Time Travel: Predestination vs Dynamic?

[Commander_Has]

Honestly, I find it simpler to write the Four Swords trilogy into a completely separate timeline all together.

 

[Ryuu Kage Desu]

My argument against your wish theory was that in order for it to be true then we should see Demise destroyed in both eras from Link's wish in Skyward sword because if any Link has the will that your theory relies on its this Link and this is the only time where we have both a Triforce wish and time travel to fact check your claim. This then lead into trying to prove the function of time travel.

Do I detect some straw in that argument? How do you figure that one Link had more will behind their wish than another. Everyone involved with the wish in SS was quite focused on the here and now of defeating the imprisoned. We don't know the scope of the wishes in the downfall timeline. And, time manipulation is seen all through the series. To count it as an impossibility/improbability simply because that one story doesn't directly include time manipulation is to cherry pick.

I didn't say that Oracle of ages resulted in a timeline split.

No?

Zelda tells Link to close the Gate of time to sever the connection between the two time points. So what this means is that Zelda time travel operates off of anchoring time points together.

there is anchoring time points against the flow of time an example of this is Oracle of ages where Veran used Nayru's power to open a portal to the past creating the first anchor point and then went through it creating the second anchor point.

By your rules, either there should be a split at OoA, you disproved yourself, or you are saying that the anchoring points created in OoA are never interrupted and remain open forever. As you have explained your perspective before, it's the closing of one of these anchors that causes the child timeline split. That is one split out of two, meaning it's only half an answer.

Where are the anchoring points in TotK, or AoC?

Follow up question, how does anchoring points solve the different time manipulation effects we see throughout the series; some being predestination, some having string theory effects, some acting more dynamic, and some operating more like what we have been calling Temporal Echoes?

Bonus question, how are anchoring point beyond the power of the Triforce?

That's not a timeline theory that's a time travel theory I do those to. And I didn't say that Oracle of ages resulted in a timeline split. As for the Minish cap split that is from my timeline theory but this is a time travel thread so this isn't the place to go in depth on that.

Ultimately, when talking about time travel theories on this series, we need to look at the effects we see in the series. This not only includes each game, but the series as a whole, and the timeline is part of that. This also means that the theory should have explanatory power for the canon we do have.

 

[DarkDagger52]

Do I detect some straw in that argument?

This statement you made is a rookie mistake.

How do you figure that one Link had more will behind their wish than another.

Skyward sword Link best demonstrates the will you were talking about when he faced Demise in Demise's own realm beyond the reach of the gods. If that's not enough will then you need to give your own answer for the question you directed at me.

Everyone involved with the wish in SS was quite focused on the here and now of defeating the imprisoned. We don't know the scope of the wishes in the downfall timeline.

This isn't good for your theory you just provided a counter argument against your own theory because your argument was that the focus on the present is irrelevant and all they needed was the will in order for it to affect a previous point in time.

And, time manipulation is seen all through the series. To count it as an impossibility/improbability simply because that one story doesn't directly include time manipulation is to cherry pick.

While time manipulation is common the Triforce has never been the source of it in any confirmed canon event. Since the theory is yours the burden of proof is yours its not cherry picking to point out that the one time we have the ability to fact check your claim the data goes against it. But to discard it then the term would apply.

No?

By your rules, either there should be a split at OoA, you disproved yourself, or you are saying that the anchoring points created in OoA are never interrupted and remain open forever. As you have explained your perspective before, it's the closing of one of these anchors that causes the child timeline split. That is one split out of two, meaning it's only half an answer.

So two things with this: first I specifically stated that removing the anchor from the PAST would cause the split and second the connection between the two eras was still intact in Oracle of age post game.

Where are the anchoring points in TotK, or AoC?

Tears of the kingdom needs a post to itself so I'll comeback to it later. As for Age of calamity that's an easy one Terrako opens a Gate of time to the past creating anchor point one and then travels through it creating anchor point two and then closes the Gate of time in the past thus severing the connection between the two time points resulting in the timeline split mentioned in Age of calamity.

Follow up question, how does anchoring points solve the different time manipulation effects we see throughout the series; some being predestination, some having string theory effects, some acting more dynamic, and some operating more like what we have been calling Temporal Echoes?

So first it explains why we DON'T see predestined time travel (I'll explain this point more in depth with Tears of the kingdom). Second string theory does not apply to any multiverse the idiot who came up with that theory didn't bother to finish the calculations on their own theory. I mapped out a timeline to those specifications and it looked something like this: (my time splotch was bigger)


.


That's not a timeline their is no defining border between one universe and another the result is a temporal singularity. Now back on the topic at hand the anchoring of time points does give explanation for why we see timeline splits from time travel at specific points in the series instead of all the time or not at all by anchoring the time points against the flow of time the two time points will remain connected preventing the changes to the past from branching off creating another timeline. The third point doesn't really need much of an explanation as time travel in the Zelda series mostly functions in a dynamic way. As for point four this is a time TRAVEL theory other forms of time manipulation aren't going to be brought up unless they have a direct affect on the function of time travel.

Bonus question, how are anchoring point beyond the power of the Triforce?

A better question is when has the Triforce demonstrated any power over time that isn't simply adding more power to someone who already had power over time? The Triforce is shown to be bound by the rules of time.

Ultimately, when talking about time travel theories on this series, we need to look at the effects we see in the series. This not only includes each game, but the series as a whole, and the timeline is part of that. This also means that the theory should have explanatory power for the canon we do have.

This theory does not change the timeline.

 

[Captain_Jack]

This statement you made is a rookie mistake.

Skyward sword Link best demonstrates the will you were talking about when he faced Demise in Demise's own realm beyond the reach of the gods. If that's not enough will then you need to give your own answer for the question you directed at me.

This isn't good for your theory you just provided a counter argument against your own theory because your argument was that the focus on the present is irrelevant and all they needed was the will in order for it to affect a previous point in time.

While time manipulation is common the Triforce has never been the source of it in any confirmed canon event. Since the theory is yours the burden of proof is yours its not cherry picking to point out that the one time we have the ability to fact check your claim the data goes against it. But to discard it then the term would apply.

So two things with this: first I specifically stated that removing the anchor from the PAST would cause the split and second the connection between the two eras was still intact in Oracle of age post game.

Tears of the kingdom needs a post to itself so I'll comeback to it later. As for Age of calamity that's an easy one Terrako opens a Gate of time to the past creating anchor point one and then travels through it creating anchor point two and then closes the Gate of time in the past thus severing the connection between the two time points resulting in the timeline split mentioned in Age of calamity.

So first it explains why we DON'T see predestined time travel (I'll explain this point more in depth with Tears of the kingdom). Second string theory does not apply to any multiverse the idiot who came up with that theory didn't bother to finish the calculations on their own theory. I mapped out a timeline to those specifications and it looked something like this: (my time splotch was bigger)


.


That's not a timeline their is no defining border between one universe and another the result is a temporal singularity. Now back on the topic at hand the anchoring of time points does give explanation for why we see timeline splits from time travel at specific points in the series instead of all the time or not at all by anchoring the time points against the flow of time the two time points will remain connected preventing the changes to the past from branching off creating another timeline. The third point doesn't really need much of an explanation as time travel in the Zelda series mostly functions in a dynamic way. As for point four this is a time TRAVEL theory other forms of time manipulation aren't going to be brought up unless they have a direct affect on the function of time travel.

A better question is when has the Triforce demonstrated any power over time that isn't simply adding more power to someone who already had power over time? The Triforce is shown to be bound by the rules of time.

This theory does not change the timeline.

What if, there simply, is no timeline.

 

[Captain_Jack]

Do heads explode?

 

[Commander_Has]

Captain jack makes a point, these are Legends map changes, inconsistences, and reoccurring characters (other than Link, zelda, and ganon) could be the result of oral transfer of stories. as Fi said, the most inefficient way to transfer data. We cannot hold every little detail to the timeline, the very nature of the games being made out of order make that impossible no matter what timeline.

 

[DarkDagger52]

What if, there simply, is no timeline.

When you have a multi game arc that by definition is a timeline. The Zelda series contains multiple of these there is Ocarina of time through Spirit tracks and Twilight princess, Zelda I and Zelda II, Triforce of the gods through Triforce heroes and then there is the Four swords trilogy. The no timeline theory is debunked.

Captain jack makes a point, these are Legends map changes, inconsistences, and reoccurring characters (other than Link, zelda, and ganon) could be the result of oral transfer of stories. as Fi said, the most inefficient way to transfer data. We cannot hold every little detail to the timeline, the very nature of the games being made out of order make that impossible no matter what timeline.

The foundations of the legend theory is mostly comprised of three things: the community's inability to learn geography (they just can't grasp the concept of north always meaning north), the constant claims of time travel being inconsistent and the official timeline. All of these are faulty data points to use to create a theory.

 

[Commander_Has]

Indeed, I’m saying details like the names of items and mountains could change or be confused. For example, we call Italy, Italy, but 2000 years ago, it would have been called Rome.

 

[Commander_Has]

Or, a Roman providence rather

 

[Commander_Has]

AoC, they travel to the past, and yet the timeline changes, yet it doesn't in SS. Can anyone explain that, because it has me stumpted.

 

[DarkDagger52]

Indeed, I’m saying details like the names of items and mountains could change or be confused. For example, we call Italy, Italy, but 2000 years ago, it would have been called Rome.

Or, a Roman providence rather

You misunderstood what I said those were faulty data points because they were faulty conclusions used as evidence for another theory. The geography, time travel and history as seen in the games and manuals are all consistent.

AoC, they travel to the past, and yet the timeline changes, yet it doesn't in SS. Can anyone explain that, because it has me stumpted.

I have an explanation that I'm going to post later today.

 

[Commander_Has]

Alright, I think I see what your saying.

 

[DarkDagger52]

In Skyward sword there are six time travelers with Link being the fourth. So the time travel begins with Impa she opened the Gate of time creating anchor point one and the traveled through it to the future creating anchor point two this means that Impa's era is the present and Link's era is the future.

By Link's perspective the crystal had always been in the temple even before Impa traveled back to the present with Zelda and from Link's perspective the tree only existed after he went to the present to plant it BUT from Groose's perspective the tree had always been there even before Link traveled to the present to plant it. This indicates that its not predestined time travel as the events are actively being altered by the time travelers.

Now to put this in perspective the changes made by Zelda and Impa retroactively change what Link experienced leading up to the moment when the changes were made the battle at the Gate of time happens and then the timeline is altered. The crystal did not cause Link to reach the Gate of time nor did it prevent Link from reaching the Gate of time but now to Link it has always been there and so to the player it was always there even tho it wasn't there until Impa and Zelda changed the timeline.

This next segment is about Tears of the kingdom which is still considered spoiler territory.

Spoiler: Tears of the kingdom spoilers

So in Tears of the kingdom Rauru makes a number of interesting statements regarding time travel. When Zelda arrives in Rauru's era her Secret stone is bonded to her bearing the mark of the attribute of time and later Rauru claims that the stone would explain how Zelda traveled through time. When Zelda was explaining that Rauru was going to die in the final battle of the Sealing war Rauru says that that was a time where Zelda hadn't traveled through time. Rauru also said "I believe there is a reason you were sent to us" when talking to Zelda. Then in the final battle of the Sealing war Rauru has a sudden shift in expresion when the battle looked hopeless indicating that Rauru realized that he had miscalulated.

We as the players see a different perspective through the memories I noticed that Zelda had also experienced the opening of the game that the players experience up to the point where she travels through time. Zelda shouldn't have experienced the intro if she traveled back in time under her own power indicating the presence of another time traveler and because the effects of time travel don't resemble Oracle of ages and instead better alignes with Skyward sword this indicates that the time jump was initiated from Rauru's era.

There is evidence to support this first we have the Secret stone assumed to have amplified Zelda's power enough to travel through time the Secret stone was not bonded to Zelda at the moment the time jump began. The Secret stones are shown several times to take a few seconds to bond to a new user during the bonding process the mark of the user's enhanced attribute is carved into it this process is not seen in the opening segment when the Secret stone is visible the moment before the time jump begins this means Zelda would need to have the power to travel through time without the aid of a Secret stone to have traveled back in time under her own power.

Second Zelda didn't just travel through time she also traveled through space there was nothing to anchor those two physical locations together to cause Zelda to travel that distance. Whenever time travel is used in the Zelda series the location of the time traveler remains the same the only exception to this is when Link puts the Master sword into the Gate of time in the Temple of time on the Great sky islands however this is because the Gate of time is anchored to the Temple of time. This indicates that Zelda was summend to Rauru's era by someone near where she ended up.

Throughout the game Zelda shows that she can use recall and open the Gate of time connected to the Temple of time. The only thing that indicates that Zelda has the ability to travel through time is the assumption that Zelda triggered the time jump at the start of the game which is the same assumption Rauru made which was his miscalculation.

So ultimately the first anchor point was created in Rauru's era placing his era as the present during the time travel sequence. And the person who caused the time travel scenario is unknown.

 

[Commander_Has]

So the reason that the time travel becomes complicated, is because they are traveling back and forth in time, creating differences to other, while being unknowing to other changes. That seems reasonable enough.

 

[DarkDagger52]

So the reason that the time travel becomes complicated, is because they are traveling back and forth in time, creating differences to other, while being unknowing to other changes. That seems reasonable enough.

That sums it up well.