Of dead Kats and time travel...

From: Leet Wai Leong Simon <leetwail_at_iscs.nus.sg>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 21:25:39 +0800 (GMT-8)

On Tue, 9 Jan 1996, DJ CLAWSON wrote:

> THE DJ CLAWSON TIME TRAVEL THEORY:
> We exist in every possibility.

Assuming our ancestors existed in EVERY possibility. Is it possible that
your progenitors never met and therefore never had you? Certainly. Ergo,
how can we exist in EVERY possibility?

> Time is merely endless amounts of planes of different timelines. However,
> when traveling in time, it is nearly impossible to get on a different
> plane that you did not experience yourself. If Razor and T-Bone travel
> into the future, they can only travel into a possible future of THEIR
> timeline. They cannot, say, travel into a future where they were never
> kicked out of the enforcers. Doing that would not be considered time
> travel, it would be considered inter dimension travel. The different
> planes are called dimensions. Therefore, when T-Bone and Razor traveled
> forward they remained on the same plane (dimension) and the only possible
> futures are within their control. Any changes are because of their
> presence of absence.

Fair enough assumption ... but your analysis in incomplete. It is
generally accepted that timelines are divergent, because each decision a
person makes in the course of his life leads to another set of decisions
which may be available only because the previous choice had been made. If=
 
so, then the future holds an infinite number of possibilities which is
yet a subset of ALL possibilities. A dimension as you have defined it may=
 
be inaccessible via "time travel", but a dimension can only be
retrospectively termed as such since all future possibilities remain
possible until one particular route is chosen.

For the particular stand you've taken on the issue, it would have been
simpler to actually assume the existence of a single linear timeline
because it illustrates your point better and does not open itself to
extreme possibilities.

> In this case, because they were blasted forward in A Bright and Shiny
> Future, they were absent and the üTurbokat (unless someone else was
> driving it) was not able to crash into City Hall because it did not
> exist. It was too busy being blasted into the future. Once in the future,
> the SWAT Kats ARE able to change their past by getting back and being
> present for the attack of the Metallikats, which was never launched
> anyway because the Pastmaster never started Mack and Molly up again
> (we think). The hole in the plot was the existence of the Turbokat in
> the future fight that T-Bone and Razor were not present for. That only
> could have existed in another dimension, where they were NOT
> blasted into the past.
> Dr. Jake

The assumption that the SWATKats would not have been present for their
"deaths" in the example would be valid according to your interpretation
of temporal continuity, however, NOTHING suggests that the absence of the=
 
SWATKats alone was responsible for the success of the Metallikats. It
could have as easily been DarkKat or Hard Drive or Rex Shard or any of an=
 
infinite number of possible villians which might have shown up or
gained the upper hand during their absence. Therefore, your earlier
assumption that the SWATKats could only travel to future "within their
control" and that "any changes are because of their presence or absence"
cannot hold since an inifinite number of possibilities still existed for
the future at the point they left and they could have ended up in any one.

The main grouse I have is the implication that the apparent death of the
SWATKats is a loophole. It is NOT. There is nothing inherent in the plot
which points to any of the ideas you have suggested. Your logic is
circular; you've assumed that your theory holds and therefore any
information presented to you which contradicts that must be in error.
Why come up with a theory that explains less than it complicates?


Simon Leet <leetwail_at_iscs.nus.sg> :)
- *sigh* now everything I did wrong in '95 can return
  to haunt me. Hurrah.




Received on Thu Jan 11 1996 - 08:29:22 PST