rd timeline - Zelda's rule, the timeline created when Zelda sends Link back in time at the end of OoT.

 

[Fierce_Deity]

I have also devised another take on my theory if you will hear me out...

I will attempt to make it as simple as possible. First Observe this diagram.

View attachment 21190

Zoom: http://postimage.org/image/4wnug6s43/
This makes the most sense to me. I've really set my mind to this one. I think the first break occurs when you first enter the sacred realm, separating you permanently from the original timeline. Why is this you may ask? It is the same reason the Master Sword forces you to sleep for seven years... Child Link will die against Ganondorf after he obtains the Triforce of Power. I believe that is what the cutscene almost implies when he is talking to you with the white background.

Either way, this is likely where the split occurs regardless of whether young Link dies or just disappears from that Timeline due to time travel. Personally, I find time travel accounting for his absence the most plausible.

This is interesting and I kind of like it, as it makes me wonder why he didn't kill Link (or now he did?). So maybe more happened in the Sacred Realm than we know.

 

[clavier223]

This is interesting and I kind of like it, as it makes me wonder why he didn't kill Link (or now he did?). So maybe more happened in the Sacred Realm than we know.

Ganon couldn't have killed Link if Link pulled the Master the Sword out of the pedestal which created a new timeline (Link's rule). Link simply vanished from the original timeline (Ganon's rule) at that moment.

1st timeline - Ganon's rule, the original timeline from the start of OoT.
2nd timeline - Link's rule, the timeline created when Link pulls the Master Sword out of the pedestal for the first time in OoT.
3rd timeline - Zelda's rule, the timeline created when Zelda sends Link back in time at the end of OoT.

 

[ebilly99]

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the first time link time travel not happen after he pulls the sword, but at the time Ganon enters the sacred realm and the sages age link to fight him. If this is the case perhaps the first timeline has the Sages unable to do this quickly enough and ganon kills link then go after the triforce?

 

[Clearly]

Now, correct me if I'm wrong; but wouldn't timelines split rather where different choices are made and followed, rather than simply plucking the MS from its pedastal? I mean, if I walked through a time portal to seven years ago, and then just stood there for an hour blnking dumbly before turning around and returning to my own time, a new timeline wouldn't necessarily be created.

So, as I understand it the Adult timeline begins ultimately with Links acceptance of Zelda's mission as a child (before touching the MS), as at the end of the game Link obviously handles that situation in a different manner, and presumably the Child timeline begins. I think the phrase 'adult timeline' is a little misleading as it sounds like it only counts as his 'adult escapades', when really it just seems to be the timeline in which he eventually spends most of his adventure as an adult in the 'future'.

So to me, from a little before Link first touches the MS, to the final battle with Ganon is all the Adult timeline. The back and forth with the Well and Spirit temple doesn't really require a whole new timeline to explain it, as it's simplest to describe as just the Adult timeline in which Link tinkers a bit. The whole idea that 'Link travels back to the defeated timeline, which the adult timeline is somehow dependant on' just feels unnessary when there's an easier explanation.

 

[Kombatgod]

I disagree with the time travel to enter the Well and Spirit Temple creating a split. Like other users said, Zelda sends Link back in Time creatindg a new timeline, but when he uses the Master Sword he travels in the same timeline, or else there would be a new timeline everytime he goes back in time, and he can do that many times. This would create a whole lot of timelines, not just three, ruining your whole tought about the three timelines.

Anyway apart from why there are three timelines, your thought about the Power/Wisdom/Courage timelines is very clever. I think that's very awesome. (btw I also agree with FSA being a prequel to ALttP)

I have another theory about how the split originated, if you want to check it I'd love to know what you think of it: Premonition Theory - Creation of the Third Timeline

 

[clavier223]

Now, correct me if I'm wrong; but wouldn't timelines split rather where different choices are made and followed, rather than simply plucking the MS from its pedastal? I mean, if I walked through a time portal to seven years ago, and then just stood there for an hour blnking dumbly before turning around and returning to my own time, a new timeline wouldn't necessarily be created.

So, as I understand it the Adult timeline begins ultimately with Links acceptance of Zelda's mission as a child (before touching the MS), as at the end of the game Link obviously handles that situation in a different manner, and presumably the Child timeline begins. I think the phrase 'adult timeline' is a little misleading as it sounds like it only counts as his 'adult escapades', when really it just seems to be the timeline in which he eventually spends most of his adventure as an adult in the 'future'.

So to me, from a little before Link first touches the MS, to the final battle with Ganon is all the Adult timeline. The back and forth with the Well and Spirit temple doesn't really require a whole new timeline to explain it, as it's simplest to describe as just the Adult timeline in which Link tinkers a bit. The whole idea that 'Link travels back to the defeated timeline, which the adult timeline is somehow dependant on' just feels unnessary when there's an easier explanation.

Well, technically, anytime you'd go back into the past you're changing the future. So, everytime Link would go back into the past for something in OoT - let's say to finish the trading sequence or get the Lens of Truth, he'd be creating a new timeline every single time. That would be silly and complicated, and it's already complicated! All of this timeline stuff happened the moment he pulled that MS out of the pedestal, which is the simplest way of explaining the "adult" and "child" timelines versus the "defeated" timeline.

It's the simplest way of explaining why/how the OoT Link vanished from one timeline which Ganon took over (the timeline for ALttP, OoX, LoZ, AoL).

 

[Clearly]

Well, technically, anytime you'd go back into the past you're changing the future. So, everytime Link would go back into the past for something in OoT - let's say to finish the trading sequence or get the Lens of Truth, he'd be creating a new timeline every single time. That would be silly and complicated, and it's already complicated! All of this timeline stuff happened the moment he pulled that MS out of the pedestal, which is the simplest way of explaining the "adult" and "child" timelines versus the "defeated" timeline.

It's the simplest way of explaining why/how the OoT Link vanished from one timeline which Ganon took over (the timeline for ALttP, OoX, LoZ, AoL).

Well, technically, the theoretical details of what we presume time travel would work like in reality are handled pretty lightly in the game. Temporal paradoxes abound, and ambiguity is used to blur the wrinkled details, like the magazine photos of an aged celebrity. Ergo, I'm not inclined to try and hold the most commonly held ideas on the dynamics of backwards time travel up to OoT, as the poor old cartridge would likely have to go back in time itself to assasinate Miyamoto's mother in order to avoid the embarrassment that would ensue.

I also don't think the defeated timeline is the simplest way of explaining around these details, as among other complications it would seem to imply both backwards time travel, and a dimensional shift. In my opinion, it's a matter of occum's razor, and the returning to the defeated timeline repeatedly throughout the game instead of the adult timeline is reaching a little too far when an easier (though perhaps to some, unsatisfying) possibility exists.

Additionally, the timeline stuff didn't start with pulling out the MS, as the 'splitting moment' evidently happened (or would happen) before that in Zelda's garden. The MS itself is merely the 'ship used to travel the stream', and not a matter of paradox itself (at least in this game). The naming conventions of the timelines are a bit misleading, as the parts of the game spent as a child are not actually the Child Timeline, they're part of the Adult Timeline (or happen before the splitting moment). The Child Timeline begins only in the ending sequence of the game, and no evidence of the travelling to, or the creation of a third timeline is shown. I'd actually argue that Kombatgod's theory, while requiring a little presumption on the part of Raru's capacity for premonition (which through dreams, is not unheard of in the games), is actually less of a leap in determing how Link was defeated. For instance, WW Link is the same age as Child Link in OoT; but is not sealed away before combating Ganon. Yet Raru knew that Child Link needed to be sealed. Interesting indeed.

 

[Princesszelda97]

oooo...makes sense now! thanks ever so much! just a picture was sorta confusing!

 

[clavier223]

Well ... we can go on and on and on with how we think the official Zelda timeline makes sense, but it all doesn't matter when Nintendo comes out with an English translation of that book, and makes further statements on the matter.

They'll probably explain the "defeated timeline" in such a way which no one has probably guessed at yet.