# Lost 1/21/09 "Because You Left; The Lie" (spoilers)



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Can't believe we don't have a thread yet.

This is for both of the episodes that aired tonight - Because You Left and The Lie.
Since it aired as a 2-hour thing together, it probably gets one thread.

Lost is back!

[edit - changed the date from 1/21/08 to 1/21/09]


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

All I can say is WOW!

AWESOME episode(s)!

Lots of answers for a season premier.....lots of new questions.....and some great surprises.

Seeing Anna Lucia was a shock....for a second I thought that maybe Hurley had traveled through time...then I realized that she was not real.

Looked like everyone was coming together and the plan to go back was falling into place....then Hurley throws a HUGE monkey wrench into the mix.

If they go back (or I should say when they go back), will everyone be alive again? Could they save Jin and Michael on the Freighter? I know that Faraday said that they can't change things, but then he talked to Desmond which will definitely change things.

Really interesting that Faraday was part of Darma....did he travel back in time, or is he from that time and is now in his future?

Another really telling line was when Ben told Jack to pack up everything that has meaning to him....that he would NEVER be back. Does this mean that once they go back to the island, they are there forever? 

So much to absorb.....I will have to watch the episode again.


----------



## Philly Bill (Oct 6, 2004)

I love the time travel thing. 

LOST is BACK! :woo-hoo!:


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Wheeeee!!! Lost has got it's game on!

And Sawyer for over half the show running around with no shirt!!!


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

So, when John was with The Others before killing his dad, and the stewardess said something like "We've been waiting for you, John!", it originally felt all mysterious like "oh, the others know about some destiny.. or they know the island called John to be there", or something like that.

But maybe instead, they just heard from Ethan "There was this guy out in the jungle.. He said Ben just appointed him to be our leader! Ha! So I went to shoot him, and he disappeared!!!!", and they've been waiting for him ever since.

I expected that instead of Desmond, it'd be Inman, or better yet, the other guy that Inman used to be with (whose blood ended up on the ceiling).


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

unixadm said:


> I know that Faraday said that they can't change things, but then he talked to Desmond which will definitely change things.


What did it change? Desmond didn't remember/act on the conversation until later. He didn't do anything differently.

I like this approach to time travel, if they can stick with it.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

I think my favorite part of premiere was when Hugo's dad settled in to watch "Expose" -- which of course was the show starring fan-favorite dead castaway Nikki.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

jkeegan said:


> I expected that instead of Desmond, it'd be Inman, or better yet, the other guy that Inman used to be with (whose blood ended up on the ceiling).


Kelvin?


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

Who's the older lady at the end? Have we seen her before on Lost?


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Kamakzie said:


> Who's the older lady at the end? Have we seen her before on Lost?


Was she the the clock shop lady from Desmond's episode, _The Constant_?

Awesome episodes. Lost is back, baby!


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

From the episode I just mentioned, I believe this might be what Faraday turned to in his book...


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Ok,

How did Marvin Candle have a baby on the island? Is that significant, or was it conceived off-island?

Cool to hear that they dedicated a whole station (The Arrow) to study the natives.

When they showed Sawyer/Juliette/etc on the beach, I thought they'd gone back to before Dharma came there at all (wrong because Desmond's hatch The Swan was there)... Anyway I thought that the island had just appeared at its new location there, and it having arrived is what attracted Dharma to the island.. (but again, nope.. Dharma was already there).

Good device having Locke at the plane, being able to show present/past by having the plane either in the tree (still smoking), or on the ground.

So do we think the drill operator, when he grabbed his head and started freaking out (we only heard the description of that - we didn't see it), do we think he was jumping like Minkowski/Desmond? Or just sick from the same thing that melted his drill (proximity to the exotic matter? the island defending itself?)

Is it obvious that redhead there, CSLewis, is jumping? (from the nosebleed). When someone described that Desmond was pushing a button every 108 minutes to save the world, she had a look on her face, of "oh! aha!" mixed with recognition..

In the sonar picture you can see the frozen donkey wheel.. Later in the 2nd episode when Ring-lady is having a big pendulum move back and forth, it seems to be making the same shape..

When watching the recap episode before this, they showed the scene w/Desmond and Jack in the football stadium way before the crash, where Desmond kept saying "..but what if you DID?" to Jack about him fixing his wife, and "see you in another life bruthah". Having not seen that scene recently, but having seen The Constant recently, I now wonder if that was a future Desmond consciousness we were watching that was talking to Jack, _knowing_ who Jack was, and probably having heard the story about him saving her.

After Candle walked out of the Orchid tunnel and bumped into someone, at first when he said "I'm sorry sir, that won't happen again", it SOUNDED like the helicopter pilot, but didn't quite look like him. When we eventually saw it was Faraday - cool.

(but I disagree with one of the posts above.. I don't think he *had* been Dharma.. I think after going back, he snuck in.. that's why I'd initially thought they'd jumped back to before Dharma arrived.. I figured Dharma showed up, Faraday and the others just kinda blended in, got jobs, etc (like Lando Calrisian(sp?)) being a guard in Jaba's palace.)

I do notice now that the guy who was drilling seems to have blood on his face, as if from coming down his nose, and Faraday seems to pay close attention as he's walked past him.


----------



## JWolff (Oct 30, 2002)

_Was she the the clock shop lady from Desmond's episode, The Constant?_

No, it's Ms. Hawking who Desmond speaks to in the Jewelry shop during the episode "Flashes Before Your Eyes". Desmond wanted to buy a ring to propose to Penny, but she explains in great detail how he wont be doing that and that he will go to the island and press the dreaded button.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

cmontyburns said:


> I think my favorite part of premiere was when Hugo's dad settled in to watch "Expose" -- which of course was the show starring fan-favorite dead castaway Nikki.


It sounded like the guy who was saying "Previously.. on Expose" was the same voice as the guy who says "Previously.. on Lost" (which is NOT Carlton Cuse, btw)


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

cherry ghost said:


> Kelvin?


There ya go. Kelvin.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Take this..

What is it?

It's a compass.

What does it ddo?

It points north, John!




and...




If you ate more comfort food, maybe you wouldn't kill people!



Classic.


Lost is back.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

hefe said:


> Was she the the clock shop lady from Desmond's episode, _The Constant_?


Correction, I meant the episode "Flashes Before Your Eyes."










And not actually a clock shop, but yup, that's her.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I am thinking the whole scene with Farraday at the construction site for the Orchid was him having travelled back to this time and being able to sneak in (he kept his head down and covered with a canister) so that he could either change something or check something out to confirm that it was going as planned.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Cool to see Frogurt again after the webisode.. Frogurt, we hardly knew ye.

Too tired to rewatch now.. Note to self, made it to minute 13 in rewatch.

Great episodes..


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

jkeegan said:


> Cool to see Frogurt again after the webisode.. Frogurt, we hardly knew ye.
> 
> Too tired to rewatch now.. Note to self, made it to minute 13 in rewatch.
> 
> Great episodes..


As soon as they started focusing too much on him, I turned to my wife and said, "he's a goner." 

ZZZZip!


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

jkeegan said:


> How did Marvin Candle have a baby on the island? Is that significant, or was it conceived off-island?


Dunno, but I like how he gets up at 8:15.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Official Lost podcast just posted.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

hefe said:


> Official Lost podcast just posted.


In addition to the one posted yesterday?


----------



## jpicard (Oct 26, 2004)

so how often does the sky light up and the island "skip the record"? My guess that it is every 108 minutes. Is is possible that season two locke/hurley/walt/etc. button pushers are somehow causing the skip through time on the island now? may through some cosmic link in time/space they are themselves causing the now new season island to skip all around. Since Desmond is a key to the solution to this maybe his turning the failsafe key will be the fixing of the island to stop skipping time. ??


----------



## scottykempf (Dec 1, 2004)

unixadm said:


> All I can say is WOW!
> 
> AWESOME episode(s)!
> 
> If they go back (or I should say when they go back), will everyone be alive again? Could they save Jin and Michael on the Freighter? I know that Faraday said that they can't change things, but then he talked to Desmond which will definitely change things.


Why do you think that they are dead? Sun, et. al _think_ that they are dead because they know that the freighter blew up. We don't yet know if they really are dead. This being Lost, they will find a way that they survived.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

aindik said:


> In addition to the one posted yesterday?


Sorry, no. I just saw it downloading. I didn't receive it yesterday for some reason.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

hefe said:


> Sorry, no. I just saw it downloading. I didn't receive it yesterday for some reason.


Ah, OK. I hope it's not a spoiler to say that this was a particularly lame edition of the podcast.


----------



## Ment (Mar 27, 2008)

Hurly spoiled this episode for me. Wanted to skip 15 minute blocks just to avoid seeing this meathead. It's too bad they need him to get back to the island.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

The meeting between Kate and Sun was certainly interesting. Sun has certainly hardened in her post-island post-Jin incarnation.

But Sun having "business to attend to" in Los Angeles seems like too convenient a plot device. More like something they would use on 24 to get Jack Bauer somewhere.

I hope they eventually tell us why the 6 leaving has anything to do with fixing what happened to the island, and why they "have to go back." If that's even true. Without that information, I'm having a hard time rooting for them to get back. Seems like, if the island keeps flashing in and out of time, Charles Widmore will never find it.

Speaking of that, Farraday suggested that only the people were time traveling, but the island wasn't. But the island has to have gone somewhere. The people on the helicopter saw it disappear.

Are we safe in assuming that, if a scene takes place on the island, and then another scene not on the island, followed by another scene on the island, that the second island scene is at the same time as the first one? IOW, are we safe in assuming there are no time flashes unless we see them?

Ben going to Hurley's house seemed like a particularly bad play from Ben. I wouldn't expect him to do something that dumb.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Absolutely brilliant. Loved it.

Daniel appearing at the beginning during the construction of The Orchid station-That was meant as an initial shock to us, but it's safe to believe this is in a future episode. Daniel and the other castaways will "integrate" into the Dharma Initiative to make sure things go well, or to stop the island from "skipping". 

LOVED seeing Mrs. Hawking again. I was worried she was only going to make those 2 appearances and we'd never see her again. I was also thinking that she might be Daniel's mother in Oxford that Desmond is going to see-but Daniel isn't British, and she appeared to be in Los Angeles there at the end-since Ben was just with Hurley and Jack, and he only has 70 hours to make it...


----------



## aforkosh (Apr 20, 2003)

hefe said:


> Was she the the clock shop lady from Desmond's episode, _The Constant_?


You mean Rose Caffee of the Hill, Providence, RI? (Brotherhood on Showtime)


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

unixadm said:


> Lots of answers for a season premier.....lots of new questions.....and some great surprises.


Yup, she seems to have gotten Rose Tyler teeth in the afterlife, too.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> What did it change? Desmond didn't remember/act on the conversation until later. He didn't do anything differently.
> 
> I like this approach to time travel, if they can stick with it.


This has always been my favorite time travel theory, that whatever has happened has already happened and can't be changed. You might perceive you're making a change, but you're making the past unfold like it's already unfolded (or to put it another way, you're doing what you've always done).

That said, Faraday had a theory about Desmond and tested it. The second he opened the door, Faraday knew what he told Desmond, which is that the rules don't apply to him. If Desmond hadn't answered the door, his theory would have been wrong. For Desmond, the past _has_ changed. That's why Desmond was so shocked as he woke up. He suddenly had a memory that he didn't have before.



jkeegan said:


> It sounded like the guy who was saying "Previously.. on Expose" was the same voice as the guy who says "Previously.. on Lost" (which is NOT Carlton Cuse, btw)


It's John Terry, who plays Christian Shepard.

Greg


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

cmontyburns said:


> I think my favorite part of premiere was when Hugo's dad settled in to watch "Expose" -- which of course was the show starring fan-favorite dead castaway Nikki.


Razzle Dazzle!



aindik said:


> The meeting between Kate and Sun was certainly interesting. Sun has certainly hardened in her post-island post-Jin incarnation.
> 
> But Sun having "business to attend to" in Los Angeles seems like too convenient a plot device. More like something they would use on 24 to get Jack Bauer somewhere.


Perhaps Sun knows Ben is in Los Angeles (although it look suspiciously like Hawaii even with Downtown matted in).



aindik said:


> Ben going to Hurley's house seemed like a particularly bad play from Ben. I wouldn't expect him to do something that dumb.


Because that's where Hurley is and he doesn't have a lot of time.



spikedavis said:


> Absolutely brilliant. Loved it.
> 
> Daniel appearing at the beginning during the construction of The Orchid station-That was meant as an initial shock to us, but it's safe to believe this is in a future episode. Daniel and the other castaways will "integrate" into the Dharma Initiative to make sure things go well, or to stop the island from "skipping".


I thought it was going to be Richard. Imagine my surprise when it was revealed to be Faraday.

Good start to the season.
The time skipping element is going to keep things interesting for a while.
Is that why Richard doesn't seem to age?
If not, why aren't the Others skipping as well?

"Libby says hi."

And is Jimmy Kimmel going to do a Lost skit for every episode?


----------



## jamesbobo (Jun 18, 2000)

Locke gets shot in the leg when he's at the crashed plane. Could that be why he couldn't walk when he approached the plane the first time we saw it a couple of seasons ago?

There's one thing I need a to refresh my memory. Who is Jill, the woman Ben goes to in the butcher shop? Where has she been seen before.


----------



## smickola (Nov 17, 2004)

I liked how the whole opening to the episode with Marvin Candle paralleled the opening scene when we first saw Desmond in the hatch. Also how the alarm clock was the same flip style as the timer in the hatch - and went off at 8:15, of course!

My favorite line of the night - Ben to Jack "oh, I thought that's what you were going to do with them!" (Jack's pills, after Jack told him he planned on flushing them down the toilet.)


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

JYoung said:


> "Libby says hi."


One of my favorite Lost moments, I loved the whole Ana Lucia shout out, great way to start what will in repeats be the 2nd episode of the season.

Diane


----------



## Mike Farrington (Nov 16, 2000)

jamesbobo said:


> There's one thing I need a to refresh my memory. Who is Jill, the woman Ben goes to in the butcher shop? Where has she been seen before.


Was she the security person in the Others' barracks?


----------



## woolybugger (Nov 12, 2004)

Mike Farrington said:


> Was she the security person in the Others' barracks?


The one they referred to as "The Sheriff"? That was my first thought.


----------



## Mike Farrington (Nov 16, 2000)

woolybugger said:


> The one they referred to as "The Sheriff"? That was my first thought.


Looking on Lostpedia, I see that her name was Isabel, and she was portrayed by a different actress.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Hugo seemed huger to me. Does anybody else zap food directly on the microwave plate?


----------



## JDHutt25 (Dec 27, 2004)

cheesesteak said:


> Hugo seemed huger to me. Does anybody else zap food directly on the microwave plate?


Yep. Though not something that might ooze.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

jamesbobo said:


> Locke gets shot in the leg when he's at the crashed plane. Could that be why he couldn't walk when he approached the plane the first time we saw it a couple of seasons ago?


After watching that episode the other day, I actually commented to my wife that maybe the island made John's legs not work so that Boone would have to climb instead of him, because the island had things for Locke to do. I also commented last night that Locke was walking fine there (i.e. It wasn't proximity to something that made his legs not work).


----------



## LifeIsABeach (Feb 28, 2001)

Locke went back in time and saw the drug smuggler plabe crashing. What would happen if the island went to right before their plane crashed? Would they see it crash and then have two of each of them on the island?


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Don't even TRY to get into time travel paradoxes. It'll blow your mind!


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

aindik said:


> ...Are we safe in assuming that, if a scene takes place on the island, and then another scene not on the island, followed by another scene on the island, that the second island scene is at the same time as the first one? IOW, are we safe in assuming there are no time flashes unless we see them?...


I was wondering that also. The scene where Richard takes the bullet out of Locke was at night right? Then it flashed to day, but when we cut to the other survivors it was night still...unless I am remembering incorrectly, I started watching an hour late and was falling asleep during the second half of the episode.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Great episode!

Poor Hurley! He did exactly what Sayid told him to do. "Whatever Ben Linus tells you to do, you do the opposite!"

So, when Ben wants Hurley to join him in returning to the island, Hurley turns himself in to the police!

I'm confident that Sayid wasn't intending to be taken literally. He was simply trying to say emphatically that Ben is, as a general rule, not trustworthy. But in this case, I'm equally confident that what Ben wanted Hurley to do was "the right thing" to do.

So, now Ben, Sayid, and Jack are going to have to figure out how to spring Hurley from jail so he can return with them (which I'm confident they'll do, but it might take most of the season!)

As to time travel, and not being able to change anything. I think Faraday was telling Sawyer and the others that it wasn't possible to change anything precisely because _he feared what they might attempt to change and the ramifications of that._

I think we were given two examples to suggest that Faraday did, indeed "change something" in the timeline.

I think it's a safe assumption that the one and only time Faraday ever told Desmond to go to Oxford was the time we saw when he was "time traveling" in this episode. We then see Desmond in "present day" remembering the incident and declaring that he needed to go to Oxford. That was "a change".

I also think that when we saw Faraday during the construction of "The Orchid" (which would have had to have been early '70's), he had traveled from sometime near "present day". He was hiding his face with the canister so that he would not be spotted as a "stranger". I think, in this case, he was deliberately observing what Darhma was doing in the early '70's and was remaining as incognito as possible so as not to accidentally affect it.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Good start to the season.
> The time skipping element is going to keep things interesting for a while.
> Is that why Richard doesn't seem to age?
> If not, why aren't the Others skipping as well?


I was wondering that too, why Richard didn't follow when Locke moved with the island.

This was classic "Lost", keep stringing you along enough to make you think you're finding things out, only to end the episode going "But wait a minute, why did...."


----------



## Paperboy2003 (Mar 30, 2004)

....and now Hurley's parents will go to jail for aiding and abetting


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

jkeegan said:


> Cool to see Frogurt again after the webisode.. Frogurt, we hardly knew ye.





hefe said:


> As soon as they started focusing too much on him, I turned to my wife and said, "he's a goner."
> 
> ZZZZip!


As soon as I saw him on the zodiac wearing a red shirt, i knew he wouldn't be around very long.



Fish Man said:


> Poor Hurley! He did exactly what Sayid told him to do. "Whatever Ben Linus tells you to do, you do the opposite!"


In the season finale, I figured Ben sent Sayid to get Hurly... was that not the case?
Sayid was just protecting Hurly? And Ben found out because Jack called Ben.


----------



## MasterCephus (Jan 3, 2005)

I totally think that Faraday at the beginning will be a future episode of trying to reset the time traveling.

I am interested in finding out why the 6 leaving causes all of this. Also no mention of Jacob (is that the name of the spirit?). 

Pretty good Lost episode. Makes me want to watch more.


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

Was this the first time we hear what Dr. Chang's real name is? 
aka Candle and Halliwax


----------



## WinBear (Aug 24, 2000)

Cindy1230 said:


> Was this the first time we hear what Dr. Chang's real name is?
> aka Candle and Halliwax


He's had a different name in each of the orientation films. He was Dr. Wick (Mark Wickmund per Lostpedia) in one.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Fish Man said:


> I think we were given two examples to suggest that Faraday did, indeed "change something" in the timeline.
> 
> I think it's a safe assumption that the one and only time Faraday ever told Desmond to go to Oxford was the time we saw when he was "time traveling" in this episode. We then see Desmond in "present day" remembering the incident and declaring that he needed to go to Oxford. That was "a change".
> 
> I also think that when we saw Faraday during the construction of "The Orchid" (which would have had to have been early '70's), he had traveled from sometime near "present day". He was hiding his face with the canister so that he would not be spotted as a "stranger". I think, in this case, he was deliberately observing what Darhma was doing in the early '70's and was remaining as incognito as possible so as not to accidentally affect it.


But I don't think either of those is a change. Desmond was always told about Oxford; he only remembered it in the dream. And Faraday was always at the construction of The Orchid. We saw nothing happen during either scene that contradicts anything we've ever seen before.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> What did it change? Desmond didn't remember/act on the conversation until later. He didn't do anything differently.
> 
> I like this approach to time travel, if they can stick with it.


Me too.

I kind of liked the simplicity of the "You can't change what happened" approach. Time travel plots always bother me a bit and this answer seems to work for me.

And then Farraday goes and blows it.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Faraday's mother is in Oxford even though he's American?

Can someone explain how what is happening to Charlotte (being unstuck in time, I guess) is different from what is happening to the rest of them? Why is she sick and losing her memory, like Daniel was last season, when the rest of them are not?

And, did the island move, or didn't it?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

I thought the story was a little clumsily put together--especially the first hour. Not the finest piece of writing we've seen from this group. The narrative didn't flow, the dialogue was stiff. (When I was watching one of the scenes I remember thinking it must be the first scene they shot because the acting was so dull--the boat scene where Hurley gets mad at Sayid for not backing him up.)

The second hour was better. We've seen slow a slow start to a season before. These writers are much better at mystery and suggestion than at exposition. Now that they've got some of the business out of the way, I expect they'll be in more comfortable territory. 

Still, my mind is charged from the return of my favorite show, and it'll be working in the background all day, I'm sure, trying to fit the new pieces of information together with the last four seasons.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

aforkosh said:


> You mean Rose Caffee of the Hill, Providence, RI? (Brotherhood on Showtime)


Yeah, that's where I recognized Finnola Flannigan from too!  I knew it was her by that white hair and Irish accent even before she turned her head around last night.

Great episode! As others have mentioned some great lines by Hurley! Also liked when he said "Never, Dude!" to Ben. Great two episodes! Looks to be a good new season.

Cheryl


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

aindik said:


> Are we safe in assuming that, if a scene takes place on the island, and then another scene not on the island, followed by another scene on the island, that the second island scene is at the same time as the first one? IOW, are we safe in assuming there are no time flashes unless we see them?


I'm a bit confused by the disappearing island as well.

How does the island disappear, unless we flash to a time when there was no island (millions of years ago?) or a time in the future when the island is gone?

I thought it was just the state of the island that changes in the time jumps, like no camp, no hatch, no man-made stuff. But the island is always there.

So how did it disappear to the helicopter bunch?


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Just a minor point.

I really liked the touch put in by the writers where the episode began with a record being played, and then the record began to skip. Then later, Faraday uses a "skipping record" as an analogy to what's happening to the island in time.

For what it's worth, the record being played was the album Shotgun Willie by Willie Nelson. This would tend to date the construction of "The Orchid" to 1973 or later.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

uncdrew said:


> I'm a bit confused by the disappearing island as well.
> 
> How does the island disappear, unless we flash to a time when there was no island (millions of years ago?) or a time in the future when the island is gone?
> 
> ...


My take is that it's moving around in time _and_ space.


----------



## pjenkins (Mar 8, 1999)

I guess I'm in the minority. The show started out interesting, probably because it's been awhile since the last episode. Then as it progressed I got less and less interested in it. Maybe it's the characters, I just don't identify or like any of them I guess. Even Hurly annoyed me this episode. And I'm not sold on the time travel ideas or approaches they are taking, what was an interesting story with a lot of mystery is now just another time travel sci-fi show that gives the writers any out they want.

Maybe it'll grow on me as the season progresses, or I'm just jaded by promising sci-fi gone bad (cough, cough Battlestar Galatica, cough, cough)


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Fish Man said:


> Just a minor point.
> 
> I really liked the touch put in by the writers where the episode began with a record being played, and then the record began to skip. Then later, Faraday uses a "skipping record" as an analogy to what's happening to the island in time.


That's for the benefit of the portion of the audience who have never seen a record.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

uncdrew said:


> How does the island disappear, unless we flash to a time when there was no island (millions of years ago?) or a time in the future when the island is gone?


If it moved in time, it would have to disappear sense the earth would be in a different part of space. I think.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> If it moved in time, it would have to disappear sense the earth would be in a different part of space. I think.


I suppose maybe I can buy that argument.

So if we flash 10 years forward, the Earth would have rotated a bunch. Perhaps the helicopter crew is now over Bakersfield.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

spikedavis said:


> LOVED seeing Mrs. Hawking again. I was worried she was only going to make those 2 appearances and we'd never see her again. I was also thinking that she might be Daniel's mother in Oxford that Desmond is going to see-but Daniel isn't British, and she appeared to be in Los Angeles there at the end-since Ben was just with Hurley and Jack, and he only has 70 hours to make it...


I'm still thinking she might be Daniel's mother. They cut to her right after Desmond said they're going to Oxford, and she was working on a classroom chalkboard. The difference in accents could be explained simply by where each was raised. Wouldn't that be a typical--but over the top--LOST twist if Mrs. H turned out to be DF's mom!



jamesbobo said:


> There's one thing I need a to refresh my memory. Who is Jill, the woman Ben goes to in the butcher shop? Where has she been seen before.


So has anyone figured out who she is, and have we seen her before?



pjenkins said:


> And I'm not sold on the time travel ideas or approaches they are taking, what was an interesting story with a lot of mystery is now just another time travel sci-fi show that gives the writers any out they want.


I do NOT like time-travel plot lines. They allow the writers far too many outs & escapes for any machinations they want. Heroes is a perfect example of why writers should stay away from TT stories.

Having said that, I was amazed, impressed, astounded with how well the writers slid time-travel into the weave of LOST. By stating that one premise (nothing changes), they removed the biggest problem TT creates to viewers--the fact that nothing is real because anything can change. Here it appears we can go back & forth to visit time, but the story won't change. Only how we see it, our POV.

I think the average TV viewer is not a big fan of TT stories. And yet I think most LOST viewers are lovin' how they are using it so far. Of course, we only have two hours under our belt.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> I thought the story was a little clumsily put together--especially the first hour. Not the finest piece of writing we've seen from this group. The narrative didn't flow, the dialogue was stiff.


I enjoyed it, except the first bit with the doctor talking to the workers in the mine. Way too much exposition and seemed out of character and unnecessary for the doctor to explain the time travel to the head of the digging crew.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Great episode.

As soon as I saw Faraday with the DI in the past I knew I would be in for a headache. Is this something that he is going to do or was that something he had already done? Does it explain why Faraday has a weird connection to the island but doesn't seem to know why.

I think most of us assumed Sayid was busting Hurley out of the nuthouse for Ben so they could all reunite. I was surprised last night to learn Sayid wasn't with Ben anymore.

When Richard came up to Lock and said, "You have to give this to me next time I see you." and handed him the compass it reminded me of when Richard came to see a young Lock and asked him which of these things belonged to him. I wonder if those are related somehow...

Is this Jill lady Daniel's mother...that's the only thing I could make fit in my mind.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

astrohip said:


> So has anyone figured out who [Jill] is, and have we seen her before?


Lostpedia is very informative.
http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Jill



> Jill is a butcher who knows and apparently works for Ben. She watches Locke's body for Ben while he's out getting the rest of the Oceanic 6 together to return to the Island. ("The Lie").


Now we know everything there is to know about Jill!


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

I suppose the "ghosts" on the island told Miles where to find the boar.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Fool Me Twice said:


> I suppose the "ghosts" on the island told Miles where to find the boar.


I assumed he somehow communicated with the ghost of the boar.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

unicorngoddess said:


> I assumed he somehow communicated with the ghost of the boar.


Is he Doctor Doolittle?


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

And my theory as to why only the 815 survivors are jumping around in time...I think it has something to do with those injections Desmond was taking in the hatch. If all the Others were taking those injections too, maybe it has made them immune to the record skipping effect.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> Great episode.
> 
> As soon as I saw Faraday with the DI in the past I knew I would be in for a headache. Is this something that he is going to do or was that something he had already done? Does it explain why Faraday has a weird connection to the island but doesn't seem to know why.


Is it possible that Faraday was actually in the DI for real, and he traveled to the future, to continue studying time travel, before Ben killed the rest of them?



unicorngoddess said:


> Is this Jill lady Daniel's mother...that's the only thing I could make fit in my mind.


Maybe her or the lady from the jewelry store. Though, neither of them is in (at?) Oxford, nor does either appear to have any reason to be there.


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

aindik said:


> Can someone explain how what is happening to Charlotte (being unstuck in time, I guess) is different from what is happening to the rest of them? Why is she sick and losing her memory, like Daniel was last season, when the rest of them are not?


I think she is pregnant with Daniel's baby. I think that is why he has taken charge of the situation.


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

Ment said:


> Hurly spoiled this episode for me. Wanted to skip 15 minute blocks just to avoid seeing this meathead. It's too bad they need him to get back to the island.


I also hate Hurly. And I still think Jin isn't dead. But what do I know.


----------



## woolybugger (Nov 12, 2004)

aindik said:


> Can someone explain how what is happening to Charlotte (being unstuck in time, I guess) is different from what is happening to the rest of them? Why is she sick and losing her memory, like Daniel was last season, when the rest of them are not?


Isn't she going through what the guy on the boat did? Can't remember his name off the top of my head. Mikowski or something? Anyways, didn't that have to do with having a Constant? And Daniel's constant is Desmond, so he went to the hatch to make contact with him so he didn't get sick? Maybe?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> And my theory as to why only the 815 survivors are jumping around in time...I think it has something to do with those injections Desmond was taking in the hatch. If all the Others were taking those injections too, maybe it has made them immune to the record skipping effect.


I *LIKE* it! but I'll go further, and suggest the Others have a natural immunity, and the injections simply bring normal people the immunity to the skipping.
just throwing it out there.

Diane


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I think the island moving and the Losties jumping in time are separated (but connected) phenomena. Ben moved the island (to another place, and possibly another time). This has happened before (which is how the Black Rock got stranded inland; it was where the island moved to). One side effect of this process is the time jumps the Losties are experiencing. It is interesting that the time jumps are tied to relative, and not absolute, locations--that is, when they jump to a time when the island was in another place, they are still at the same place on the island.

Which leads to the interesting question of what would happen if somebody were, say, in the hatch when a time-jump went to a time when there was no hatch? Ouch.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

whitson77 said:


> And I still think Jin isn't dead. But what do I know.


In the official recap episode that aired before the premier, Carlton Cuse said Sun "believes" Jin is dead, which makes it sound like he's still alive. I was shocked, not because I hadn't considered the possibility, but that he would spoil that in a recap episode.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> In the official recap episode that aired before the premier, Carlton Cuse said Sun "believes" Jin is dead, which makes it sound like he's still alive. I was shocked, not because I hadn't considered the possibility, but that he would spoil that in a recap episode.


I don't think that's a spoiler. It's meant to keep the door open. IOW, people believe things that are true, and they believe things that are not true.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

woolybugger said:


> Isn't she going through what the guy on the boat did? Can't remember his name off the top of my head. Mikowski or something? Anyways, didn't that have to do with having a Constant? And Daniel's constant is Desmond, so he went to the hatch to make contact with him so he didn't get sick? Maybe?


But aren't they all going through that? Why isn't Sawyer getting sick?

On another note, I bet at some point the losties travel back in time to a point where Danielle Rousseau is still alive.


----------



## woolybugger (Nov 12, 2004)

aindik said:


> But aren't they all going through that? Why isn't Sawyer getting sick?
> 
> On another note, I bet at some point the losties travel back in time to a point where Danielle Rousseau is still alive.


Hubby and I were talking about this after I posted and we couldn't figure out why some people get sick and some don't. The Others and the 815 survivors seem fine. The people on the freighter didn't (IIRC wasn't there another guy that died before the Mikowski guy did?). Since Daniel and Des both have a Constant, they are OK, but then again why isn't psychic guy getting sick? Oh, I am so confused! 

ETA: The guy I have been thinking of is Minkowski, according to the Lostpedia page.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

spikedavis said:


> LOVED seeing Mrs. Hawking again. I was worried she was only going to make those 2 appearances and we'd never see her again. I was also thinking that she might be Daniel's mother in Oxford that Desmond is going to see-but Daniel isn't British, and she appeared to be in Los Angeles there at the end-since Ben was just with Hurley and Jack, and he only has 70 hours to make it...


Remember that Mrs. Hawking's encounter with Ben in Los Angeles was three years after Daniel's present. It wouldn't be inconsistent for her to have left Oxford during those three years. Actually, now that I think of it, have we been given a point of reference as to when in time Desmond actually had the dream where he remembered his encounter with Daniel? Was it the same three years later we've been watching with the Oceanic 6, or was it at a time closer to when they all left the island (or even later in time)? Either way, Faraday could only tell Desmond to start his search in Oxford, but not that she'd definitively be there at the time he tried to find her.



Test said:


> I was wondering that also. The scene where Richard takes the bullet out of Locke was at night right? Then it flashed to day, but when we cut to the other survivors it was night still...unless I am remembering incorrectly, I started watching an hour late and was falling asleep during the second half of the episode.


Although separated by a commerical break, I just took it that they were showing the same jump twice: once from Locke's perspective and once from the other survivor's perspective.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

JWolff said:


> No, it's Ms. Hawking who Desmond speaks to in the Jewelry shop during the episode "Flashes Before Your Eyes". Desmond wanted to buy a ring to propose to Penny, but she explains in great detail how he wont be doing that and that he will go to the island and press the dreaded button.





spikedavis said:


> LOVED seeing Mrs. Hawking again. I was worried she was only going to make those 2 appearances and we'd never see her again. I was also thinking that she might be Daniel's mother in Oxford that Desmond is going to see-but Daniel isn't British, and she appeared to be in Los Angeles there at the end-since Ben was just with Hurley and Jack, and he only has 70 hours to make it...





astrohip said:


> I'm still thinking she might be Daniel's mother. They cut to her right after Desmond said they're going to Oxford, and she was working on a classroom chalkboard. The difference in accents could be explained simply by where each was raised. Wouldn't that be a typical--but over the top--LOST twist if Mrs. H turned out to be DF's mom!


I think Mrs. Hawking is going to end up being Daniel's mom. He got cut off just as he was going to say her name, which tells me it's a name that we would recognize and a character that we know. She's really the only one that fits, and she's the only one that seems to know what's going on, as Daniel said she would. I have no explanation for the different accents, but that's fairly minor, IMO.


Fish Man said:


> So, now Ben, Sayid, and Jack are going to have to figure out how to spring Hurley from jail so he can return with them (which I'm confident they'll do, but it might take most of the season!)


I don't think there's any chance it will take most of the season. As we learned, Ben only has 70 hours (*42*00 minutes, BTW), and that would really drag on if they made this entire season only cover three days.



Fool Me Twice said:


> In the official recap episode that aired before the premier, Carlton Cuse said Sun "believes" Jin is dead, which makes it sound like he's still alive. I was shocked, not because I hadn't considered the possibility, but that he would spoil that in a recap episode.


I don't think it's a spoiler either. Because we don't know for sure whether Jin is alive or dead, Cuse had to narrate that part to leave open either possibility.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

3D said:


> Remember that Mrs. Hawking's encounter with Ben in Los Angeles was three years after Daniel's present. It wouldn't be inconsistent for her to have left Oxford during those three years. Actually, now that I think of it, have we been given a point of reference as to when in time Desmond actually had the dream where he remembered his encounter with Daniel? Was it the same three years later we've been watching with the Oceanic 6, or was it at a time closer to when they all left the island (or even later in time)? Either way, Faraday could only tell Desmond to start his search in Oxford, but not that she'd definitively be there at the time he tried to find her.


Yes, he woke up from the dream and told Penny about it, and she said that it's been three years, he's safe now.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

unicorngoddess said:


> And my theory as to why only the 815 survivors are jumping around in time...I think it has something to do with those injections Desmond was taking in the hatch. If all the Others were taking those injections too, maybe it has made them immune to the record skipping effect.


I like this idea, but what about Juliet? Is she no longer immune because of her brief time away from the Others? Have the Others been able to continue taking injections, even at that makeshift camp where Locke found them? I guess if the answer to both is yes, then I've answered by own question.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Yes, he woke up from the dream and told Penny about it, and she said that it's been three years, he's safe now.


Didn't remember that, thanks. So I guess, if Mrs. Hawking is Daniel's mother, Desmond will just have to go to Los Angeles to find her. Fancy that


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Maybe these weird time anomalies are why babies couldn't be conceived on the island. It would surely be a plot convenient effect, but perhaps the mother and the baby are in different time streams or something because the baby was "made" on the island. And perhaps there have always been small time slippages that throw things out of sync and are part of why the island is hard to find from the outside.

I don't know...just rambling here...


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

So... didn't Locke change events in the past by killing the two thugs?

Count me in the camp that thinks Faraday at the drill site is something that will happen in a future episode to the current Faraday.

Loved the red shirt guy. Knew he was dead the first time he spoke.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> There ya go. Kelvin.


No. Radinski.

Kelvin is Inman's first name.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

aindik said:


> But aren't they all going through that? Why isn't Sawyer getting sick?


When Desmond first went through it and no one else did, I think it was Faraday that asked if he had been exposed to massive amounts of electromagnetism. I think that might be the key.



3D said:


> I like this idea, but what about Juliet? Is she no longer immune because of her brief time away from the Others? Have the Others been able to continue taking injections, even at that makeshift camp where Locke found them? I guess if the answer to both is yes, then I've answered by own question.


Juliette was brought to the island. She was kinda considered an outside. She was just brought there to try to figure out the problem with getting pregnant on the island. So maybe she never receieved any injections. I don't know...I guess that's why it's just a theory


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

3D said:


> Didn't remember that, thanks. So I guess, if Mrs. Hawking is Daniel's mother, Desmond will just have to go to Los Angeles to find her. Fancy that


Yep. Just like Sun, they had to concoct a reason for him to end up in Los Angeles. This must be it.

Is Desmond on the list of people who "have to" go back to set the universe right? Is Aaron? Is Walt?

Is this list "the list" that we heard about in earlier seasons?


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

aindik said:


> But aren't they all going through that? Why isn't Sawyer getting sick?


Probably has something to do with Charlotte being born on the island. That's the one thing that we know for sure makes her unique from the Other Losties. I like the idea about the injections Desmond was taking being related to his unique power.

I'm still reeling from how good that show was last night. I'm going to go home, un-delete it from my Tivo and watch it all over again. No other form of entertainment makes me happy like Lost does.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Also-another thought-

Remember how we learned last year that Jacob's cabin disappears and re-appears in different locations? Seems to be related to what's going on now...


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> So... didn't Locke change events in the past by killing the two thugs?
> 
> Count me in the camp that thinks Faraday at the drill site is something that will happen in a future episode to the current Faraday.
> 
> Loved the red shirt guy. Knew he was dead the first time he spoke.


No I think we are supposed to understand that that allready happened in the past, Locke was just playing it through.

On that note, did Ethan ever meet Locke? If so why didn't he recognize him?


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

vertigo235 said:


> No I think we are supposed to understand that that allready happened in the past, Locke was just playing it through.
> 
> On that note, did Ethan ever meet Locke? If so why didn't he recognize him?


He hadn't met him yet. Not at the the time that plane had just gone down. Oceanic 815 hadn't crashed yet.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

vertigo235 said:


> No I think we are supposed to understand that that allready happened in the past, Locke was just playing it through.
> 
> On that note, did Ethan ever meet Locke? If so why didn't he recognize him?


Because he was Ethan in the past. Ethan in the present is dead.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I want a flashback episode devoted to whoever created the time travel wagon wheel.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

vertigo235 said:


> No I think we are supposed to understand that that allready happened in the past, Locke was just playing it through.
> 
> On that note, did Ethan ever meet Locke? If so why didn't he recognize him?


So your theory is that those two guys were going to be killed or die for some unknown reason had the losties not gone back in time and appeared in the forest at that point in time, and Locke was repairing the timeline by ensuring that they did indeed die?


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I want a flashback episode devoted to whoever created the time travel wagon wheel.


I was just about to post something like this.

Who built "the wheel"? And, how did it get buried under so much rock?

When Dr. Candle/Wickman/Wheterwax gets called to the construction area, and is shown a sonogram of what's behind the rock wall that they are cutting, it is obvious from his reaction that he recognizes "the wheel", and knows what it does. He admonishes the construction workers not to cut any closer to it.

How did he know about it? And how did it get buried under all that solid rock with no access?

His reaction also indicates that he recognized exactly what it was from the sonogram, but he hadn't previously known precisely *WHERE* it was. That the excavation encountered it in that particular location appeared to be a surprise to him.

Apparently, subsequent to the scene we saw, Darhma built that "time chamber" (where we see the bunny get sent trough time) right against that point in the rock where Dr. Candle instructs the men to stop excavating.

Then, Ben puts metal in the time chamber to blow a hole through to the chamber where the wheel is.

Obviously, like Candle, Ben knew about the "wheel" too, and knew what it did.

How did Ben know?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> So your theory is that those two guys were going to be killed or die for some unknown reason had the losties not gone back in time and appeared in the forest at that point in time, and Locke was repairing the timeline by ensuring that they did indeed die?


IMO, the Losties always went back in time and Locke always killed those guys. The fact that we saw it in this episode doesn't make it a "new" occurrence. If we are to believe Daniel, you CAN'T change the past. So the fact that Locke was able to kill them indicates that it wasn't a change. Same with Daniel talking to Desmond and Ethan shooting Locke.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

I LOVED how Hurley recapped the whole island story for his Mom. I probably won't rewatch the whole episode but I will definitely watch that scene again.

Is it supposed to be clear exactly how the O-6 leaving is the cause of whatever bad things are happening? And do we even know what bad things they're talking about? Getting shot with fire arrows kinda sucks, but I don't see how that wouldn't have happened if the rest of them hadn't left on the helicopter; it just would have happened to all of them. Ben would have been turning the wheel either way, right?

Maybe we're just not supposed to understand it yet, but if we are, then I don't.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Fish Man said:


> I was just about to post something like this.
> 
> Who built "the wheel"? And, how did it get buried under so much rock?
> 
> ...


The thing that is a little incredible to me is that if Dr. Chang knew of the exotic matter and that releasing it would have some catastrophic effect, why did he have the workers in there just drilling and blasting away? Did he know that when they got close, strange things would happen and he'd be called in, or was it simply coincidence that they called him down there at precisely the right time when he wanted them to stop their excavation?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jeff125va said:


> I LOVED how Hurley recapped the whole island story for his Mom. I probably won't rewatch the whole episode but I will definitely watch that scene again.


I thought for sure when he got done talking, he'd pause and say, "No wonder Jack wanted us to lie. Nobody would believe that."


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jeff125va said:


> Is it supposed to be clear exactly how the O-6 leaving is the cause of whatever bad things are happening? And do we even know what bad things they're talking about? Getting shot with fire arrows kinda sucks, but I don't see how that wouldn't have happened if the rest of them hadn't left on the helicopter; it just would have happened to all of them. Ben would have been turning the wheel either way, right?
> 
> Maybe we're just not supposed to understand it yet, but if we are, then I don't.


I think it might have to do with Jack calling the people on the freighter and asking them to come rescue them. Locke almost killed him for it. That was the point of no return and Locke knew it. Had Jack not done that, the island would have remained hidden and things would have continued as they were. But as soon as Jack made that call, he set into motion the chain of events that led to Ben turning the wheel, the O-6 leaving the island, the skipping in time, etc. So it's not so much that they left, but that they created a situation where they were able to leave.

However, I'm not sure how going back is going to fix anything.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> IMO, the Losties always went back in time and Locke always killed those guys. The fact that we saw it in this episode doesn't make it a "new" occurrence. If we are to believe Daniel, you CAN'T change the past. So the fact that Locke was able to kill them indicates that it wasn't a change. Same with Daniel talking to Desmond and Ethan shooting Locke.


Was this the rule Ben was talking about that got broken when Keamy killed Alex? Looking back on that, it seems like Ben didn't think it could happen because it, well, doesn't happen.

Maybe Faraday thinks you can't change the past but he's not right.

What happens when the Losties (or anyone, really) time travels to a point in time when they are already on the Island? Are there two of them? Does the new one inhabit the old one's body like with Desmond?


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

I haven't seen this discussed, but what are your thoughts on who is the client behind the DNA test order?

* It could be Ben trying to smoke out Kate and Aaron.
* The same could be applied to Windmore.
* Sun getting some revenge? Looks like part of her still blames/resents her for Jin's death.
* Jack b/c he wants custody
* Claire's Mom? Far fetched, but this is lost after all.

Angel


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I think it might have to do with Jack calling the people on the freighter and asking them to come rescue them. Locke almost killed him for it. That was the point of no return and Locke knew it. Had Jack not done that, the island would have remained hidden and things would have continued as they were. But as soon as Jack made that call, he set into motion the chain of events that led to Ben turning the wheel, the O-6 leaving the island, the skipping in time, etc. So it's not so much that they left, but that they created a situation where they were able to leave.
> 
> However, I'm not sure how going back is going to fix anything.


That was making a lot of sense until your last sentence.  Now I still don't know.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

aindik said:


> Because he was Ethan in the past. Ethan in the present is dead.


You're not following, BEFORE Eathan died, did he recognize Locke. Or see him for that matter. I know he lived with them for a few days.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> IMO, the Losties always went back in time and Locke always killed those guys. The fact that we saw it in this episode doesn't make it a "new" occurrence. If we are to believe Daniel, you CAN'T change the past. So the fact that Locke was able to kill them indicates that it wasn't a change. Same with Daniel talking to Desmond and Ethan shooting Locke.


That makes no sense. If Locke can kill two people in the past, then Sawyer should be able to storm the hatch. What Daniel stated is not entirely consistent with the events in the episode. Either he was unaware of the full circumstances, or he was wrong/lied. I think, based on what we saw, that Locke is different and can affect change. Same for desmond.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> So your theory is that those two guys were going to be killed or die for some unknown reason had the losties not gone back in time and appeared in the forest at that point in time, and Locke was repairing the timeline by ensuring that they did indeed die?


No I'm saying that Locke allways killed them, because he allways was sent back in time.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

hefe said:


> He hadn't met him yet. Not at the the time that plane had just gone down. Oceanic 815 hadn't crashed yet.


But he DID meet him, in the past


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

verdugan said:


> I haven't seen this discussed, but what are your thoughts on who is the client behind the DNA test order?
> 
> * It could be Ben trying to smoke out Kate and Aaron.
> * The same could be applied to Windmore.
> ...


I'm sort of assuming that Widmore knows everything already. Plus, what Sun said made sense; if they wanted to come after Kate, they wouldn't hide.

Claire's mom makes a lot more sense than any of those others. I'm sure she would have found out that Claire was pregnant, and maybe eventually started to wonder. There was a reporter at the press conference who pointed out that Kate would have been 6 months pregnant when she was in custody. Granted, when we saw Claire's mom at Christian's funeral, she certainly didn't seem to suspect anything, so something would have to have happened to make her suspect something.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> The thing that is a little incredible to me is that if Dr. Chang knew of the exotic matter and that releasing it would have some catastrophic effect, why did he have the workers in there just drilling and blasting away? Did he know that when they got close, strange things would happen and he'd be called in, or was it simply coincidence that they called him down there at precisely the right time when he wanted them to stop their excavation?


One possibility is that he knew that wherever the "wheel" was, it would "protect" itself. He wasn't all that worried about getting too close to it. Note, however, when the men were talking about blasting their way through is when Chang went a little ballistic and ordered them not to do so.

It was melting their drillbits, after all, not letting them cut too near to it.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

vertigo235 said:


> You're not following, BEFORE Eathan died, did he recognize Locke. Or see him for that matter. I know he lived with them for a few days.


If we're talking about post-crash Ethan, he lived among them at the beach for quite a while. He would know who they all are. It was his mission to find out who they all are and report back with lists in three days.

But this person, in this episode, was pre-crash Ethan. He hadn't met Locke or heard of Oceanic 815 yet.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

vertigo235 said:


> No I'm saying that Locke allways killed them, because he allways was sent back in time.


This makes no sense. If he can "always" have gone back in time and altered things, then he can go back in time and alter things, meaning that Daniel was wrong.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> This makes no sense. If he can "always" have gone back in time and altered things, then he can go back in time and alter things, meaning that Daniel was wrong.


What was altered? I think you're assuming that because we saw Locke kill those two people during this episode, that it must be something new and altered. But what if that's how that timeline always happened, and we're simply seeing it now. You can't try and figure it out. You simply have to accept that what we're seeing is what happened, because there can't be any change.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

jeff125va said:


> I'm sort of assuming that Widmore knows everything already. Plus, what Sun said made sense; if they wanted to come after Kate, they wouldn't hide.
> 
> Claire's mom makes a lot more sense than any of those others. I'm sure she would have found out that Claire was pregnant, and maybe eventually started to wonder. There was a reporter at the press conference who pointed out that Kate would have been 6 months pregnant when she was in custody. Granted, when we saw Claire's mom at Christian's funeral, she certainly didn't seem to suspect anything, so something would have to have happened to make her suspect something.


Could be the child's father, but that wouldn't serve the storyline very well.

Claire was very pregnant when they crashed. Is it even possible that her mother didn't know about it?

Legally "that kid is not hers" isn't enough for a court order. It has to be accompanied by a reason the person suing should have custody. So, the person behind the request has to be someone like Jack or Claire's mom or the baby's father - someone more related to the kid than Kate is. But that doesn't mean that person isn't being setup by someone with a greater interest in manipulating what Kate does.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> That makes no sense. If Locke can kill two people in the past, then Sawyer should be able to storm the hatch. What Daniel stated is not entirely consistent with the events in the episode. Either he was unaware of the full circumstances, or he was wrong/lied. I think, based on what we saw, that Locke is different and can affect change. Same for desmond.


Daniel was just saying that because Desmond doesn't recall meeting sawyer, that it would be impossible for Sawyer to get desmond to open the door, otherwise Desmond would have remembered meeting sawyer before.

However! Daniel effectively proved himself wrong later by speaking to Desmond. Although, I don't honestly remember if Desmond and Daniel ever met in a previous episode. If they did not then all is good, but Daniel did imply that Desmond was special somehow and that the "rules" do not apply to him. Again going against what he said, the rules are the rules, if they do not apply to desmond then the rules don't apply.

Then again, remember that ben's nemisis "changed the rules", whatever that means


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> What was altered? I think you're assuming that because we saw Locke kill those two people during this episode, that it must be something new and altered. But what if that's how that timeline always happened, and we're simply seeing it now. You can't try and figure it out. You simply have to accept that what we're seeing is what happened, because there can't be any change.


True, unless apparently if desmond does it...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

aindik said:


> Claire was very pregnant when they crashed. Is it even possible that her mother didn't know about it?


When Claire's mom approached Jack at his father's funeral, she told Jack that Claire was eight months pregnant when the plane crashed. She definitely knew.


vertigo235 said:


> Daniel was just saying that because Desmond doesn't recall meeting sawyer, that it would be impossible for Sawyer to get desmond to open the door, otherwise Desmond would have remembered meeting sawyer before.
> 
> However! Daniel effectively proved himself wrong later by speaking to Desmond. Although, I don't honestly remember if Desmond and Daniel ever met in a previous episode. If they did not then all is good, but Daniel did imply that Desmond was special somehow and that the "rules" do not apply to him. Again going against what he said, the rules are the rules, if they do not apply to desmond then the rules don't apply.
> 
> Then again, remember that ben's nemisis "changed the rules", whatever that means


Daniel wasn't sure that pounding on the door and getting Desmond to open it would work, but he had a theory that because Desmond is his constant, he and Desmond had met sometime before. Therefore, he banged on the door in the hope that in fact he had spoken to Desmond in the past, and because Desmond opened the door and spoke to him, that's how it happened.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

aindik said:


> Could be the child's father, but that wouldn't serve the storyline very well.
> 
> Claire was very pregnant when they crashed. Is it even possible that her mother didn't know about it?
> 
> Legally "that kid is not hers" isn't enough for a court order. It has to be accompanied by a reason the person suing should have custody. So, the person behind the request has to be someone like Jack or Claire's mom or the baby's father - someone more related to the kid than Kate is. But that doesn't mean that person isn't being setup by someone with a greater interest in manipulating what Kate does.


I believe Claire's mom was still in a coma when she left Austraila.

What if the person behind the demand for the DNA test is Kate's mom. What if Kate's mom is on to her because she got suspicious that she wouldn't let her see the baby.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> What was altered? I think you're assuming that because we saw Locke kill those two people during this episode, that it must be something new and altered. But what if that's how that timeline always happened, and we're simply seeing it now. You can't try and figure it out. You simply have to accept that what we're seeing is what happened, because there can't be any change.


No. I'm assuming that Locke killing those two people casts doubt on what Daniel said. What we are seeing now is Locke killing those two people. Which means that he interacted with two people and killed them. Which would make what Daniel said dubious at best unless Locke were in some way not subject to the rules Daniel stated.

Your circular reasoning about time travel makes no sense to me. You're going to have to elaborate on it. It appears you are suggesting that only in this particular instance of time travel can they not alter the past, but in other instances of time travel, they can. That doesn't really make a lot of sense to me, nor is it even an implied rule from what Daniel said.

Locke going back in time to kill people = locke altering the past. If he did it in this "observed" instance but it wasn't a change from some other timeline where he still traveled back in time to kill two people, it doesn't matter. At some point there is the "original" "road" where those two people were not killed by a Locke sent back in time. If Daniel's road analogy is correct, and Locke is not subject to any special rules, then the only way this would be possible is if they were dying soon thereafter anyway.



vertigo235 said:


> Daniel was just saying that because Desmond doesn't recall meeting sawyer, that it would be impossible for Sawyer to get desmond to open the door, otherwise Desmond would have remembered meeting sawyer before.
> 
> However! Daniel effectively proved himself wrong later by speaking to Desmond. Although, I don't honestly remember if Desmond and Daniel ever met in a previous episode. If they did not then all is good, but Daniel did imply that Desmond was special somehow and that the "rules" do not apply to him. Again going against what he said, the rules are the rules, if they do not apply to desmond then the rules don't apply.
> 
> Then again, remember that ben's nemisis "changed the rules", whatever that means


Right. What Daniel said is therefore incomplete, inaccurate, or simply not true. It seems that there is some sort of rift in time allowing changes, if we read between the lines.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Daniel wasn't sure that pounding on the door and getting Desmond to open it would work, but he had a theory that because Desmond is his constant, he and Desmond had met sometime before. Therefore, he banged on the door in the hope that in fact he had spoken to Desmond in the past, and because Desmond opened the door and spoke to him, that's how it happened.


We know for sure he has spoken to Desmond in some sort of past. We saw it in a prior episode, "The Constant."


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> I believe Claire's mom was still in a coma when she left Austraila.
> 
> What if the person behind the demand for the DNA test is Kate's mom. What if Kate's mom is on to her because she got suspicious that she wouldn't let her see the baby.


If Aaron is not Kate's, what business is that of Kate's mom?


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Essentially, I don't think we have enough information right now to know what is going on 

Welcome to Lost.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> I believe Claire's mom was still in a coma when she left Austraila.
> 
> What if the person behind the demand for the DNA test is Kate's mom. What if Kate's mom is on to her because she got suspicious that she wouldn't let her see the baby.


Things that make you go hmmm. I agree with the poster who said that whoever has enough legal cause to get the DNA testing is probably being manipulated by someone. We'll just have to wait.

Up to this point, we're all assuming (and Kate too) that the court order is authentic. If somebody just wanted her to go on the run (again Windmore?), they could just pretend to have the court order knowing that Kate would run.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

When Faraday and Desmond were having their chat at the back door of the hatch, I wonder if Desmond experienced the same "island flash" as Faraday or if from his perspective Faraday just sort of disappeared....ala Wet Walt?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Fish Man said:


> So, now Ben, Sayid, and Jack are going to have to figure out how to spring Hurley from jail so he can return with them (which I'm confident they'll do, but it might take most of the season!)


Since they're in Los Angeles, they need to get this guy to get Hurley out of jail.












Fish Man said:


> J
> For what it's worth, the record being played was the album Shotgun Willie by Willie Nelson. This would tend to date the construction of "The Orchid" to 1973 or later.


Certainly an interesting choice for Dr. Chang to put on.



Fool Me Twice said:


> In the official recap episode that aired before the premier, Carlton Cuse said Sun "believes" Jin is dead, which makes it sound like he's still alive. I was shocked, not because I hadn't considered the possibility, but that he would spoil that in a recap episode.





aindik said:


> I don't think that's a spoiler. It's meant to keep the door open. IOW, people believe things that are true, and they believe things that are not true.


Daniel Dae Kim is still in the opening credits but of course that still doesn't mean he's alive after the boat explosion.



TAsunder said:


> So... didn't Locke change events in the past by killing the two thugs?
> 
> C





DevdogAZ said:


> IMO, the Losties always went back in time and Locke always killed those guys. The fact that we saw it in this episode doesn't make it a "new" occurrence. If we are to believe Daniel, you CAN'T change the past. So the fact that Locke was able to kill them indicates that it wasn't a change. Same with Daniel talking to Desmond and Ethan shooting Locke.


What if Locke killed those two guys in the future?



vertigo235 said:


> However! Daniel effectively proved himself wrong later by speaking to Desmond. Although, I don't honestly remember if Desmond and Daniel ever met in a previous episode. If they did not then all is good, but Daniel did imply that Desmond was special somehow and that the "rules" do not apply to him. Again going against what he said, the rules are the rules, if they do not apply to desmond then the rules don't apply.


Remember that Desmond tracked down Daniel at Oxford while he was still in the military.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> No. I'm assuming that Locke killing those two people casts doubt on what Daniel said. What we are seeing now is Locke killing those two people. Which means that he interacted with two people and killed them. Which would make what Daniel said dubious at best unless Locke were in some way not subject to the rules Daniel stated.
> 
> Your circular reasoning about time travel makes no sense to me. You're going to have to elaborate on it. It appears you are suggesting that only in this particular instance of time travel can they not alter the past, but in other instances of time travel, they can. That doesn't really make a lot of sense to me, nor is it even an implied rule from what Daniel said.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure what's so hard to understand. What we're seeing is what happened. Doesn't matter that we're seeing it from the standpoint of something new happening now. There is no other timeline for those army guys that Locke killed. They always died because the island skipped in time, Locke showed up and killed them. That's how their "street" ended. Just because Locke was from the future (as far as we know) doesn't mean that's not the way their story always ended.

Same with Daniel talking to Desmond. If they hadn't spoken in Desmond's original timeline, then Desmond wouldn't have opened the door. But because Desmond did open the door, we know that the conversation did occur in Desmond's original timeline.

Basically, you're viewing this with the perspective of most traditional time-travel stories, i.e. things can be changed, the characters from future weren't supposed to be there, etc. However, the rules Daniel stated make viewing this very different. We don't have to think of all the various permutations. We just simply watch and see what happens, because what happens on the screen is what always happened. It can't be changed.


----------



## BradJW (Jun 9, 2008)

aindik said:


> Legally "that kid is not hers" isn't enough for a court order. It has to be accompanied by a reason the person suing should have custody. So, the person behind the request has to be someone like Jack or Claire's mom or the baby's father - someone more related to the kid than Kate is. But that doesn't mean that person isn't being setup by someone with a greater interest in manipulating what Kate does.


Someone like Ben perhaps? Ben knows Kate will protect Aaron and take him away from people trying to get him from her. Maybe even take him to the island to protect him.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Remember that Desmond tracked down Daniel at Oxford while he was still in the military.


That wasn't exactly Military Desmond. It was Island Desmond in Military Desmond's body.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

unicorngoddess said:


> I believe Claire's mom was still in a coma when she left Austraila.
> 
> What if the person behind the demand for the DNA test is Kate's mom. What if Kate's mom is on to her because she got suspicious that she wouldn't let her see the baby.


Yes, Claire's mom was still in a coma, but I figured someone would have told her, and I do remember now that she did say something to Jack at Christian's funeral.

I don't see why that would lead Kate's mom to believe that it wasn't Kate's baby. Their past relationship would have been enough to explain it, and even if not, I really don't see how she'd reach that particular conclusion.

I think the key to figuring it out has to do with the court order. Either someone has some real evidence, or the means to bribe or blackmail a judge into issuing the order.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

BradJW said:


> Someone like Ben perhaps? Ben knows Kate will protect Aaron and take him away from people trying to get him from her. Maybe even take him to the island to protect him.


I think it's quite likely that it's Ben manipulating someone with a legal claim on Aaron, in order to get Kate thinking that she can't stay home anymore and has to run.


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

BradJW said:


> Someone like Ben perhaps? Ben knows Kate will protect Aaron and take him away from people trying to get him from her. Maybe even take him to the island to protect him.


I am thinking along those lines. Jack inferred that it would be difficult to get Kate to go back to the island, so perhaps Ben staged this to flush her out and use the island as a safe haven type of thing in order to keep Aaron.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

aindik said:


> Maybe Faraday thinks you can't change the past but he's not right.


I thought maybe Faraday was saying that to keep other people from messing about. Maybe he thinks things are actually very precarious and he is trying to be the one to set the right things in motion.


verdugan said:


> I haven't seen this discussed, but what are your thoughts on who is the client behind the DNA test order?
> 
> * It could be Ben trying to smoke out Kate and Aaron.


Yeah, that's my first thought. Why would Kate go to the island unless she is on the run again?



vertigo235 said:


> But he DID meet him, in the past


He met him in Locke's past, but from his frame of reference at that point, he only had met Locke in his future.


----------



## scsiguy72 (Nov 25, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> When Richard came up to Lock and said, "You have to give this to me next time I see you." and handed him the compass it reminded me of when Richard came to see a young Lock and asked him which of these things belonged to him. I wonder if those are related somehow...


It looked like the same compass that Locke gave to Sayid in season one. Sayid made a compass out of a leaf and needle and told Locke that North was not North. Locke then gave Sayid the compass and said, here, I don't need this anymore.

At the time I was thinking Locke din't need it because he knew his way around the island, but maybe he didn't need it becasue he already showed it to Richard?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

aindik said:


> That wasn't exactly Military Desmond. It was Island Desmond in Military Desmond's body.


However, if you take that train of thought further, then what does Military Desmond remember?
Did his memories change?
Did he have a gap in his memory, saying "Wait, I was in another part of the base and it's 4 hours later"?
Did he just think he was asleep?

However, after watching Tell Me That You Love Me, I think I want to be In-bed-with-Penny Desmond



jeff125va said:


> I don't see why that would lead Kate's mom to believe that it wasn't Kate's baby. Their past relationship would have been enough to explain it, and even if not, I really don't see how she'd reach that particular conclusion.


Well the fact she won't let her mother see Aaron at all might have something to do with it.

But it is more likely that it's someone like Ben or Widmore.


----------



## BrandonRe (Jul 15, 2006)

vertigo235 said:


> Daniel was just saying that because Desmond doesn't recall meeting sawyer, that it would be impossible for Sawyer to get desmond to open the door, otherwise Desmond would have remembered meeting sawyer before.
> 
> *However! Daniel effectively proved himself wrong later by speaking to Desmond. Although, I don't honestly remember if Desmond and Daniel ever met in a previous episode. * If they did not then all is good, but Daniel did imply that Desmond was special somehow and that the "rules" do not apply to him. Again going against what he said, the rules are the rules, if they do not apply to desmond then the rules don't apply.
> 
> Then again, remember that ben's nemisis "changed the rules", whatever that means


Also, remember that Faraday only knocked on the door after reading his journal. I bet what he read was a note he wrote in the future that Desmond had tracked his Mom down in Oxford and what had happened. IOW, I think Faraday had documentation that he had the conversation with Desmond, and thus he didn't change the rules.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

BrandonRe said:


> Also, remember that Faraday only knocked on the door after reading his journal. I bet what he read was a note he wrote in the future that Desmond had tracked his Mom down in Oxford and what had happened. IOW, I think Faraday had documentation that he had the conversation with Desmond, and thus he didn't change the rules.


I thought maybe he was reading this...


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

JYoung said:


> Since they're in Los Angeles, they need to get this guy to get Hurley out of jail.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good point, he should have recognized him then.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

aindik said:


> That wasn't exactly Military Desmond. It was Island Desmond in Military Desmond's body.


Doh! You are correct, then he should not have recognized him


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

jeff125va said:


> I think the key to figuring it out has to do with the court order. Either someone has some real evidence, or the means to bribe or blackmail a judge into issuing the order.


Keep in mind that it might not even be a real court order. What proof do we have that it's real? Some guy who claims to be a lawyer claims to have a court order? Mmhhh, fishy.

Did anybody catch the name of the law firm? Have we heard it before? If we have, is it associated with any characters?


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

verdugan said:


> Keep in mind that it might not even be a real court order. What proof do we have that it's real? Some guy who claims to be a lawyer claims to have a court order? Mmhhh, fishy.
> 
> Did anybody catch the name of the law firm? Have we heard it before? If we have, is it associated with any characters?


I thought the exact same thing. The lawyers were fakes. I think Kate suspected that as well.

Besides, do lawyers show up with court orders IRL? (honest question) I always thought an officer of the law (policeman, etc) had to present those? But I could be wrong. Thankfully my experience with courts and law enforcement goes no farther than a speeding ticket.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

Is Marvin Candle's child the other guy from the freighter?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Jstkiddn said:


> I thought the exact same thing. The lawyers were fakes. I think Kate suspected that as well.
> 
> Besides, do lawyers show up with court orders IRL? (honest question) I always thought an officer of the law (policeman, etc) had to present those? But I could be wrong. Thankfully my experience with courts and law enforcement goes no farther than a speeding ticket.


Such an order would likely be served by a process server, not an attorney. And they likely wouldn't be expecting to draw blood right there on the spot. There would be a period of time where Kate could object and they could hold a hearing, and then a time would be scheduled for the blood to be drawn.

Because of that, I'm fairly certain that it was just a scam cooked up by either Ben or Widmore to smoke Kate and Aaron out, as has already been suggested.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

aindik said:


> Yep. Just like Sun, they had to concoct a reason for him to end up in Los Angeles. This must be it.
> 
> Is Desmond on the list of people who "have to" go back to set the universe right?


It would appear that he is not on the list of those who must return. However, if Desmond goes to L.A., to meet Mrs. Hawking, he very well might be accompanied by one Ms. Penny Widmore. Given Ben's connection to Mrs. Hawking, that might provide him with the opportunity to kill Charles Widmore's daughter, as he promised Mr. Widmore last season.



hefe said:


> He met him in Locke's past, but from his frame of reference at that point, he only had met Locke in his future.


I think what the other poster is wondering is whether the Ethan who integrated with the 815 survivors remembered Locke from shooting him in the past, as opposed to whether the Ethan from last night remembered 815 Locke. Seeing as how every visitor to the island sent the Others into a tizzy, you'd expect Ethan to remember one as distinct looking as Locke, especially considering Locke's claim that Ben told him that he was supposed to lead the Others. I believe that the post 815 crash Ethan did in fact recognize Locke, and that his arrival sent shock waves through the Others' camp specifically because of the meeting with Ethan that we saw last night.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Man, this is gonna be tough, I know that after I post another 50 will have appeared before I click Submit Reply.  And it'll turn into a smeek. You accept these things in Lost threads.

I'll start the post by saying that Faraday gave us the time travel rules in this episode, whether you agree with them or not. That's for us, the audience, to understand how it works. You can't change the past, it's already happened. Desmond, however, is above those rules and can break them. There's always the possibility of someone else (i.e., Locke) being above them as well.

There were three people in the hatch when Desmond turned the key: Desmond, Locke, & Eko. It's possible all three would be above those rules.



Fish Man said:


> I think it's a safe assumption that the one and only time Faraday ever told Desmond to go to Oxford was the time we saw when he was "time traveling" in this episode. We then see Desmond in "present day" remembering the incident and declaring that he needed to go to Oxford. That was "a change".


It's also a memory that Desmond didn't have when he went to sleep. That's why he was SO unnerved by it, and the fact that it wasn't a dream, it was a memory. Not a repressed memory, but a memory he didn't have until just then.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> But I don't think either of those is a change. Desmond was always told about Oxford; he only remembered it in the dream. And Faraday was always at the construction of The Orchid. We saw nothing happen during either scene that contradicts anything we've ever seen before.


I think you and I have the same views on the whole situation with exception to Desmond and his memory.



astrohip said:


> I do NOT like time-travel plot lines. They allow the writers far too many outs & escapes for any machinations they want. Heroes is a perfect example of why writers should stay away from TT stories.


The problem with most time travel stories is they don't follow a strict set of rules, and if they do, they aren't stated to the audience, so we don't know what to believe. They'll also contradict rules they set for themselves. Hopefully Lost won't do that.



> Having said that, I was amazed, impressed, astounded with how well the writers slid time-travel into the weave of LOST. By stating that one premise (nothing changes), they removed the biggest problem TT creates to viewers--the fact that nothing is real because anything can change. Here it appears we can go back & forth to visit time, but the story won't change. Only how we see it, our POV.


Bingo. We have a different POV than the characters do at any point in the story except the ones we haven't seen yet, the ones who get out of the whole thing both alive and with the memories of everything that occurred. We may never see these versions of the characters.



> I think the average TV viewer is not a big fan of TT stories. And yet I think most LOST viewers are lovin' how they are using it so far. Of course, we only have two hours under our belt.


I think the average Lost viewer isn't the average TV viewer. The show lost the average TV viewers a long time ago.



unicorngoddess said:


> As soon as I saw Faraday with the DI in the past I knew I would be in for a headache. Is this something that he is going to do or was that something he had already done? Does it explain why Faraday has a weird connection to the island but doesn't seem to know why.


No, I think it's a lot simpler than that. I think Faraday somehow traveled into the past (we have yet to understand the how) and either became Dharma, or infiltrated Dharma to get to the frozen donkey wheel. He's there because he's always been there, thereby not changing a thing. His NOT being there would be a change.



> When Richard came up to Lock and said, "You have to give this to me next time I see you." and handed him the compass it reminded me of when Richard came to see a young Lock and asked him which of these things belonged to him. I wonder if those are related somehow...


Wasn't the compass one of the items Richard placed before Locke as a child? What's that metal object that's face down on the table?











aindik said:


> On another note, I bet at some point the losties travel back in time to a point where Danielle Rousseau is still alive.


This totally opens the door for us to see all characters who died, but not only that, they could travel back to ANY time. 2000 years in the past, no problem. They could even see a certain 4-toed statue complete, before it was just a foot.



DevdogAZ said:


> I don't think there's any chance it will take most of the season. As we learned, Ben only has 70 hours (*42*00 minutes, BTW), and that would really drag on if they made this entire season only cover three days.


It couldn't drag any more than a season of 24. 



cheesesteak said:


> I want a flashback episode devoted to whoever created the time travel wagon wheel.


I wonder if those people have four toes on each foot?



DevdogAZ said:


> IMO, the Losties always went back in time and Locke always killed those guys. The fact that we saw it in this episode doesn't make it a "new" occurrence. If we are to believe Daniel, you CAN'T change the past. So the fact that Locke was able to kill them indicates that it wasn't a change. Same with Daniel talking to Desmond and Ethan shooting Locke.


I'm with you except for Desmond talking to Locke, that WAS a change. I think that just about anything Desmond does at this point in any time can change anything.



TAsunder said:


> That makes no sense. If Locke can kill two people in the past, then Sawyer should be able to storm the hatch. What Daniel stated is not entirely consistent with the events in the episode. Either he was unaware of the full circumstances, or he was wrong/lied. I think, based on what we saw, that Locke is different and can affect change. Same for desmond.


As I said before, I don't so much think Faraday was wrong OR lied. I think that he simply doesn't know Locke is the same as Desmond.



DevdogAZ said:


> Daniel wasn't sure that pounding on the door and getting Desmond to open it would work, but he had a theory that because Desmond is his constant, he and Desmond had met sometime before. Therefore, he banged on the door in the hope that in fact he had spoken to Desmond in the past, and because Desmond opened the door and spoke to him, that's how it happened.


Bingo. He theorized that Desmond was different somehow and was testing it by knocking on the door. He was proven right, he was surprised at it actually.



TAsunder said:


> No. I'm assuming that Locke killing those two people casts doubt on what Daniel said. What we are seeing now is Locke killing those two people. Which means that he interacted with two people and killed them. Which would make what Daniel said dubious at best unless Locke were in some way not subject to the rules Daniel stated.


Locke going back in time to kill people = locke altering the past. If he did it in this "observed" instance but it wasn't a change from some other timeline where he still traveled back in time to kill two people, it doesn't matter. At some point there is the "original" "road" where those two people were not killed by a Locke sent back in time. If Daniel's road analogy is correct, and Locke is not subject to any special rules, then the only way this would be possible is if they were dying soon thereafter anyway.

Right. What Daniel said is therefore incomplete, inaccurate, or simply not true. It seems that there is some sort of rift in time allowing changes, if we read between the lines.[/QUOTE]

Unless Locke can change things as Desmond can, he always killed those people. The fact that he went back in time to do it doesn't change the fact that he already did it. The Locke that goes back in time sees it as his present, but for everyone else, it's the past.

OK let's see how many posts have come up since I started typing my response here.

Edit to add: WOO! Only three. 

Greg


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Ok here are my multi-quote comments about pages 1&2 of the thread:



MasterCephus said:


> I totally think that Faraday at the beginning will be a future episode of trying to reset the time traveling.


Note how Candle told them not to dig an inch further (even though the room with the donkey wheel was ahead of them, as they could see via sonar). Maybe Faraday is the one that eventually blasts out that long hallway that Ben walked down, then covers it up with some of the concrete that made up the bunny chamber..



aindik said:


> Faraday's mother is in Oxford even though he's American?


He used to teach at Oxford..



aindik said:


> And, did the island move, or didn't it?


Yes, it moved (at least in space), at least according to Faraday. He said he has to figure out where the island is, and he seemed to be holding a sextant or something with which he was going to calculate their location on earth.



speedcouch said:


> Yeah, that's where I recognized Finnola Flannigan from too!  I knew it was her by that white hair and Irish accent even before she turned her head around last night.


She also played Data's mother in a Star Trek Next Generation episode.



uncdrew said:


> I'm a bit confused by the disappearing island as well.
> 
> How does the island disappear, unless we flash to a time when there was no island (millions of years ago?) or a time in the future when the island is gone?
> 
> ...


Again, the island DOES move. I agree with Rob, it feels like the island moving (which Ben said was risky and had consequences - a measure of last resort) and their jumping around in time are separate events, linked, but separate. The fact that we watch them both happen in the same episode adds to our confusion, making the story more interesting to figure out. The island didn't disappear to Faraday - they were within the sphere of influence of the movement mechanism.. (Faraday wants to know where they and the island are now, in the "present" time.. whether the location of the island in the "past" time is the same as we've been watching for season 1 or not isn't clear because we don't know when the island has been moved, except maybe for the fact that the orchid rabbit station will presumably be built in front of a tunnel going to the wheel, so apparently it doesn't move between the completion of the orchid station and Ben's move.



aindik said:


> That's for the benefit of the portion of the audience who have never seen a record.


I thought the same thing! 



unicorngoddess said:


> When Richard came up to Lock and said, "You have to give this to me next time I see you." and handed him the compass it reminded me of when Richard came to see a young Lock and asked him which of these things belonged to him. I wonder if those are related somehow...


Richard has to remember having gone to see Locke as a kid, and obviously remembers the test he gave him where he asked which things Locke already owned (one of which was a compass). Lock eventually handing the compass to Richard will be a way to make Richard think "whoa, is this HIM?".



unicorngoddess said:


> And my theory as to why only the 815 survivors are jumping around in time...I think it has something to do with those injections Desmond was taking in the hatch. If all the Others were taking those injections too, maybe it has made them immune to the record skipping effect.


DAMNED COOL idea.. Hey, Claire took that injection.. Is that related to her being able to see Jacob and not being with everyone? Maybe the writers NEEDED to move her away from the group so we wouldn't notice how she's being affected (or not affected) differently than everyone else?



aindik said:


> Is it possible that Faraday was actually in the DI for real, and he traveled to the future, to continue studying time travel, before Ben killed the rest of them?


Faraday, when doing his work in Oxford in the.. umm.. when did Desmond jump back to the army? 198something? Anyway he seemed to be experimenting.. not like he'd already SEEN time travel.. So no, my guess is the Faraday we see in the cave has been through all of what we've seen so far (plus more).



Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which leads to the interesting question of what would happen if somebody were, say, in the hatch when a time-jump went to a time when there was no hatch? Ouch.


I actually wondered if they were going to try to climb into the hole and make their best guess as to where would be in-the-hatch-area and not in-solid-rock when they snapped to the other time (because at least in that episode, it seems they were jumping between two times, not 5 or 10).


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not sure what's so hard to understand. What we're seeing is what happened. Doesn't matter that we're seeing it from the standpoint of something new happening now. There is no other timeline for those army guys that Locke killed. They always died because the island skipped in time, Locke showed up and killed them. That's how their "street" ended. Just because Locke was from the future (as far as we know) doesn't mean that's not the way their story always ended.
> 
> Same with Daniel talking to Desmond. If they hadn't spoken in Desmond's original timeline, then Desmond wouldn't have opened the door. But because Desmond did open the door, we know that the conversation did occur in Desmond's original timeline.
> 
> Basically, you're viewing this with the perspective of most traditional time-travel stories, i.e. things can be changed, the characters from future weren't supposed to be there, etc. However, the rules Daniel stated make viewing this very different. We don't have to think of all the various permutations. We just simply watch and see what happens, because what happens on the screen is what always happened. It can't be changed.


This. Dev, you have the right answer here.

I know it's hard to think of it apart from the "traditional time-travel stories." But think of the island as moving back and forth in time, mixing people that have been on the island at different times. BUT THE ISLAND IS ALWAYS MOVING AHEAD LINEARLY, it's just that right now it's unstuck, so the needle (island) is skipping and can land anywhere in its track (time). So, those British soldiers were killed at their point in time by Locke never survived elsewhere in their time. Nothing changed for those soldiers. The record will always remain the same. You can't change the record.

Now, if Sawyer had barged in the hatch and met Desmond long before the events of 815 had happened, this would have altered time/events, which is what Daniel says cannot happen. Now, for those who are talking about if Daniel actually changed things, he didn't. Desmond doesn't remember meeting him in his "previous life" when he was in Oxford. What Daniel did was effectively give Desmond another memory which he was hoping Desmond would remember down the line.

I'm wondering now if the whispers are the voices of people who are shuffling through time on the island.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not sure what's so hard to understand. What we're seeing is what happened. Doesn't matter that we're seeing it from the standpoint of something new happening now. There is no other timeline for those army guys that Locke killed. They always died because the island skipped in time, Locke showed up and killed them. That's how their "street" ended. Just because Locke was from the future (as far as we know) doesn't mean that's not the way their story always ended.
> 
> Same with Daniel talking to Desmond. If they hadn't spoken in Desmond's original timeline, then Desmond wouldn't have opened the door. But because Desmond did open the door, we know that the conversation did occur in Desmond's original timeline.
> 
> Basically, you're viewing this with the perspective of most traditional time-travel stories, i.e. things can be changed, the characters from future weren't supposed to be there, etc. However, the rules Daniel stated make viewing this very different. We don't have to think of all the various permutations. We just simply watch and see what happens, because what happens on the screen is what always happened. It can't be changed.


If Locke killed those two people such that "The Others" remember them dying in the "present," then that means that anyone can do anything as long as the people in the present/future remember it happening or didn't notice. Which means that for all Daniel knows, Sawyer could have busted into the hatch and raided it, as long as it was later replaced. He could have spoken with Desmond, since Daniel has no idea whether Desmond remembered having met Sawyer or not.

In other words, what Daniel said was really, "You can't do anything that you won't do." Which is meaningless and, if that is the implication, then the show will now begin to suffer from extremely, extremely weak writing tricks and stupidities because they can write whatever they want in the "past" and then later show that people remember it now (as they did with Desmond).


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

jr461 said:


> I am thinking along those lines. Jack inferred that it would be difficult to get Kate to go back to the island, so perhaps Ben staged this to flush her out and use the island as a safe haven type of thing in order to keep Aaron.


Recall in the season 4 finale that, 'no Australian accent in Kate's dream' Claire.. told her not to take Aaron back to the island.

So it's going to be really hard to convince Kate to go back.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> If Locke killed those two people such that "The Others" remember them dying in the "present," then that means that anyone can do anything as long as the people in the present/future remember it happening or didn't notice. Which means that for all Daniel knows, Sawyer could have busted into the hatch and raided it, as long as it was later replaced. He could have spoken with Desmond, since Daniel has no idea whether Desmond remembered having met Sawyer or not.
> 
> In other words, what Daniel said was really, "You can't do anything that you won't do." Which is meaningless and, if that is the implication, then the show will now begin to suffer from extremely, extremely weak writing tricks and stupidities because they can write whatever they want in the "past" and then later show that people remember it now (as they did with Desmond).


It boils down to this. If it's something that happened (or is supposed to happen, depending on your perspective), then it will be allowed to happen. Otherwise, it won't.

Sawyer wanted to break down the door and raid the hatch, but he didn't. Therefore, it never happened. That he wanted to or was prevented from doing so by Faraday doesn't matter. The fact is, Sawyer never met Desmond at that stage in Desmond's life, and therefore, Sawyer was unable to break in and raid the hatch. Conversely, Desmond DID meet Daniel at that stage of Desmond's life, which is why Desmond opened up the hatch when only Daniel was there.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

tewcewl said:


> I'm wondering now if the whispers are the voices of people who are shuffling through time on the island.


I was wondering the same thing myself. It would also explain a lot of the other strange things that happen on the island, like "taller walt" only partially able to communicate. What if the smoke monster was really something the Losties bouncing through time are doing? I very sincerely doubt that's the case, but it does make you think.

Of course, time travel doesn't explain Christian Shepard's white shoes. 

Greg


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> It boils down to this. If it's something that happened (or is supposed to happen, depending on your perspective), then it will be allowed to happen. Otherwise, it won't.
> 
> Sawyer wanted to break down the door and raid the hatch, but he didn't. Therefore, it never happened. That he wanted to or was prevented from doing so by Faraday doesn't matter. The fact is, Sawyer never met Desmond at that stage in Desmond's life, and therefore, Sawyer was unable to break in and raid the hatch. Conversely, Desmond DID meet Daniel at that stage of Desmond's life, which is why Desmond opened up the hatch when only Daniel was there.


Or, simplified, whatever the writers write is what happened and therefore they can write whatever they want. If they wanted to write Sawyer breaking into the hatch to get a shirt, they could have. Desmond could have slept through it because he is a heavy sleeper. If they wanted Sawyer to talk to Desmond, they could have. Some time later he would have remembered this one crazy guy with no shirt talking to him.

Simplified even further, the writers are lazy amateurs.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Cindy1230 said:


> Recall in the season 4 finale that, 'no Australian accent in Kate's dream' Claire.. told her not to take Aaron back to the island.
> 
> So it's going to be really hard to convince Kate to go back.


Actually, as pointed out in one of Jeff Jensen's, of EW, online columns, it was easy to assume that she was talking about Aaron, but she never actually used his name. What she said was, something along the lines of, don't you dare bring HIM back. Is him Aaaron? What does bring him back mean? Back to the island? Back to life? John Locke anyone?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> Simplified even further, the writers are lazy amateurs.


Unlike Battlestar Galactica's writers?

Greg


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

gchance said:


> Unlike Battlestar Galactica's writers?


Apparently not.


----------



## rondotcom (Feb 13, 2005)

vertigo235 said:


> But he DID meet him, in the past


Yes, but AFTER that incident.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

I just thought of something. We know that Daniel already has gaps in his memory prior to coming to the island. And now Charlotte is starting to experience that as well. 

Ethan didn't remember meeting Locke. And Desmond didn't remember meeting Daniel at the hatch door. 

Maybe these memory gaps are The Universe's way of course correcting-these memories are blocked basically due to the time skipping...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> Or, simplified, whatever the writers write is what happened and therefore they can write whatever they want. If they wanted to write Sawyer breaking into the hatch to get a shirt, they could have. Desmond could have slept through it because he is a heavy sleeper. If they wanted Sawyer to talk to Desmond, they could have. Some time later he would have remembered this one crazy guy with no shirt talking to him.
> 
> Simplified even further, the writers are lazy amateurs.


I suppose you can choose to look at it like that if you want. Personally, I'm engrossed in the story and I'm happy with the way it's playing out. If they want to tell me that the past can't be changed, I'm happy to take them at their word.

However, from a writing standpoint, it sure seems less lazy to say the past can't be changed, than it does to allow changes and wind up with the complete dreck that was Heroes this season.


----------



## rondotcom (Feb 13, 2005)

Not a spoiler, I don't know anything, pure speculation.

THe rules don't apply to Desmond (we may or may not find out why). He is responsible for bringing down the plane (magnetic burst when he was late pushing the button). He is able to go back in time and correct that, the plane never crashes and no one is "LOST"

But they all have to be there so time can be reversed from the time the plane crashed.

Ben's comment to Jack about taking what he likes because he'll never leave holds true because he'll never be there TO leave,


Or probably not


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

spikedavis said:


> \And Desmond didn't remember meeting Daniel at the hatch door.


Which is complicated even further by the matter that Desmond has actually met Faraday before then.

Desmond's brain must be all kinds of swiss cheesed.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> I suppose you can choose to look at it like that if you want. Personally, I'm engrossed in the story and I'm happy with the way it's playing out. If they want to tell me that the past can't be changed, I'm happy to take them at their word.
> 
> However, from a writing standpoint, it sure seems less lazy to say the past can't be changed, than it does to allow changes and wind up with the complete dreck that was Heroes this season.


But if it is operating as you describe, it is still significantly more lazy than saying the past can't be changed and then actually avoiding any interactions that require patching up with a flash forward "Oh yeah I forgot about that" or similar scene.

I am not sure that they are definitely this lazy yet. It seems to me that they are showing us things that conflict in order to make it obvious that "the rules" aren't "the rules."


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

I guess I'm in the minority who didn't like it as well.. 

I think Lost had enough to wrap up with the existing mysteries without adding a signifcant amount of time travel.

I always thought the Oceanic 6 could leave because they were the ones who were far away when the hatch imploded. Which now makes no sense since all the beach people aren't bleeding from the nose but Charlotte is...

I think Desmond is different because of the hatch implosion. 

But I can't see them wrapping this up in 34 episodes without some Alias-like disappointment...


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

The nose-bleed thing may be a bit of a red herring. Daniel said in "The constant" that it varied from case to case. More people might get nose bleeds in the coming weeks.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

rondotcom said:


> Yes, but AFTER that incident.


It depends on how you interpret what daniel said.


----------



## Crow159 (Jul 28, 2004)

TAsunder said:


> But if it is operating as you describe, it is still significantly more lazy than saying the past can't be changed and then actually avoiding any interactions that require patching up with a flash forward "Oh yeah I forgot about that" or similar scene.
> 
> I am not sure that they are definitely this lazy yet. It seems to me that they are showing us things that conflict in order to make it obvious that "the rules" aren't "the rules."


I would think it would be harder to write if you can't change the past. All future interactions would have already been seen in the past episodes but unknown to the viewer at the time.

I also think that the reason Desmond is "special" is because he was already "unstuck". He already had an episode where he went back and forth to different parts of his life. He could also still be having after effects of the skipping and after waking with Penny, have a memory that he didn't already have.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Crow159 said:


> I also think that the reason Desmond is "special" is because he was already "unstuck". He already had an episode where he went back and forth to different parts of his life. He could also still be having after effects of the skipping and after waking with Penny, have a memory that he didn't already have.


Walt is "special" too. He even had an episode named that.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Well, either Locke or Richard Alpert is special, as evidence by Richard knowing that Locke would need him to provide first aid before he even arrived at the small plane crash. IIRC, when Locke asked him about how he knew, Richard said "you told me." Locke then said that he didn't remember telling him, to which Richard replied "you will." The implication being that Locke was destined to go back to the past and tell Richard when and where to provide him with aid. Under Daniel's "rules", this can only happen if either Richard or Locke are in some way special. Even if one of them is special, I'm not sure how Locke would have been able to tell Richard the "when" of it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

3D said:


> Under Daniel's "rules", this can only happen if either Richard or Locke are in some way special.


No, under Daniel's rules that can also happen if that's what happened.

All he's saying is if something didn't happen (i.e., Desmond didn't answer the hatch), then it doesn't matter how hard Sawyer tries to get Desmond to answer the hatch, it won't happen.

But Desmond answered the hatch for Daniel because that's what happened.

The trick is knowing what happens and what doesn't, which they can really only find out by trying.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

If the island moved, how did the drug plane end up over it anyway?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

3D said:


> Well, either Locke or Richard Alpert is special, as evidence by Richard knowing that Locke would need him to provide first aid before he even arrived at the small plane crash. IIRC, when Locke asked him about how he knew, Richard said "you told me." Locke then said that he didn't remember telling him, to which Richard replied "you will." The implication being that Locke was destined to go back to the past and tell Richard when and where to provide him with aid. Under Daniel's "rules", this can only happen if either Richard or Locke are in some way special. Even if one of them is special, I'm not sure how Locke would have been able to tell Richard the "when" of it.


Richard seems to be traveling through time. I think this is "future" Richard. He knew that they killed Ethan, for example. Or at least hinted that he did.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

aindik said:


> If the island moved, how did the drug plane end up over it anyway?


The island moved 108 days after Flight 815 crashed there (sometime in January 2005). The drug plane crashed on the island several years before that, so the moving of the island in 2005 would have no effect on what happened on the island prior to that.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> No, under Daniel's rules that can also happen if that's what happened.
> 
> All he's saying is if something didn't happen (i.e., Desmond didn't answer the hatch), then it doesn't matter how hard Sawyer tries to get Desmond to answer the hatch, it won't happen.
> 
> ...


I think I understand what you're saying and can agree with most of it, but not as it applies to Desmond and Daniel. If I'm reading you correctly, Sawyer can't have an encounter with someone from the Island's pre-Oceanic 815 days unless that's what always had happend, which would have been exhibited by some type of recognition if he had had an encounter post Oceanic-815. Thus, since Desmond never showed any signs of having recognized Sawyer, Desmond could never be in a position in the past to meet Sawyer. Thus, Desmond never met Sawyer is what happend and what will continue to happen.

I don't think that this is true with Daniel, otherwise we wouldn't have had the scene where Desmond only later remembers meeting him. Desmond is somehow special. I don't know if it's because of something inate to him or by virute of being Daniel's contant, but Daniel was able to get him to open the hatch in spite of the fact that it is not what has always happend. Otherwise, Daniel wouldn't have concluded that Desmond was special, but merely that his encounter was what had always happend. Also, didn't Desmond have some interaction with Daniel before leaving for the freighter last year? If he did, did he show signs of recognition?


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> The trick is knowing what happens and what doesn't, which they can really only find out by trying.


Sometimes. Daniel knew that Desmond didn't answer Sawyer's knocking because they didn't recognize each other when they met earlier (or later depending on how you look at it)


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

gchance said:


> Locke going back in time to kill people = locke altering the past. If he did it in this "observed" instance but it wasn't a change from some other timeline where he still traveled back in time to kill two people, it doesn't matter. At some point there is the "original" "road" where those two people were not killed by a Locke sent back in time. If Daniel's road analogy is correct, and Locke is not subject to any special rules, then the only way this would be possible is if they were dying soon thereafter anyway.


It's a time loop. Standard time travel concept - see the first Terminator movie (but not the sequels) for an example. There is no "original" road...it always did/does/will happen that way.


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

aindik said:


> If the island moved, how did the drug plane end up over it anyway?


Maybe it "moved" in to the path of the plane...maybe that's why it crashed. I remember them saying it was weird that the plane ended up on the island in the middle of the Pacific in the first place.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

hapdrastic said:


> Maybe it "moved" in to the path of the plane...maybe that's why it crashed. I remember them saying it was weird that the plane ended up on the island in the middle of the Pacific in the first place.


You've just explained why the plane from Africa ended up on the island and how the _Black Rock _did too!


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

hapdrastic said:


> Maybe it "moved" in to the path of the plane...maybe that's why it crashed. I remember them saying it was weird that the plane ended up on the island in the middle of the Pacific in the first place.





5thcrewman said:


> You've just explained why the plane from Africa ended up on the island and how the _Black Rock _did too!


And maybe how the frozen donkey wheel got inside the island...?


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> The island moved 108 days after Flight 815 crashed there (sometime in January 2005). The drug plane crashed on the island several years before that, so the moving of the island in 2005 would have no effect on what happened on the island prior to that.


First of all, 108 days!  

Anyway, first, Ben moved the island, physically. Then, John traveled back in time. At that point, the island is physically still wherever it was when Ben moved it. Right?

When John goes back in time, does he also travel in space to where the island was at that time? Or is he, and is the island, still where it was before he jumped?

It can't be that, when the plane crashed and John wasn't there, the island was in one place, but when the plane crashed and John was there, it was in a different place. Can it?

If Ben wants to get back to the island, can't he just travel back in time to before he moved it? He knows where it was then.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

3D said:


> Also, didn't Desmond have some interaction with Daniel before leaving for the freighter last year? If he did, did he show signs of recognition?


While Desmond was apparently time traveling in The Constant, he visited Daniel at Oxford when he jumped back to 1996.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

3D said:


> I don't think that this is true with Daniel, otherwise we wouldn't have had the scene where Desmond only later remembers meeting him. Desmond is somehow special. I don't know if it's because of something inate to him or by virute of being Daniel's contant, but Daniel was able to get him to open the hatch in spite of the fact that it is not what has always happend. Otherwise, Daniel wouldn't have concluded that Desmond was special, but merely that his encounter was what had always happend. Also, didn't Desmond have some interaction with Daniel before leaving for the freighter last year? If he did, did he show signs of recognition?


It might just be a whole lot simpler than you're making it. Desmond's brain has been scrambled through time, that after an extended period of isolation (which can mess with you as well). We know that various Desmonds and Daniels have met at various points throughout their respective timelines. Is it any surprise that Desmond might not remember one particular meeting until later?

Maybe they really are making it more complicated that Daniel would have us believe. Or maybe it really is that simple, and we're just trying to make it more complicated than it is.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

spikedavis said:


> No other form of entertainment makes me happy like Lost does.


Well said, I totally agree. :up:

If the island moved in space, and they're moving in time, why are they even on the island when they move to the past. Are the whole island and related areas of the ocean skipping around?

I assume their travel is different from Desmond. Only his consciousness traveled, and he could only go where he'd been before or would be in the future. His actual body stayed behind. Are their bodies still on the beach?

What they're doing now doesn't bode well for survival. They can't build fire or gather supplies or even find water, not even mentioning dodging flaming arrows. They aren't going to keep this up for 3 years are they, until the 6 come back? So actual time has no meaning to them? Will they think it's been a day or 2 when it's been 3 years in the real world?

Can Richard and the Others control their time travel? Someone mentioned that maybe Richard does age, he just travels to other times. Could he have gone back to Locke as a child after meeting him on the island? But to what purpose if he couldn't change things by taking him with him then.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

I would have to go way back and rewatch, but after seeing Hurley hallucinate Ana Lucia, is it possible that she and Libby were never there at all? Maybe that was all in his head and everyone went along with it. I doubt it though.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

aindik said:


> If Ben wants to get back to the island, can't he just travel back in time to before he moved it? He knows where it was then.


When has Ben demonstrated any time travel ability?


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

When he turned the donkey wheel he traveled to the future, didn't he? But who knows if anyone has any control over it.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

stellie93 said:


> When he turned the donkey wheel he traveled to the future, didn't he? But who knows if anyone has any control over it.


I don't think so.
He certainly traveled in space but there's been no indication I can recall that he traveled in time.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

JYoung said:


> I don't think so.
> He certainly traveled in space but there's been no indication I can recall that he traveled in time.


It was pretty strongly implied by some of the things he said to, Sayid was it? Something like "3 years for you..."


----------



## aintnosin (Jun 25, 2003)

stellie93 said:


> When he turned the donkey wheel he traveled to the future, didn't he? But who knows if anyone has any control over it.


Actually, I think he only travelled in space. That was probably when he appeared in the middle of the desert and first hooked up with Sayid in Baghdad.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

JYoung said:


> I don't think so.
> He certainly traveled in space but there's been no indication I can recall that he traveled in time.


Yes, he definitely traveled in time. Based on the time line of events on the island, he turned the wheel sometime in January 2005, but IIRC, when he got to Tunisia, the clerk at the hotel told him it was October 2005.

However, Ben has not exhibited any ability to time travel on his own. It was merely the island that transported him and now that he's no longer on the island, there is no indication that he could initiate time travel without the island.

ETA: According to this site: http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline:Post-Island, Ben arrived in Tunisia on October 24, 2005.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

jlb said:


> I would have to go way back and rewatch, but after seeing Hurley hallucinate Ana Lucia, is it possible that she and Libby were never there at all? Maybe that was all in his head and everyone went along with it. I doubt it though.


Jack, Kate, et al. wouldn't have been nearly as pissed at Michael as they were if he didn't kill anyone that was actually there.

Hurley also has had visions of Charlie, and we're pretty sure he's real.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

When Faraday, in the past, tells Desmond to do something, what determines the time at which Desmond will wake up with this new memory? And, whatever it is, does Faraday know it? 

Faraday and everyone else went back to whenever that was when Desmond was in the hatch, and told Desmond to go find Faraday's mother. How is it determined that Desmond would "forget" this instruction until 2007, when he wakes up in bed with Penny and "remembers" this conversation?


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

aindik said:


> That wasn't exactly Military Desmond. It was Island Desmond in Military Desmond's body.


You should watch "The Constant" again. That was Military Desmond in Island Desmond's body, at least until Penny answered the phone on Christmas Eve. Remember that he didn't recognize Sayid and thought it was 1996 after "coming back" in the helicopter.


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

stellie93 said:


> I assume their travel is different from Desmond. Only his consciousness traveled, and he could only go where he'd been before or would be in the future. His actual body stayed behind. *Are their bodies still on the beach?*


When the island moved, and their camp was gone,....I assumed the buried bodies would be gone and thought... ah man Miles won't be able to talk to Nikki and Paolo.

So, I hope they are still there just for one chance of closure and an opportunity for Miles to say something witty.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

If "the rules don't apply to Desmond," does that mean Desmond can change the future? If so, Mrs. H lied to him, and there are going to be some pretty pissed off fans of DriveShaft when they find out.


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

I won't make comments on specific plot points, but I am happy to see that it appears the writers knew where they were going all along. I have had my doubts the past few seasons - seems like they will be able to tie up loose ends.

And, in a spectacularly entertaining manner.

And finally, Damn. Sawyer is hot. I'm so happy this show is back on the air.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Yes, he definitely traveled in time. Based on the time line of events on the island, he turned the wheel sometime in January 2005, but IIRC, when he got to Tunisia, the clerk at the hotel told him it was October 2005.
> 
> However, Ben has not exhibited any ability to time travel on his own. It was merely the island that transported him and now that he's no longer on the island, there is no indication that he could initiate time travel without the island.
> 
> ETA: According to this site: http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline:Post-Island, Ben arrived in Tunisia on October 24, 2005.


Mea Culpa. I did not pick up or forgot that Ben moved 10 months into the future.



aindik said:


> Jack, Kate, et al. wouldn't have been nearly as pissed at Michael as they were if he didn't kill anyone that was actually there.
> 
> Hurley also has had visions of Charlie, and we're pretty sure he's real.


He also has been playing chess with Mr. Eko.



aindik said:


> If "the rules don't apply to Desmond," does that mean Desmond can change the future? If so, Mrs. H lied to him, and there are going to be some pretty pissed off fans of DriveShaft when they find out.


All ten of them?


----------



## jmathey (Oct 31, 2002)

Is it being shown again or is there an On-Demand. I think I can get the first epiosde from abc.com online but I'd like to see it on TV if possible. 

Thanks


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

My local ABC station looks to be reshowing it on Saturday, along with the Lost catch up show that aired right before it.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Me again talking about the baby. Not sure why I'm hung up on it.

Based on what it was mentioned about how a lawyer would not serve the papers, maybe the idea was to take Aaron? Maybe he's the key to something?


----------



## sonnik (Jul 7, 2000)

You know who is due for a random re-appearance back into the storyline? 

The clairvoyant (Richard Malkin in Sydney) who told Claire about the importance of her raising her child. 

He stated that he found a couple wanting to adopt in LA...

That may have been his way to force her to get on the plane, or there really is a "couple" in Los Angeles trying to get Aaron. This mysterious couple may be the ones trying to get DNA information from Kate and Aaron.

It would be cool to see the events in the Lost universe actually in Chronological order from start to finish.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

sonnik said:


> It would be cool to see the events in the Lost universe actually in Chronological order from start to finish.


I don't know, I think most of the fun is the journey.
After I'd seen Memento a few times, I used the easter egg that lets you watch it with the scenes in order, it wasn't nearly as good.

Diane


----------



## Big_Daddy (Nov 20, 2002)

So one thing I haven't seen through this discussion is that the "rules" described by Farraday mirrors the producers' statements about time travel. They particularly dislike "changing the future" plots in time travel stories as you get invested in a storyline, then *poof* it changes.

If that's how they run this show, then what we've seen is what happened. Thus no one will go try to make sure 815 never crashed, and history (hopefully) won't be rewritten. Even with Farraday meeting hatch Desmond, the change affected the current time, not intervening events.

It seems that they're trying to keep good tabs on who knows what. I was surprised by the observation that Farraday and Sawyer never met - Sawyer asked "who are you" when they got together in the premiere. If they continue with the high level of attention to detail that I hope they're doing, this may turn out more interesting than the average time travel story.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

dianebrat said:


> I don't know, I think most of the fun is the journey.
> After I'd seen Memento a few times, I used the easter egg that lets you watch it with the scenes in order, it wasn't nearly as good.


The one thing that feature accomplishes is it demonstrates how much they didn't cheat.

Lost would be a bit long for that. But perhaps an edited version (maybe even a miniseries) after it's over to show how tight it really is (and I suspect it will turn out to be pretty dang tight!).


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> So your theory is that those two guys were going to be killed or die for some unknown reason had the losties not gone back in time and appeared in the forest at that point in time, and Locke was repairing the timeline by ensuring that they did indeed die?


No, no, they always have died then because of Locke, and Locke always has made the trip back in time. Even if Locke had had a time machine he could have CHOSEN to go into (instead of the island snapping him back), he still couldn't choose NOT to go in the time machine because he already HAD arrived in the past from entering the machine.

Farraday is saying this is like a 4d painting, showing 3-d worlds over time, and it's all fixed. Part of that painting is someone going back in time and doing things, but that's always in the painting.



DevdogAZ said:


> The thing that is a little incredible to me is that if Dr. Chang knew of the exotic matter and that releasing it would have some catastrophic effect, why did he have the workers in there just drilling and blasting away? Did he know that when they got close, strange things would happen and he'd be called in, or was it simply coincidence that they called him down there at precisely the right time when he wanted them to stop their excavation?


He wanted them to get close but then stop, and build the rabbit chamber right there, so they could tap into the power via proximity to the power source (and it worked! They moved bunnies through time).

The foreman said they'd followed his precise instructions. Maybe that's right where he planned them to stop. The foreman suggested *further* steps and Candle freaked out.



TAsunder said:


> That makes no sense. If Locke can kill two people in the past, then Sawyer should be able to storm the hatch. What Daniel stated is not entirely consistent with the events in the episode. Either he was unaware of the full circumstances, or he was wrong/lied. I think, based on what we saw, that Locke is different and can affect change. Same for desmond.


You misunderstood Faraday. He said that since Desmond hadn't already recognized Sawyer in the future when Sawyer first saw Desmond (pushing the button?), then we already know that you don't talk to him now to get supplies. Everything is fixed. It's still based on what they do and choose, but it's already happened to the future, and the future is their past, which already happened to them.

He didn't account for things like forgetfullness, lying on Dedmond's part, or other things that might have still allowed for Sawyer to see Desmond just then and get supplies, but..


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

hefe said:


> While Desmond was apparently time traveling in The Constant, he visited Daniel at Oxford when he jumped back to 1996.


I remember that, but was wondering if Desmond and Daniel had actually met on the island last season (I'm almost certain the answer is yes, as I beleive both Sayid and Desmond, who were on the same helicopter to the freighter, met Frank, Charlotte, and Desmond). My point was that, if they had, Desmond would have shown some recognition of Daniel, which he didn't. Thus, Daniel could only get him to open the hatch because he's special.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> We know that various Desmonds and Daniels have met at various points throughout their respective timelines. Is it any surprise that Desmond might not remember one particular meeting until later?


It's not that Desmond doesn't remember a specific occurrence of meeting Daniel, it's that, IIRC, he showed no signs of recognition whatsoever when he met Daniel, prior to heading for the freighter, in S4.

On further reflection, I think that Desmond's classification as "special" only extends to Daniel because Daniel is his constant. If Desmond were more generally special and none of the rules applied to him, then he should have answered the door when Sawyer was knocking twenty minutes earlier. After all, he'd been anxiously waitng for his replacement so it's hard to believe that he would choose not to answer the first knock. The only reason he didn't is because he couldn't, as that's not how it happened. That rule does not apply between Desmond and Daniel because they are each other's constants.

Taking this one step further, I will speculate that Daniel will try to create situations so that those left on the island (Sawyer, Juliet, etc.) will be able to establish constants back home. The Oceanic 6 will ultimately become these constants. The left behind castaways will then be able to interact with their constants when they travel in time to a place when the 6 had yet to leave. The Oceanic 6 will subsequenlty get memories of these encounters through dreams, and said memories will help them to save the island. Now my head hurts .


----------



## BrandonRe (Jul 15, 2006)

jmathey said:


> Is it being shown again or is there an On-Demand. I think I can get the first epiosde from abc.com online but I'd like to see it on TV if possible.
> 
> Thanks


We have Cox cable, and they just added ABC prime time shows to On-demand, so it's available to us, in hi-def no less.


----------



## BrandonRe (Jul 15, 2006)

3D said:


> I remember that, but was wondering if Desmond and Daniel had actually met on the island last season (I'm almost certain the answer is yes, as I beleive both Sayid and Desmond, who were on the same helicopter to the freighter, met Frank, Charlotte, and Desmond). My point was that, if they had, Desmond would have shown some recognition of Daniel, which he didn't. Thus, Daniel could only get him to open the hatch because he's special.


Except the meeting on the island was in the future for Desmond, relative to this week's episode. He wouldn't recognize Farady because he hadn't yet met him. The meeting in Oxford was actually island Desmond in military Desmond's body during one of those trips through time he was taking, so I don't think it created memories except from last season's "present day" forward.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

One intersting theory I read on another board is that Locke is not dead, but was just bitten by one of those spiders from the Nikki and Paulo episode (I think right after Jack asked Ben if Locke was really dead, they cut to a shot of Hurley's dad watching Expose).


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

not a single mention of charlie in the preshow. :down: And when those guys were saying 'we are led to believe X is dead' you know they are just trying to tease us by thinking that person may be alive. or maybe they will turn out to be alive!



Fish Man said:


> Great episode!
> 
> Poor Hurley! He did exactly what Sayid told him to do. "Whatever Ben Linus tells you to do, you do the opposite!"
> 
> .


if you liked that, watch the pilot ep of The Beast



Cindy1230 said:


> Was this the first time we hear what Dr. Chang's real name is?
> aka Candle and Halliwax


for some reason i thought that training video was being made 'today' and not in yesteryear. I dont think they did a very good job of 'aging' the set to make it look like the old days. 
--------------

from last year i dont remember how , if the helicopter barely had enough juice to make it TO the ship, they even got to turn around and fly at all. And how far out was sawyer anyway at that point that he dropped off?

and to the ladies, is sawyer really that hot? I mean, i'm no judge of guys but if i was, i think jack or someone was better looking (and he washes his hair more )


----------



## BrandonRe (Jul 15, 2006)

3D said:


> One intersting theory I read on another board is that Locke is not dead, but was just bitten by one of those spiders from the Nikki and Paulo episode (I think right after Jack asked Ben if Locke was really dead, they cut to a shot of Hurley's dad watching Expose).


Interesting. I never put the spider bite with that, but I did wonder if he is "really" dead. The thought came to me when Ben was telling him "you have to die." There was just something about that scene that made me think maybe there was some sort of plan to make it appear Locke had died when he hadn't really.


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

BrandonRe said:


> Interesting. I never put the spider bite with that, but I did wonder if he is "really" dead. The thought came to me when Ben was telling him "you have to die." There was just something about that scene that made me think maybe there was some sort of plan to make it appear Locke had died when he hadn't really.


I don't think Locke is truly dead especially since his body has to be watched/refrigerated by Jill the butcher. But wouldn't his body have been embalmed at the funeral home? So, maybe he is dead. 
Richard told Locke, in order for him to leave the island, he would have to 'die.'


----------



## shaunrose (Sep 13, 2001)

It seems the indigenous Others move with the island, which is why Richard and the rest of the Others Locke was with disappeared. Ben and Juliet joined the Others, but were not indigenous. So Juliet is moving like the rest of the people. I would wonder about the stewardess who ended up joining the Others. I would guess she would move too. Unless it has something to do with the shots they were getting as mentioned by previous posters.

Didn't Charlotte mention something about possibly being born on the island? Perhaps this is related to why she is having a different experience than the rest of them. I wonder if the British people that they ran into during one of the leaps were Charlotte's parents.

I also think that it is interesting that when they leap, anything they have with them or are in contact with leaps too. I wonder if this could explain the donkey wheel and even the island itself. The dark matter at the center of the island has been moving around unpredictably picking things up as it went. At some point it merged with some type of wheel that got stuck partially in the dark matter. Then it moved into an arctic mountain or something and got encased. Then it moved and ended up inside an island somewhere. The next time it moved it picked up the island with it. Then it picked up the other smaller island (which also disappeared when the island vanished). It also has picked up things like the Black Rock slave ship and Yemi's plane. At some point, someone figured out how to control the island maybe by moving the wheel or by discharging the energy with the Hatch. 

I am guessing that while the island is moving around in space and reappearing in different places, the people not connected to the island are moving around in time. This would be like if you took a record player (the island) and moved it from one side of a table to another while it is playing (moving the island and everything on it through space), the needle may bounce around to different tracks on the record (moving the people through time). The needle stays in the same relative location on the record because it is fixed to the record player (which is why the people end up in the same place on the island when they move), but shifts from one grove in the record to another. 

Lots of holes in that theory, but I like all of the questions the story is giving us to ponder.

I would have to disagree strongly with the person who said the writers are lazy amateurs. I think they have thought out and set up a lot of things to create a fantastic set of ideas and interesting stories. Just because there may be a few things that seem too convenient or don't quite work, I think it's ridiculous to say that these writers are amateurs. I think they have elevated story telling to whole new and interesting levels. Maybe everything isn't perfect in the story, but it is clearly on the other extreme of amateurish.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

BrandonRe said:


> Except the meeting on the island was in the future for Desmond, relative to this week's episode. He wouldn't recognize Farady because he hadn't yet met him. The meeting in Oxford was actually island Desmond in military Desmond's body during one of those trips through time he was taking, so I don't think it created memories except from last season's "present day" forward.


I guess I'm not being clear. Daniel asked Sawyer if, when he first met Desmond, Desmond recognized him. Sawyer said no. Therefore, Daniel said, there's nothing Sawyer could now do that would change the fact that Desmond won't recognize Sawyer when they first meet in the future, because that's just not how it happend. Thus, despite all of Sawyer's efforts, he won't be able to have any interactions with Desmond. The same should apply to Daniel because when Daniel and Desmond interacted on the island last season, Desmond did not show any hint of recognition (at least that's how I remember it). Therefore, the way it always happend was for Desmond and Daniel to not have met in pre-freighter S4 Desmond's past. Thus, the only reason Daniel and Desmond can interact with each other is because Desmond is special. Daniel didn't test whether Desmond was special until after Sawyer had already left for the beach. Desmond answering the door showed that either Daniel was wrong, and Sawyer should have been able to interact with Desmond because of his special nature, or Desmond's specialness is limited to being able to interact with Daniel, even though that's not how it's always happend.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

jkeegan said:


> So, when John was with The Others before killing his dad, and the stewardess said something like "We've been waiting for you, John!", it originally felt all mysterious like "oh, the others know about some destiny.. or they know the island called John to be there", or something like that.
> 
> But maybe instead, they just heard from Ethan "There was this guy out in the jungle.. He said Ben just appointed him to be our leader! Ha! So I went to shoot him, and he disappeared!!!!", and they've been waiting for him ever since.


Richard did say that Locke would meet him at a time before he knew who Locke was. So maybe Richard is the one who's been driving things in that direction. He seems to be more of a leader than Ethan, so I would think it would be more likely to be him.



MickeS said:


> I enjoyed it, except the first bit with the doctor talking to the workers in the mine. Way too much exposition and seemed out of character and unnecessary for the doctor to explain the time travel to the head of the digging crew.


I agree. That was an awkward scene.



DevdogAZ said:


> The thing that is a little incredible to me is that if Dr. Chang knew of the exotic matter and that releasing it would have some catastrophic effect, why did he have the workers in there just drilling and blasting away? Did he know that when they got close, strange things would happen and he'd be called in, or was it simply coincidence that they called him down there at precisely the right time when he wanted them to stop their excavation?


Yeah, that seemed weird to me too. He knew the material was down there, and that it was dangerous, but he didn't tell them to watch out for the stuff? Or maybe he did, but they were just gung-ho about drilling.



TAsunder said:


> Richard seems to be traveling through time. I think this is "future" Richard. He knew that they killed Ethan, for example. Or at least hinted that he did.


I agree that it was future Richard, but I think it was Locke who traveled through time to that future rather than Richard travelling back. At some point in Locke's future, he will meet up with an earlier Richard, and tell him the information he needed to know to show up to help Locke after he appeared. We know Locke will meet up with Richard at least once when he will need to give Richard the compass to prove they had met before. But we don't know if it's that time or a different time when Locke will make plans to help his past self.



stellie93 said:


> If the island moved in space, and they're moving in time, why are they even on the island when they move to the past. Are the whole island and related areas of the ocean skipping around?


I wonder if the island is really moving, or if it's the connection to our world that is moving. If the island exists in its own pocket of space-time, then that would explain why those skipping through time always moved to the same relative spot on the island no matter where the island was located in the world.



aindik said:


> When Faraday, in the past, tells Desmond to do something, what determines the time at which Desmond will wake up with this new memory? And, whatever it is, does Faraday know it?
> 
> Faraday and everyone else went back to whenever that was when Desmond was in the hatch, and told Desmond to go find Faraday's mother. How is it determined that Desmond would "forget" this instruction until 2007, when he wakes up in bed with Penny and "remembers" this conversation?


This is why I'm thinking that it is something that Desmond truly forgot as opposed to a memory that got "inserted" by altering time. From Faraday's point-of-view, giving Desmond the information happened shortly after the island was moved. But Desmond didn't remember until 3 years later.

So it appears that the writers are treating this as a real memory as opposed to an altered memory. On the other hand, Faraday did say that Desmond was special, so who knows what that means.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

sonnik said:


> It would be cool to see the events in the Lost universe actually in Chronological order from start to finish.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> Lost would be a bit long for that. But perhaps an edited version (maybe even a miniseries) after it's over to show how tight it really is (and I suspect it will turn out to be pretty dang tight!).


Not the whole series, but a good portion of it, and it's very well done:


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Perhaps the "rules don't apply to you" means something different than "Desmond's timeline can be changed". What if Desmond wasn't dreaming about a repressed memory, but in fact experiencing it? What if future Desmond jumped into his past self just before opening the door, talked with Daniel, then went back inside, and jumped back into his present body before waking up? In that case, past Desmond would have no memory of ever opening the door and encountering anybody.

Future Desmond might have interpreted that as remembering something that happened long ago when in reality he had just experienced it.

But I guess then Desmond would have recognized Daniel. Although maybe since he was sleeping, he wasn't completely clear-headed.


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

Big_Daddy said:


> It seems that they're trying to keep good tabs on who knows what. I was surprised by the observation that Farraday and Sawyer never met - Sawyer asked "who are you" when they got together in the premiere. If they continue with the high level of attention to detail that I hope they're doing, this may turn out more interesting than the average time travel story.


I noticed this, too. I thought it was great and definitely shows that they're paying very, very close attention to details.

There were so many things that were new to us this year, their fifth season! How many shows can you remember that were still this fresh five years in and continually changing organically and taking you to a place where you genuinely don't know how it's all going to end? Not that many I'd bet.

I still don't think we have all the context and rules of this time traveling thing. So, with all the theorizing that's going on in this board, we're still lacking some key concepts. For example, why these specific six? Why not Michael/Walt, although Michael did return and fulfilled what his redemption, which was supposed to do. I still think Walt, Aaron and Claire are still big players somewhere.

Finally, I just wanted to remark on how quickly the Oceanic 6 reverted to their former selves when they were back on mainland. Hurley went back in the nuthouse, Jack became addicted again, Kate's a fugitive, Sayid's back as a "soldier," and Sun... she's become cold. I fear she's allying herself with the wrong person.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

jkeegan said:


> You misunderstood Faraday. He said that since Desmond hadn't already recognized Sawyer in the future when Sawyer first saw Desmond (pushing the button?), then we already know that you don't talk to him now to get supplies. Everything is fixed. It's still based on what they do and choose, but it's already happened to the future, and the future is their past, which already happened to them.


Yeah, except that he then proceeded to do the very thing Sawyer was trying to do, and then Locke appeared to do something similar to what Sawyer was trying to do. So his point was really a pretty weak one, if this is the interpretation, since no one really knows what people remember unless they are mind readers.



> He didn't account for things like forgetfullness, lying on Dedmond's part, or other things that might have still allowed for Sawyer to see Desmond just then and get supplies, but..


Right. I like to call those "writer cop-outs". They are great to use when writing oneself into a corner.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> When Claire's mom approached Jack at his father's funeral, she told Jack that Claire was eight months pregnant when the plane crashed. She definitely knew.


I think I agree with you (hadn't thought it through chronologically before now, but she'd have seen that press conference first wouldn't she). Why the delay though to the subpoena?


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Only the most minor of spoilers in this article. I only link to it because it will leave you salivating for next week's episode.

http://www.televisionaryblog.com/2009/01/taunting-jughead-advance-look-at.html


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

In thinking about the mechanics of how Desmond has traveled through time, the forgetfulness of Desmond actually does make sense. It appears that nothing physical travels through time in the way that Desmond travels, which would include the neurons that make up his memories. Thus, it must be that rather than his mind actually traveling through time, something in his brain allows his past brain to access future memories, and vice versa.

So when future Desmond "traveled" to the past, it was really his future brain sort of remote controlling his past body (and vice versa in _The Constant_).

Now, what if when Desmond encountered Daniel, there was a similar anomaly there, but only one way? What if everything about Desmond was his past self except that long-term memories were being stored in his future brain? That would explain why Desmond didn't recognize Daniel then, but didn't remember him later either. He didn't forget about the encounter; he just couldn't remember it yet.


----------



## BradJW (Jun 9, 2008)

I'm salivating for next week's episode.


----------



## BrandonRe (Jul 15, 2006)

BradJW said:


> I'm salivating for next week's episode.


As am I. Why so long until Wednesday?


----------



## ireland967 (Feb 27, 2003)

When Daniel asked the group for a monument or something to prove when in time they are, I immediately thought of the (possibly still standing) four-toed statue. Then again none of the group with the possible exception of Juliet would even know about it, since Sun, Jin and Sayid's sailboat trip in the S3 finale was the only time we've witnessed any Losties seeing it.

Still, with all of the time traveling going on it looks like it very well make another appearance.


----------



## jwjody (Dec 7, 2002)

hefe said:


> As soon as they started focusing too much on him, I turned to my wife and said, "he's a goner."
> 
> ZZZZip!


I thought it was funny he was wearing a red shirt.

J


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

BrandonRe said:


> Except the meeting on the island was in the future for Desmond, relative to this week's episode. He wouldn't recognize Farady because he hadn't yet met him. The meeting in Oxford was actually island Desmond in military Desmond's body during one of those trips through time he was taking, so I don't think it created memories except from last season's "present day" forward.





3D said:


> Only the most minor of spoilers in this article. I only link to it because it will leave you salivating for next week's episode.
> 
> http://www.televisionaryblog.com/2009/01/taunting-jughead-advance-look-at.html


Droooooooooooool.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ireland967 said:


> When Daniel asked the group for a monument or something to prove when in time they are, I immediately thought of the (possibly still standing) four-toed statue. Then again none of the group with the possible exception of Juliet would even know about it, since Sun, Jin and Sayid's sailboat trip in the S3 finale was the only time we've witnessed any Losties seeing it.
> 
> Still, with all of the time traveling going on it looks like it very well make another appearance.


They showed it a couple of times in the recap episode that aired before the season premiere, so I'd say that it definitely has some significance this season.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

newsposter said:


> not a single mention of charlie in the preshow. :down: And when those guys were saying 'we are led to believe X is dead' you know they are just trying to tease us by thinking that person may be alive. or maybe they will turn out to be alive!


There was also no mention of Michael, Boone, Shannon, Ana Lucia, Eko, etc. This episode was designed to bring new viewers up to speed so they'll know what's going on in the new season. It wasn't meant to tell the entire story so far. If those characters aren't around any more and their stories are over, there's not much point in mentioning them to someone who is just now getting into the show.


----------



## mostman (Jul 16, 2000)

aindik said:


> When Faraday, in the past, tells Desmond to do something, what determines the time at which Desmond will wake up with this new memory? And, whatever it is, does Faraday know it?
> 
> Faraday and everyone else went back to whenever that was when Desmond was in the hatch, and told Desmond to go find Faraday's mother. How is it determined that Desmond would "forget" this instruction until 2007, when he wakes up in bed with Penny and "remembers" this conversation?


I think this is easily explained. 

Desmond gets the memory in real time in relation to the person who is out of time. Make sense? So Faraday is from now - but he goes back in time and tells Desmond something - the Desmond of NOW get the memory NOW. Its like Faraday is telling him something in current time - but its actually happening in the past.

This would also make it impossible to change the past by going back and telling someone something. They won't remember it until the time in the future where you went back.

Simple really 

Edit: Actually - this doesn't work. We already know Desmond got the memory three years in advance of Faradays current time. So yeah, why did it take three years to remember?


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

BitbyBlit said:


> In thinking about the mechanics of how Desmond has traveled through time, the forgetfulness of Desmond actually does make sense. It appears that nothing physical travels through time in the way that Desmond travels, which would include the neurons that make up his memories. Thus, it must be that rather than his mind actually traveling through time, something in his brain allows his past brain to access future memories, and vice versa.


This was my question about whether the bodies of the people traveling now (Sawyer, Juliet) are still back on the beach where they were standing when they first traveled. Desmond's consciousness traveled, but when military Desmond went to Oxford, Desmond on the freighter stood there and stared in space. So did Minkowski. The traveling they're doing now is different. They're not going to some other part of their life except in the sense that it's part of it now. How many different kinds of time travel are there. 

Some awesome theories in this thread. You guys are really imaginative.

I don't remember Desmond actually meeting Daniel on the island. He talked to him on the phone, but did they meet in person before that? He wouldn't recognize his voice on the phone.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

In an early review of these episodes, this writer states:



> What else can you expect? Look for an intriguing plot twist with Charlotte, keep your eye on the night sky, and pay special attention to Daniel Faraday's journal, which seems to hold answers to every single question that the remaining castaways need answered. And, oh, Bernard and Rose squabble and cuddle, but that's hardly news, now is it?


What did I miss about the night sky? And although we know Daniel consulted his journal, I don't believe we got to see what he looked at, did we?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Arrows came out of the sky. We didn't see much in the journal, but Daniel seemed to have a lot of useful info in there.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not sure what's so hard to understand. What we're seeing is what happened. Doesn't matter that we're seeing it from the standpoint of something new happening now. There is no other timeline for those army guys that Locke killed. They always died because the island skipped in time, Locke showed up and killed them. That's how their "street" ended. Just because Locke was from the future (as far as we know) doesn't mean that's not the way their story always ended.
> 
> Same with Daniel talking to Desmond. If they hadn't spoken in Desmond's original timeline, then Desmond wouldn't have opened the door. But because Desmond did open the door, we know that the conversation did occur in Desmond's original timeline.
> 
> Basically, you're viewing this with the perspective of most traditional time-travel stories, i.e. things can be changed, the characters from future weren't supposed to be there, etc. However, the rules Daniel stated make viewing this very different. We don't have to think of all the various permutations. We just simply watch and see what happens, because what happens on the screen is what always happened. It can't be changed.


the way i got it... and it's the same as what devdog and gchance are saying, i think...

is that the street is always there, it ends up in the same place, but the path the road takes can change. everyone fixating on 'you can't change the past'... you CAN change the past, you can change how you get somewhere, but the end result will always be the same.

is that kinda like fate? the fate won't change?

to me, the perfect example of this is with charlie and desmond. charlie was destined to die, no matter how much desmond tried to prevent. the interesting thing now is... desmond was having these visions of charlie dying, and he kept having new ones... was he getting new memories implanted from changes in the past/future??

at least that's how i understood it as daniel was explaining the rules.



TAsunder said:


> Or, simplified, whatever the writers write is what happened and therefore they can write whatever they want.


isn't that how writing works?


Fool Me Twice said:


> I suppose the "ghosts" on the island told Miles where to find the boar.


he said he just found the boar lying there dead. does that have anything to do with the supposed disease that the injections were for? maybe at some point there was a disease that was killing people.. .like charlotte is having now... i forget if the disease that desmond was afraid of in when he was in the hatch was absolutely proved as a psychological ploy of dharma, or an actual realized fear at one point.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

bruinfan said:


> isn't that how writing works?


Yes, if they are not bound by any rules. The point being, what Daniel said is not a promise that they won't retcon things whenever they feel like it. If they actually had any guts, they would have made stuff like that impossible and still written a good story. In that case, it really would be "the past cannot be changed" and not "the past can't be changed in scenes where it is inconvenient for us to write the scene if it can be changed, but it can be in scenes where it is inconvenient for us to write the scene without the possibility of having someone wake up years later with a spontaneous memory."


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

TAsunder said:


> Yes, if they are not bound by any rules. The point being, what Daniel said is not a promise that they won't retcon things whenever they feel like it. If they actually had any guts, they would have made stuff like that impossible and still written a good story. In that case, it really would be "the past cannot be changed" and not "the past can't be changed in scenes where it is inconvenient for us to write the scene if it can be changed, but it can be in scenes where it is inconvenient for us to write the scene without the possibility of having someone wake up years later with a spontaneous memory."


You're pretty harsh on the writers here. I haven't seen any inclination for them to retcon nor change anything. They're not Indian givers. I would withhold my criticism until I see the story play out, and if this season's attention to detail is any indication, it'll play out very well.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

ireland967 said:


> When Daniel asked the group for a monument or something to prove when in time they are, I immediately thought of the (possibly still standing) four-toed statue. Then again none of the group with the possible exception of Juliet would even know about it, since Sun, Jin and Sayid's sailboat trip in the S3 finale was the only time we've witnessed any Losties seeing it.
> 
> Still, with all of the time traveling going on it looks like it very well make another appearance.





DevdogAZ said:


> They showed it a couple of times in the recap episode that aired before the season premiere, so I'd say that it definitely has some significance this season.


Eh, I don't know about SIGNIFICANCE, but it'll certainly be shown. Our heroes are going back and forth through time, just about any residents of the island at any time in history could be shown. That's what the flaming arrows were, and my guess is we'll at very least see what the full statue looked like. Dunno about its builders though.

Greg


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> Yes, if they are not bound by any rules. The point being, what Daniel said is not a promise that they won't retcon things whenever they feel like it. If they actually had any guts, they would have made stuff like that impossible and still written a good story. In that case, it really would be "the past cannot be changed" and not "the past can't be changed in scenes where it is inconvenient for us to write the scene if it can be changed, but it can be in scenes where it is inconvenient for us to write the scene without the possibility of having someone wake up years later with a spontaneous memory."


Don't you think you should see the rest of the story before making those types of judgments? They haven't had a chance to cut the corner yet before you've said, "They cut the corner!"

I still see the season premiere in part as a definition of the rules the show will now be following.

Greg


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

How does the fact that the 6 have been off the island for three years correlate to island time? Remember, the helicoptor came right back to the island, but it was a couple of days according to the people on the island.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

The guy at Televisionary believes that Daniel talking to Desmond was a change in the past and that Desmond is the only one that can participate in such change. He also believes that Mrs. Hawking is Daniel's mother. There's some good stuff in his recap of these two episodes.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

gchance said:


> I still see the season premiere in part as a definition of the rules the show will now be following.
> 
> Greg


The producers have also said that they view the premier episodes as exactly that, setting the tone and rules for the season coming up.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Philosofy said:


> How does the fact that the 6 have been off the island for three years correlate to island time? Remember, the helicoptor came right back to the island, but it was a couple of days according to the people on the island.


I think the best way to answer this is by quoting Faraday - "Look, I'd have trouble explaining this to a quantum physicist."

He'd have trouble, I'd have no chance. 

But here's an idea - maybe how long will depend on what time period the Losties are in when the Oceanic 6 show back up.


----------



## Dad (Oct 27, 2001)

3D said:


> I think I understand what you're saying and can agree with most of it, but not as it applies to Desmond and Daniel. If I'm reading you correctly, Sawyer can't have an encounter with someone from the Island's pre-Oceanic 815 days unless that's what always had happend, which would have been exhibited by some type of recognition if he had had an encounter post Oceanic-815. Thus, since Desmond never showed any signs of having recognized Sawyer, Desmond could never be in a position in the past to meet Sawyer. Thus, Desmond never met Sawyer is what happend and what will continue to happen.
> 
> I don't think that this is true with Daniel, otherwise we wouldn't have had the scene where Desmond only later remembers meeting him. Desmond is somehow special. I don't know if it's because of something inate to him or by virute of being Daniel's contant, but Daniel was able to get him to open the hatch in spite of the fact that it is not what has always happend. Otherwise, Daniel wouldn't have concluded that Desmond was special, but merely that his encounter was what had always happend. Also, didn't Desmond have some interaction with Daniel before leaving for the freighter last year? If he did, did he show signs of recognition?





aindik said:


> When Faraday, in the past, tells Desmond to do something, what determines the time at which Desmond will wake up with this new memory? And, whatever it is, does Faraday know it?
> 
> Faraday and everyone else went back to whenever that was when Desmond was in the hatch, and told Desmond to go find Faraday's mother. How is it determined that Desmond would "forget" this instruction until 2007, when he wakes up in bed with Penny and "remembers" this conversation?





BitbyBlit said:


> Richard did say that Locke would meet him at a time before he knew who Locke was. So maybe Richard is the one who's been driving things in that direction. He seems to be more of a leader than Ethan, so I would think it would be more likely to be him.
> 
> I agree. That was an awkward scene.
> 
> ...


The only way to explain (I think) why Desmond did not remember the message from Daniel is that it has been three years of island time. Now this does explain how Locke is dead and off the island at the same time. And the only reason it worked for Daniel was that he remembered that Desmond actually did go to Oxford and that Daniels message is why he went. Daniel would have to have been flipping through time prior to the getting to island.

Or maybe it was just a plot device for the writers


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

In all of this discussion, there has been very little talk of the Mrs. Hawkings scene (and waaay too much dissecting time travel--jeez guys, can we let it drop and just see how it plays out?).

That seems to be a key scene, and if anything needs over analyzing, that's it. The first part of it, in Mrs. H's underground lair, seemed to be set in the past--chalk, ancient computers & monitors. Yet when she walks upstairs and sees Ben, one gets the impression it's current, as they discuss the O6. And her final statement, when Ben asks what if he fails, "Then God help us all." Certainly implying that if the O6 don't make it back, it's not just bad for them (as in maybe the remaining survivors will die), but bad for all of us, bad for the world. Why?

And what's with the pendulum? And the event marks on her monitor? Is it the Island jumping around? If so, that confirms it's moving in space.

So much to think about... can't wait for next week. Early word has it if you liked the first two hours, #3 will knock your socks off.


----------



## JnApop (Feb 26, 2004)

astrohip said:


> So much to think about... can't wait for next week. Early word has it if you liked the first two hours, #3 will knock your socks off.


I'm in. But I was sold at the 20 minute mark of the first episode!


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

Time travel blows. I guess this will be their cop out for everything except smokey.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> The guy at Televisionary believes that Daniel talking to Desmond was a change in the past and that Desmond is the only one that can participate in such change. He also believes that Mrs. Hawking is Daniel's mother. There's some good stuff in his recap of these two episodes.


That was a great write up.........


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

Has anyone tried rearranging the letters in the law firm Agostini & Norton?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

astrohip said:


> That seems to be a key scene, and if anything needs over analyzing, that's it. The first part of it, in Mrs. H's underground lair, seemed to be set in the past--chalk, ancient computers & monitors.


It's implied she's in the present, using equipment that was designed when the Dharma equipment was, late 70s/early 80s. She also may or may not be in a Dharma station, the hatch door looks the same as the Dharma ones do.



> Yet when she walks upstairs and sees Ben, one gets the impression it's current, as they discuss the O6. And her final statement, when Ben asks what if he fails, "Then God help us all." Certainly implying that if the O6 don't make it back, it's not just bad for them (as in maybe the remaining survivors will die), but bad for all of us, bad for the world. Why?


That's part of why we haven't discussed it. There's not really enough to discuss. Any speculation on our part is 100% speculation. For all we know, the world could go 500 years into the past and land in the Andromeda galaxy. Not that I think this is true, but there's so little information here, we just don't know.



> And what's with the pendulum? And the event marks on her monitor? Is it the Island jumping around? If so, that confirms it's moving in space.


This one's easy. It's a Foucault pendulum[/quote], which demonstrates the rotation of the Earth.



They're pretty cool devices. When I was a kid they had a giant one (20 or 30 feet across) at the California Acadamy of Sciences. Dunno if they do now.



> So much to think about... can't wait for next week. Early word has it if you liked the first two hours, #3 will knock your socks off.


There's a lot of early word, but the big consensus seems to be that we won't be disappointed.

Greg


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

scsiguy72 said:


> It looked like the same compass that Locke gave to Sayid in season one.





gchance said:


> Wasn't the compass one of the items Richard placed before Locke as a child?


A compass comparison.

http://lost.cubit.net/images/index/covers/5x01_compass2.jpg


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

jlb said:


> That was a great write up.........


One thing he notes (which I missed and, I believe, hasn't been mentioned here) was that Candle's baby was notably *not* Oriental. Does anyone recall if she had reddish hair and blue eyes?

As for Daniel talking to Desmond, he may have _changed_ the past but he didn't actually _affect_ it. Desmond remembered only 3+ years later.

As for why it was 3+ later and not shortly after they got off the Island, who knows what time-frame the remaining losties are in. They are jumping all around.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> A compass comparison.


Thanks for that. I wasn't implying that Locke's compass was the same as the one Richard had, but that picture does confirm what I thought was correct and couldn't find an image of, that the compass Richard gives to Locke before Locke jumps is the same one he showed to him as a boy.



wprager said:


> One thing he notes (which I missed and, I believe, hasn't been mentioned here) was that Candle's baby was notably *not* Oriental. Does anyone recall if she had reddish hair and blue eyes?


He was, in fact DarkUFO had some people speculating the baby might actually be Miles.

Greg


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

justapixel said:


> I won't make comments on specific plot points, but I am happy to see that it appears the writers knew where they were going all along. I have had my doubts the past few seasons - seems like they will be able to tie up loose ends.
> 
> And, in a spectacularly entertaining manner.
> 
> And finally, Damn. Sawyer is hot. I'm so happy this show is back on the air.


Women are always looking at us like that. Disgusting. 

Me, I thought Sawyer had put on a bit of weight. Note the emerging love handles when he was shirtless.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

jkeegan said:


> Can't believe we don't have a thread yet.
> 
> This is for both of the episodes that aired tonight - Because You Left and The Lie.
> Since it aired as a 2-hour thing together, it probably gets one thread.
> ...


Unless jkeegan is time-trippin', the title SHOULD read 1/21/*09*. 

Just reading through this extensive thread. I'll have comments/observations later ...


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

When Richard told Locke he would have to die to go back and convince the 6 to return, did he mean he had to appear to them after his death like Charlie, Anna, and others did who had previously tried to convince them? Was Jeremy Bentham ever alive, or did they just not suspect that he wasn't because they didn't know Locke had died? But that doesn't explain why his body was there. 

Did anyone else think when they said that they had access to limitless energy that there would be way better uses for that than time travel? Probably not anyone on this thread.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

philw1776 said:


> Me, I thought Sawyer had put on a bit of weight. Note the emerging love handles when he was shirtless.


He's always had those. I think he just has wide obliques. So don't be rude!


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> Women are always looking at us like that. Disgusting.
> 
> Me, I thought Sawyer had put on a bit of weight. Note the emerging love handles when he was shirtless.





Fool Me Twice said:


> He's always had those. I think he just has wide obliques. So don't be rude!


Yup, he always had them. I commented on them to my wife during the first season episode when he showed his buttcrack.

If women want to be in love with Sawyer, I have no problem with it. Just so long as they don't comment on how sexist we are when we drool over Kate.

Greg


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

gchance said:


> If women want to be in love with Sawyer, I have no problem with it. Just so long as they don't comment on how sexist we are when we drool over Kate.
> 
> Greg


I was just looking for an excuse to post a pic of EL. But, do I really need a reason?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

GDG76 said:


> I guess I'm in the minority who didn't like it as well..
> 
> I think Lost had enough to wrap up with the existing mysteries without adding a signifcant amount of time travel.


I'm hoping we see they didn't 'add' a significant amount of time travel, it was in the story all along (from the first season).


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Still behind, around post 214, but wanted to get this out before I read more.

I was about to post a statement that Daniel saying Desmond was "special" was possibly only referring to the fact that his memory was swiss cheese, that he spends portions of his life in different times from when he "just was", and that there's some possibility that Desmond might open the hatch, meet him there, NOT remember that meeting when departing on the helicopter, but then remember that meeting at a later date.

(Maybe Desmond, for the 3 years with Penny after being rescued, still shifts around in time (he just doesn't nosebleed because of his constant Penny), and that's why Penny told him "you're safe.. You have been for 3 years". Maybe 3 years after the rescue he jumped back to the hatch, eventually fell back into that routine forgetting who/where he was, somehow remembered he was expecting a replacement, this guy pounds on the hatch door, he opens it, talks with him, then snaps back to 3-years after the rescue. And hell, that's 3 years after the rescue, it's not like Daniel planned the date, so it's entirely possible he doesn't need to be "special" at all, other than not remembering the conversation at the helicopter departure (possibly because he didn't experience it yet)).

That's what I was going to post.

But I can't escape the fact that they've shown us Desmond seeing Charlie shot in the neck with an arrow, only to later prevent an arrow at that exact same location (i.e. not just luck or coincidence). Desmond saw a vision of a future, and changed it - there were two versions of those 5 seconds - one where Charlie died and one where he didn't. Desmond's mechanism is different. Minkowski's mechanism may be different too, if the effect of turning the hatch key was merely to give him the same exposure to radiation that Minkowski had, coupled with moving near the island on the wrong bearing, and Minkowski and Desmond are the same.

Initially I thought that when Oxford Daniel said "so wait, I made reference to this conversation, right? I remembered it?" and Desmond said no and Daniel said "How can that be?", that the answer was because his memory was all screwed up and he couldn't remember anything. But maybe the answer truly is something more like Desmond's changes actually change the 4d picture.

Well, maybe it's more like the one and only 4d painting of time (made up of people's decisions, actions, etc) has its Desmond portions painted by a guy (Desmond) who has a bit of a sneak peak of possible outcomes, and he decides which one will be real. That will then be the only real one, and other people time traveling won't be able to change it.

Ugh. Need sleep.

Nah. Daniel will believe Desmond is something special, and then later we'll find out a clear, cool, easy explanation for why he's not -


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

getreal said:


> Unless jkeegan is time-trippin', the title SHOULD read 1/21/*09*.
> 
> Just reading through this extensive thread. I'll have comments/observations later ...


Doh! I tried changing it, but all it lets me change is the title of my initial post of the thread. Can a moderator rename the thread?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jkeegan said:


> But I can't escape the fact that they've shown us Desmond seeing Charlie shot in the neck with an arrow, only to later prevent an arrow at that exact same location (i.e. not just luck or coincidence). Desmond saw a vision of a future, and changed it - there were two versions of those 5 seconds - one where Charlie died and one where he didn't.


Well, not really...he SAW two versions of it, one in his vision and one in reality. But in reality there was only ONE version.

Your original theory may well be on to something.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

When Desmond saw Charlie getting killed with an arrow in the neck and prevented it from happening, he was not affecting the past. Perhaps *that* is the rule or, more precisely, you cannot change the past to affect your present. We all ahve the ability to affect our future, unless you believe in pre-destiny.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

In which case it must get tricky when part of the future is part of the past. E.g., during the period between when Locke leaves the present and acts in the past, the part of the future where he goes to the past is part of the past and thus can't be changed.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I figure we each have 1 opportunity to make any one decision we make in our lives at whatever
time we are first presented with it. We can't go back and redo it or change it. But if "someone"
has a vantage point above the whole timeline, and sees it all at once, they know not only what 
we did, but what we will do. And that won't change.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

gchance said:


> that picture does confirm what I thought was correct and couldn't find an image of, that the compass Richard gives to Locke before Locke jumps is the same one he showed to him as a boy.


The brass casing is the same / similar, but the compass lettering, arrows, etc. look very different to me.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, not really...he SAW two versions of it, one in his vision and one in reality. But in reality there was only ONE version.
> 
> Your original theory may well be on to something.


Not precisely, Rob. You are right on the reality part, about only 1 thing coming true. But Desmond never saw an alternate version of what was happening to Charlie. He just kept preventing the one he saw from happening.

The lightning strike, the drowning saving Claire, the slipping on the rocks getting the bird - Desmond (to our knowledge) never saw the next Charlie incident until he changed the future he saw. And he was clearly frustrated that he kept saving Charlie for no apparent reason, until it was time for the Looking Glass station diving expedition.

Another future-change (absent a writing flub) is that Desmond saw Claire and Aaron getting on a helicopter and leaving. Even if he mistook Kate for Claire somehow, he totally missed the fact that he was also on the very same chopper. Yeah, I know, it *could* still happen - but I believe it was a change in the future.

I think Desmond can change the past and the future. Everyone else (with the possible exception of Locke) is locked into their destiny.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Delta13 said:


> Not precisely, Rob. You are right on the reality part, about only 1 thing coming true. But Desmond never saw an alternate version of what was happening to Charlie. He just kept preventing the one he saw from happening.


Sure he did. He also saw the one that actually happened, when it happened. That was my point. The one he saw in his vision may or may not have eventually happened, but the only one that matters is the one that happened before his very eyes. His visions weren't "what happened," and thus unable to be changed. They were things that might have happened if things went differently.

One could even argue that the point of the visions was to make sure that what happened happened, by "inspiring" Desmond to "interfere" and thus do what was going to happen all along.

I still think Desmond and time travel are going to turn out to be a lot more straight-forward than most people are thinking.


----------



## rondotcom (Feb 13, 2005)

Upon third viewing I finally realized the truth about the Chang's baby. It's red-haired, blue-eyed female and named Charlotte.

Of course I could be wrong.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

1st off I have not read all these posts. 

The only episode I watched last season was the season finale. I stopped watching in the middle of the season before that. I only recorded the 3 hour block cuz it was repeated on Saturday, and nothing else to record. I was really impressed how the 1st hour caught me up. Great job guys. I think they might of just sucked me in for another season. I will never get as involved as many of you, but kudos to them for a great start to the season.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Delta13 said:


> I think Desmond can change the past and the future. Everyone else (with the possible exception of Locke) is locked into their destiny.


Could be.

Daniel told Desmond that the rules don't apply to him because he is "uniquely, miraculously special."

If he's truly _uniquely _special, then there are some exceptions to the rules that apply only to Desmond.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

stellie93 said:


> I don't remember Desmond actually meeting Daniel on the island. He talked to him on the phone, but did they meet in person before that? He wouldn't recognize his voice on the phone.


I honestly can't remember if Desmond and Daniel met face to face last season, but think that they must have because Daniel and Charlotte were with Frank before Frank left for the freighter with Desmond and Sayid. Maybe someone who's recently rewatched S4 can confirm or deny.



Jeeters said:


> The brass casing is the same / similar, but the compass lettering, arrows, etc. look very different to me.


There were three pictures of compasses in the post you were referring two. The one Ricahrd gave Locke this episode and the one he showed Locke as a boy look the same. The third compass, which I believe Locke had during S1 (and then gave to someone after saying that he didn't need it anymore) was the one that you are looking at and seeing as completely different.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

Jeeters said:


> The brass casing is the same / similar, but the compass lettering, arrows, etc. look very different to me.





3D said:


> There were three pictures of compasses in the post you were referring two. The one Ricahrd gave Locke this episode and the one he showed Locke as a boy look the same..


Umm, no, they're different. The compass that Richard gave Locke in this episode is different than the one given to him at a boy...

The 'boy compass' has the N for North next to the lanyard ring.

The compass that Richard gave Locke in this episode has its face upside down in comparison to the boy compass; i.e., South is next to the lanyard ring instead of North.
Also, instead of W for West, it has an 'O' which means it's probably either a Spanish or French compass. The boy compass has a 'W'.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Jeeters said:


> The compass that Richard gave Locke in this episode has its face upside down in comparison to the boy compass; i.e., South is next to the lanyard ring instead of North.
> Also, instead of W for West, it has an 'O' which means it's probably either a Spanish or French compass. The boy compass has a 'W'.


The needle also looks quite different.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Jeeters said:


> Umm, no, they're different. The compass that Richard gave Locke in this episode is different than the one given to him at a boy...
> 
> The 'boy compass' has the N for North next to the lanyard ring.
> 
> ...


oops. You're right. For some reason, when I first looked at it, I thought that the W for West was just being covered up by the way the arrow was pointing.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Read this observation on another board and found it intersting. In S1, Locke had a vision of the small plane crashing, which led him to take Boone and go looking for it. Was he simply having a memory inserted the same way Desmond suddenly remembered the meeting with Daniel?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

3D said:


> Read this observation on another board and found it intersting. In S1, Locke had a vision of the small plane crashing, which led him to take Boone and go looking for it. Was he simply having a memory inserted the same way Desmond suddenly remembered the meeting with Daniel?


I don't see how. Desmond's "memory" from this episode is something that happened to him in his past. But what you're suggesting is that Locke might have had a "memory" of something that happened to him in his future. Although the actual plane crash took place in the past, it was future Locke that traveled back in time and saw the crash, so in S1, the vision that Locke had couldn't have been a memory.


----------



## 7thton (Mar 3, 2005)

jamesbobo said:


> Locke gets shot in the leg when he's at the crashed plane. Could that be why he couldn't walk when he approached the plane the first time we saw it a couple of seasons ago?
> 
> There's one thing I need a to refresh my memory. Who is Jill, the woman Ben goes to in the butcher shop? Where has she been seen before.


Good catch! That didn't occur to me.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't see how. Desmond's "memory" from this episode is something that happened to him in his past. But what you're suggesting is that Locke might have had a "memory" of something that happened to him in his future. Although the actual plane crash took place in the past, it was future Locke that traveled back in time and saw the crash, so in S1, the vision that Locke had couldn't have been a memory.


Man, I'm just striking out left and right now. You're correct. What I posted from the other board wouldn't make sense as the Locke from Season 1 is younger, so couldn't have a memory from what we saw this week, as opposed to Desmond, who is three now at least three years older from hatch Desmond.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Rewatching now. Thought it was very interesting that Daniel left open the question of whether it was the island moving through time, or the people.

Juliette: So, that's why our camp is gone. Because the island is moving through time?

Daniel: Yeah, either the island is, or we are.

Sawyer: What?

Daniel: It's just as likely that we're moving, your people and us.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Another weird thing.. When John was talking to Ethan and Ethan said "Goodbye John Locke", the sky started going white again.. John certainly noticed it, but it didn't seem that Ethan did..


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

With all this time traveling, I wonder how soon we are going to see who Adam and Eve (the two bodies found in the cave) are.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Another thing I noticed during the first time through but never got to post.. It looks like we have our first confirmed link between Oceanic and Widmore. First, scanning her passport and seeing it was her was enough to get the Oceanic booking attendant to get her pulled in a room. Then when the Oceanic guard closes the door and she yells "Open this door!", Widmore enters and says "Save your breath. They only do what I tell them to do."

I wonder now about the stewardess that joined the others.. Is she a Widmore spy?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> With all this time traveling, I wonder how soon we are going to see who Adam and Eve (the two bodies found in the cave) are.


I thought the same thing.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

If Miles can be believed, it took Widmore "like 20 years" to find the island the first time. Did that mean from 1950ish-1970ish and he started the Dharma Initiative, or does it mean 1975ish-1995 when he found it just now?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> With all this time traveling, I wonder how soon we are going to see who Adam and Eve (the two bodies found in the cave) are.





jkeegan said:


> I thought the same thing.


You know, when I first saw the plane, Adam & Eve were the first ones I thought about. Then when Locke saw the smoke, I thought oh wait, the drug plane.

But as I said before, with the people and island moving through time randomly, we now have the opportunity to explain all those strange things we've seen, like Adam & Eve, the Black Rock, the 4-toed statue (we'd see it fully standing and/or its builders).

Greg


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Another quote from the show, for those still hung up on Daniel's explanation of how time works:

Juliette: We could warn them. Stop them from ever flying to that boat.

Daniel: That's not the way it works.

Sawyer: Who says?

Daniel: You cannot change anything.. You can't. Even if you tried to - it wouldn't work.

Sawyer: Why not?

Daniel: Time, it's like a street. Alright, we can move forward on that street, we can move in reverse, but we cannot - ever - create a new street. If we try to do anything different we will fail. Every time. Whatever happened.. ..happened.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

jkeegan said:


> Rewatching now. Thought it was very interesting that Daniel left open the question of whether it was the island moving through time, or the people.
> 
> Juliette: So, that's why our camp is gone. Because the island is moving through time?
> 
> ...


So depending on how much we presume Richard knows, there may be an answer..

John: Wait.. the noise.. when the sky lit up.. where did you go?

Richard: I didn't go anywhere, John, you went.

Then again, that could still be a relative answer.. The island could have moved, bringing Richard along with it, and from his point of view John left. Again, it's how much Richard actually knows.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jkeegan said:


> So depending on how much we presume Richard knows, there may be an answer..
> 
> John: Wait.. the noise.. when the sky lit up.. where did you go?
> 
> ...


I think we're going to find out that the reason Richard doesn't age, and the reason Locke "moved" while Richard didn't, is because Richard (and the indigenous Others) is somehow tied to the island while anyone who comes from the outside world is not. Being born on the island (Charlotte, Aaron) don't make one indigenous like Richard and his people.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I think we're going to find out that the reason Richard doesn't age, and the reason Locke "moved" while Richard didn't, is because Richard (and the indigenous Others) is somehow tied to the island while anyone who comes from the outside world is not. Being born on the island (Charlotte, Aaron) don't make one indigenous like Richard and his people.


If Richard is indigenous (i.e. was born on) the island, he at some point aged. If not, he'd either still be a newborn infant, or was born in his 30s or 40s.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

hmm.. Earlier I said the island did move in space according to Daniel, but I was mistaken. The actual quote:

Daniel: No, no no. We can't just sail out on any course. For us to leave, I need to calculate a new bearing, and, uh, to do that, I need to determine where we are now...... ... in time.


----------



## mostman (Jul 16, 2000)

aindik said:


> If Richard is indigenous (i.e. was born on) the island, he at some point aged. If not, he'd either still be a newborn infant, or was born in his 30s or 40s.


Well - we have seen him off the island. Maybe he ages when he isn't on the island.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Was Cindy the stewardess with the others when they didn't travel with Locke? She's definately not indigenous. Or is she? What about the children from the plane? Juliet has been there 3 years? Are all the rest original others? Juliet was the only one brought in?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Can we please hurry and finish this page so that I don't have to keep scrolling to the right to read every post? That compass pic at the top of the page really made this page annoying.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Can we please hurry and finish this page so that I don't have to keep scrolling to the right to read every post? That compass pic at the top of the page really made this page annoying.


Kind of a downside to your "most posts per page that the forum allows" config, isn't it.  I'm past that compass page already.

(Glad I could help).


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

aindik said:


> Kind of a downside to your "most posts per page that the forum allows" config, isn't it.  I'm past that compass page already.
> 
> (Glad I could help).


Yeah, I knew someone would point out that I could just change my settings from 50 posts per page.

Only a couple more to go.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Yeah, I knew someone would point out that I could just change my settings from 50 posts per page.
> 
> Only a couple more to go.


Or you could just disable in-post images like I do. It took me a while to figure out what the issue was you mentioned.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> Or you could just disable in-post images like I do. It took me a while to figure out what the issue was you mentioned.


Well, most of the time I'm glad the images are there. It's pretty rare that an image is so large that it's wider than the page, and even more rare that it happens in a thread that I return to on a regular basis. Therefore, I'd rather put up with the minor annoyance in this instance rather than not seeing the images that other posters insert on a regular basis that are not too large and that add to the discussion.

One more to go!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I ad-block too-wide images.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I ad-block too-wide images.


Ooh, interesting. How do you program ad-block to know what images are too wide? Or do you simply do it manually after it's been posted and you see it's too wide?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Ooh, interesting. How do you program ad-block to know what images are too wide? Or do you simply do it manually after it's been posted and you see it's too wide?


Manually.

It's quick, and saves a lot of scrolling back and forth for the next up-to-50 posts!


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I just CTL-ScrollWheel to scale the page down, then squint for a little while.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Sorry, didn't realize the large image was causing problems. I don't mind annoying that one guy, but I can see how it can be a general nuisance. I've changed it to a link (yeah, I know, a little late).


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

jkeegan said:


> Daniel: Time, it's like a street. Alright, we can move forward on that street, we can move in reverse, but we cannot - ever - create a new street. If we try to do anything different we will fail. Every time. Whatever happened.. ..happened.


I heard this as "string", but "street" works just as well or better in the analogy.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

I didn't check the closed captioning, I can (although if I remember even that's not always canon), but according to www.lost-tv.com it's neither:

http://www.lost-tv.com/transcripts/s5e01.html

They have it as 'Time, it is like a stream'


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I heard street.

Is this going to become another Goth/Gaunt?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Daniel said you can go back, you can go forth, but you can't create a new one.

Follow the logic. Why are you moving down a string? Why are you moving forward AND back in a stream?

It's street, guys.

Greg


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

jkeegan said:


> I didn't check the closed captioning, I can (although if I remember even that's not always canon), but according to www.lost-tv.com it's neither:
> 
> http://www.lost-tv.com/transcripts/s5e01.html
> 
> They have it as 'Time, it is like a stream'


Stream is what I heard...everyone else I watched it with heard street. Nice to have the transcripts back me up for once - I always hear things wrong.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

gchance said:


> Daniel said you can go back, you can go forth, but you can't create a new one.
> 
> Follow the logic. Why are you moving down a string? Why are you moving forward AND back in a stream?
> 
> ...


Hey, Spock once described time as a river.

Stream works for me.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Hey, Spock once described time as a river.
> 
> Stream works for me.


Neil Peart said that time is a gypsy caravan that steals away in the night, to leave you stranded in dreamland.

But that was too long for Daniel, he was running out of time.

Greg


----------



## barbeedoll (Sep 26, 2005)

aindik said:


> That's for the benefit of the portion of the audience who have never seen a record.


Funny, funny comment. Except it's probably so true. Even an 8 track would go over the heads of lots of the audience.

Barbeedoll


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Stream makes no sense when considering the rest of the analogy about forks and exits.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> Stream makes no sense when considering the rest of the analogy about forks and exits.


While I agree that it was street and not stream, I don't think there was anything said about forks and exits.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> While I agree that it was street and not stream, I don't think there was anything said about forks and exits.


Not exact words, just the meaning of the analogy. You can't ever create a new stream? Why not... that's easy. Creating a new street is a lot harder for someone traveling on it.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

barbeedoll said:


> Funny, funny comment. Except it's probably so true. Even an 8 track would go over the heads of lots of the audience.
> 
> Barbeedoll


I would think 8-tracks were dead long before records were.


----------



## barbeedoll (Sep 26, 2005)

aindik said:


> I would think 8-tracks were dead long before records were.


In my experience, the technology timeline was wax cylinders, 78 rpm records, 45 rpm records, 33 1/3 rpm records, 8 track, cassettes, CDs, DVDs, iPods (and their ilk). Obviously most of these overlapped each other.

But I'm sure someone in the thread will have more scientific information.

Barbeedoll


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

I thought it was "string". I guess any straight thing will do.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

gchance said:


> Neil Peart said that time is a gypsy caravan that steals away in the night, to leave you stranded in dreamland.
> 
> But that was too long for Daniel, he was running out of time.
> 
> Greg


I let my past go too fast
No time to pause
If I could slow it all down
Like some captain, whose ship runs aground
I can wait until the tide comes around

(Time stand still)
I'm not looking back
But I want to look around me now
(Time stand still)
See more of the people and the places that surround me now
Freeze this moment a little bit longer
Make each impression a little bit stronger
Freeze this motion a little bit longer
The innocence slips away
The innocence slips away...


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

The closed captions have it as street.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

The mighty ocean
Dances with the moon
The silent forest
Echoes with the loon

Time and motion
Live and love and dream
Eyes connect like interstellar beams

Superman in super nature
Needs all the comfort he can find
Spontaneous emotion
And the long enduring kind


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

barbeedoll said:


> In my experience, the technology timeline was wax cylinders, 78 rpm records, 45 rpm records, 33 1/3 rpm records, 8 track, cassettes, CDs, DVDs, iPods (and their ilk). Obviously most of these overlapped each other.
> 
> But I'm sure someone in the thread will have more scientific information.
> 
> Barbeedoll


The point is there are still stores that sell records. There are even some new "vinyl LPs" being released. Many stores sell a turntable that lets you convert your records to mp3 format.

I don't think there is similar interest in the 8 track format.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

barbeedoll said:


> In my experience, the technology timeline was wax cylinders, 78 rpm records, 45 rpm records, 33 1/3 rpm records, 8 track, cassettes, CDs, DVDs, iPods (and their ilk). Obviously most of these overlapped each other.
> 
> But I'm sure someone in the thread will have more scientific information.
> 
> Barbeedoll


I was thinking about the order in which things died, not the order in which they arrived.


----------



## BrandonRe (Jul 15, 2006)

barbeedoll said:


> In my experience, the technology timeline was wax cylinders, 78 rpm records, 45 rpm records, 33 1/3 rpm records, 8 track, cassettes, CDs, DVDs, iPods (and their ilk). Obviously most of these overlapped each other.
> 
> But I'm sure someone in the thread will have more scientific information.
> 
> Barbeedoll


That may be the order in which things were commercially introduced and gained a mass audience, but it's not the order of peoples experience looking back form today. 8-tracks began to fall out of favor in the late 70's if my memory is right. records, on the other hand, only dwindled significantly in the late 80's/early 90's. And there is a significant number of records still sold today. Not so with 8-tracks.

So, I'll say that those who wouldn't know an LP because their experience has been with cds and newer technology would be even less likely to know what an 8-track is.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

jkeegan said:


> I let my past go too fast
> No time to pause
> If I could slow it all down
> Like some captain, whose ship runs aground
> ...


Experience slips away.

The music is reversible, but time... turn back! Turn back! Turn back!

Greg


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Is it just me that is kind of assuming that when dead Locke gets back to the island he'll become live Locke?

-smak-


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

smak said:


> Is it just me that is kind of assuming that when dead Locke gets back to the island he'll become live Locke?
> 
> -smak-


I've assumed that since the moment we saw him in the casket.

Greg


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Well, _that _would be unrealistic!


----------



## Rosincrans (May 4, 2006)

I can handle the "If it didn't happen, it can't happen" angle, even though it's not my favorite type of time travel story, but I hope they keep it realistic as to why things don't happen.

We know Sawyer can't meet Desmond, because he already knows he didn't (ignoring the fact that Desmond is "special"). I think their needs to be a reason why he didn't. In this case it's because Faraday talked Sawyer out of it while Desmond was still putting on his contamination suit. That makes sense to me. But if they start behaving as if there is some magical force keeping them from doing what they would naturally do, the story will get tiresome to me.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

expose dialog from the cc:

Previously on expose..

(tires squeal)
(woman) It looks like the Scorpion is taking over all the Cobra's business.
(woman) You want me to work with Tsunami, the dragon lady of van nuys?
I'm here to capture the scorpion, so if you've got a problem with that, you can go work stage 3. 
(gunshot)
(man) She's hit!
(grunts)
(people screaming)


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rosincrans said:


> I can handle the "If it didn't happen, it can't happen" angle, even though it's not my favorite type of time travel story, but I hope they keep it realistic as to why things don't happen.
> 
> We know Sawyer can't meet Desmond, because he already knows he didn't (ignoring the fact that Desmond is "special"). I think their needs to be a reason why he didn't. In this case it's because Faraday talked Sawyer out of it while Desmond was still putting on his contamination suit. That makes sense to me. But if they start behaving as if there is some magical force keeping them from doing what they would naturally do, the story will get tiresome to me.


I agree, but I hope it doesn't even go that far. I hope the instances of them having opportunities to meet up with themselves or others in the past are few and far between. Honestly, I hope that they are able to stop the "time skipping" of the island within the next episode or two and we don't have these potential paradoxes all season long.


----------



## Rosincrans (May 4, 2006)

jkeegan said:


> expose dialog from the cc:
> 
> Previously on expose..
> 
> ...


Razzle Dazzle!


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Rosincrans said:


> I can handle the "If it didn't happen, it can't happen" angle, even though it's not my favorite type of time travel story, but I hope they keep it realistic as to why things don't happen.
> 
> We know Sawyer can't meet Desmond, because he already knows he didn't (ignoring the fact that Desmond is "special"). I think their needs to be a reason why he didn't. In this case it's because Faraday talked Sawyer out of it while Desmond was still putting on his contamination suit. That makes sense to me. But if they start behaving as if there is some magical force keeping them from doing what they would naturally do, the story will get tiresome to me.


yeah I wasn't a huge fan of "the universe has a way of course correcting", and I've been hoping we'd see an intelligence (the island? Our castmembers?) behind those corrections somehow..


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

tewcewl said:


> The closed captions have it as street.


The closed captions aren't infallible. We had a big discussion about that in the "we're the survivors of Oceanic 815" days. And had some insight from an actual captioner on the board. Usually the captioners are just listening like the rest of us, and sometimes make mistakes.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Rosincrans said:


> I can handle the "If it didn't happen, it can't happen" angle, even though it's not my favorite type of time travel story, but I hope they keep it realistic as to why things don't happen.
> 
> We know Sawyer can't meet Desmond, because he already knows he didn't (ignoring the fact that Desmond is "special"). I think their needs to be a reason why he didn't. In this case it's because Faraday talked Sawyer out of it while Desmond was still putting on his contamination suit. That makes sense to me. But if they start behaving as if there is some magical force keeping them from doing what they would naturally do, the story will get tiresome to me.


Remember when Michael couldn't shoot himself? I wonder if it's because he had already blown up the freighter in the future. Which means that someone from the future would have had to have been there, someone who knew that Michael could not have killed himself at that time. Except that Mr. Friendly died before the freighter ever go to the Island. I'm confused.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

hapdrastic said:


> Stream is what I heard...everyone else I watched it with heard street. Nice to have the transcripts back me up for once - I always hear things wrong.





JYoung said:


> Hey, Spock once described time as a river.
> 
> Stream works for me.





TAsunder said:


> Stream makes no sense when considering the rest of the analogy about forks and exits.


/Dr. Egon Spengler/ Don't cross the streams. /Dr. Egon Spengler/


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

gchance said:


> Why are you moving down a string?


Dunno, maybe you should ask Dr. Samuel Beckett.


----------



## barbeedoll (Sep 26, 2005)

hefe said:


> The closed captions aren't infallible. We had a big discussion about that in the "we're the survivors of Oceanic 815" days. And had some insight from an actual captioner on the board. Usually the captioners are just listening like the rest of us, and sometimes make mistakes.


I agree that the closed captioning is often flawed. We take great sport in watching shows and hearing the dialogue and then seeing what some poor intern typing the closed captioning has used for spelling or misunderstood words to try to convey it in text.

Barbeedoll


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

barbeedoll said:


> I agree that the closed captioning is often flawed. We take great sport in watching shows and hearing the dialogue and then seeing what some poor intern typing the closed captioning has used for spelling or misunderstood words to try to convey it in text.
> 
> Barbeedoll


I think you need to read some of trainman's descriptions of the captioning process if you think it is done by "some poor intern." Having said that, I agree that captioners make mistakes. It's inevitable. But in this case, I'm pretty sure that "street" was correct. Stream or string just make no sense in the context.


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

aindik said:


> That's for the benefit of the portion of the audience who have never seen a record.


I had to pause and explain to my 13 year old son about records skipping, why they skipped and how we fixed them.

Skipping risk and all, I really want a to buy a high quality turntable one day to play a few choice records on my sound system - can't beat the sound.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

I know it's late in the thread to throw an idea out there, but here goes: I alluded to this in an earlier post but didn't really elaborate. Constants don't necessarily travel both ways. For instance, IIRC, Desmond is Daniel's constant, but Daniel is not Desmond's constant. I beleive that Penny was actually Desmond's constant (haven't watched that episode since it first aired but I'm almost certain that this is how it turned out). Point being, Desmond was able to travel back in time and create the constant relationship with Daniel so that the now time travelling in the past Daniel is able to communicate, via dreams or newly discovered memories, with 2007 off the island Desmond. This all resulted from Desmond and Daniel having some type of meaningful exchange when Desmond, for lack of a better phrase, mind time travelled to the past. 

What if Daniel is able to harness the islands power, possibly by getting in close proximity to the orchid (i.e., the frozen donkey wheel), so as to send Sawyer, Juliet, and company to mind time travel in the same manner that Desmond did? Might they also be able to have a meaningful exchange with one of the Oceanic 6 in their pre-island life (ala Desmond and Daniel), thereby creating a new constant relationship? This would allow them, when in the proper island time, to communicate with the 2007 Oceanic 6 by creating new memories through exchanges with the Oceanic 6's island counterparts. I'm sure everyone remembers the crossovers we saw in flashbacks from seasons 1 and two? Perhaps we will return to some of those, but this time an actual exchange might take place.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, _that _would be unrealistic!


Methinks possibly Locke was 'spider bit' to induce a deathlike appearance. Why Ben's concern for the body? It would give meaning to the two stupid dead characters from a couple seasons ago. Ah Nikki. How could i forget?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> Methinks possibly Locke was 'spider bit' to induce a deathlike appearance. Why Ben's concern for the body? It would give meaning to the two stupid dead characters from a couple seasons ago. Ah Nikki. How could i forget?


The body's bury-ready. When Jack went to see Bentham at the funeral home and nobody was there, the casket was basically there for a body viewing, if anyone so desired. At that point, it's been embalmed.

Once embalmed, I do believe you're dead and not paralyzed.

Greg


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

gchance said:


> The body's bury-ready. When Jack went to see Bentham at the funeral home and nobody was there, the casket was basically there for a body viewing, if anyone so desired. At that point, it's been embalmed.
> 
> Once embalmed, I do believe you're dead and not paralyzed.
> 
> Greg


Unless Ben paid off the mortician.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

JYoung said:


> Unless Ben paid off the mortician.


Or if Bentham is Jewish.


----------



## Trent Bates (Dec 17, 2001)

The Zombies would disagree.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Jack's dad came back to life on the island... maybe. Stands to reason that Locke could too, maybe.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> Jack's dad came back to life on the island... maybe. Stands to reason that Locke could too, maybe.


I'll give that a definite maybe.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I don't think Christian "came back to life"; I think there's some force/entity on the island that takes the form of dead people who are important to the people it is talking/appearing to.

(Which is why I think Clare is dead...)


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think Christian "came back to life"; I think there's some force/entity on the island that takes the form of dead people who are important to the people it is talking/appearing to.
> 
> (Which is why I think Clare is dead...)


So, his missing body is just a coincidence?

Is this the same force that showed Boone to Locke? Dave to Hurley? Shannon to Sayid? Walt to pretty much everyone? (Except, Walt isn't dead). Is this the same force that shows Charlie and Anna-Lucia to Hurley, Claire to Kate, and Christian to Jack off the island? Who else isn't really there?


----------



## Fleegle (Jan 15, 2002)

We've seen the smoke monster take on the form of Eko's brother, so I'd say yes to all of your situations except the Walt ones. And possibly the ones involving Hurley. I'm still not sure if those were hallucinations or not.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

Were there pop-ups in the original airing of 'The Lie?'

The replay last night, (1/28) had them.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

5thcrewman said:


> Were there pop-ups in the original airing of 'The Lie?'
> 
> The replay last night, (1/28) had them.


There are never popup in the original airing. There are almost always popups in the reruns, at least recently.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

5thcrewman said:


> Were there pop-ups in the original airing of 'The Lie?'
> 
> The replay last night, (1/28) had them.


No, the pop-ups are never there in the original airings, but are usually there when they re-air something. It's their way of getting people to watch the same episode twice, so they can see if they missed any crucial information the first time.


----------



## Alpinemaps (Jul 26, 2004)

I didn't watch, but there were pop ups last night. There was a potentially important one...

(Spoiler for The Lie, and for Jughead)


Spoiler



The popup at the end identified Mrs Hawking as Eloise Hawking. The girl that held Daniel at gunpoint in 1954 was identified as Ellie - which could be short for Eloise.


----------



## GaryGnu (Jan 22, 2003)

I've read all 12 pages, and I have a question. Some posts here seem to be fixating on whether or not Sawyer could have made Desmond answer the hatch door. Why is that significant? Desmond is just a person on the island at that time. The Lost folks traveling through time have come into contact with many other people since then, so hasn't that essentially changed what happened?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

GaryGnu said:


> I've read all 12 pages, and I have a question. Some posts here seem to be fixating on whether or not Sawyer could have made Desmond answer the hatch door. Why is that significant? Desmond is just a person on the island at that time. The Lost folks traveling through time have come into contact with many other people since then, so hasn't that essentially changed what happened?


As far as the Daniel/Sawyer conversation goes, they wouldn't even need a person there for the gist of the talk. Let's pretend that in season 2 they showed a big piñata outside the hatch which looked like it had been there for sixty years, and in season 3 they finally smashed it open and ate the candy. Sawyer time travels back fifty years and says "hey i'm hungry, I want candy". Daniel is telling him not to waste his time trying to get the candy, because they already know what's gonna happen - somehow the piñata remains unopened until season 3. If, however, Sawyer remembers that next to the piñata had been lots of empty beer cans from the fifties on the ground, it might be worth his while to go look for an unopened case of beer there.. He may just drink it now and leave the empty cans he always remembered seeing.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

One of the many time-travel roleplaying games I've played over the years used this same approach. Anything you already knew happened, *happened*. You couldn't go back in time to change it. However, you could go back and change what those events _actually meant_.

So if you just saw one of your friends get shot, you can't travel back in time to prevent him getting shot. He already was shot, that's done. However, you can travel back in time to make sure that just around the corner there's some EMTs who are about to jump out. Or you can travel back in time to arrange that it wasn't really him that got shot, but a dummy rigged with fake blood-packs, etc. These things are only possible as long as you don't already _know_ something that contradicts them: for instance, you can't use the dummy approach if your friend was just talking, unless you can get the dummy to talk, too.

In this game, then, the key currency is knowledge: the more you know for sure, the less you can do. Time agents tend to avoid telling each other anything they don't have to know, to avoid backing them into corners.

I'm finding myself amused at the thought that this is the real reason why, for the first three or four seasons, none of the Losties ever told each other anything.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Hunter Green said:


> In this game, then, the key currency is knowledge: the more you know for sure, the less you can do. Time agents tend to avoid telling each other anything they don't have to know, to avoid backing them into corners.
> 
> I'm finding myself amused at the thought that this is the real reason why, for the first three or four seasons, none of the Losties ever told each other anything.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hunter Green said:


> I'm finding myself amused at the thought that this is the real reason why, for the first three or four seasons, none of the Losties ever told each other anything.


DUDE!

You've figured it all out. They aren't a--holes after all!

Of course, that would depend on all of them knowing the "rules". 

Greg


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Hunter Green said:


> In this game, then, the key currency is knowledge: the more you know for sure, the less you can do. Time agents tend to avoid telling each other anything they don't have to know, to avoid backing them into corners.


Well, technically it wouldn't matter whether they know it or not; if they didn't know that something happened, then they just wouldn't know why whatever they tried wouldn't work. So the game is kind of cheating, in that any number of things could have happened, depending on what the player does. Whereas in "reality," what happened happened and the player's action could only work if that is the precise and only thing that happened. In which case, the more knowledge the better; one's actions are no less prescribed, but at least one has a better understanding of the exact prescription.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Hunter Green said:


> So if you just saw one of your friends get shot, you can't travel back in time to prevent him getting shot. He already was shot, that's done. However, you can travel back in time to make sure that just around the corner there's some EMTs who are about to jump out. Or you can travel back in time to arrange that it wasn't really him that got shot, but a dummy rigged with fake blood-packs, etc. These things are only possible as long as you don't already _know_ something that contradicts them: for instance, you can't use the dummy approach if your friend was just talking, unless you can get the dummy to talk, too.


Exactly like Back to the Future! Marty couldn't get back to the mall in time to stop Doc from being shot because he was already shot! It was a known fact to him. Essentially, that HAD to happen to cause Marty to freak out, get in the Delorian and go back to 1955.

However, he didn't know that Doc would be wearing a bullet proof vest, so it didn't really change anything for Marty.

It all makes sense now.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, technically it wouldn't matter whether they know it or not; if they didn't know that something happened, then they just wouldn't know why whatever they tried wouldn't work. So the game is kind of cheating, in that any number of things could have happened, depending on what the player does. Whereas in "reality," what happened happened and the player's action could only work if that is the precise and only thing that happened. In which case, the more knowledge the better; one's actions are no less prescribed, but at least one has a better understanding of the exact prescription.


Exactly. If the past cannot be changed, and time travel is possible, then that means all events are fixed, and our lives are predestined to go down a certain path.

Consider a person, Person A, living in 1900. Person A makes various decisions in his life that ultimately lead up to an event, Event 1, happening in 1950. Now, suppose there is another person, Person B, who learns about this event in the year 2000. It doesn't matter how much this person learns about it, the event already happened in a particular way in the past, and no matter what he does or learns about it, nothing will change.

The question is, can we define a common point where everyone could agree that Event 1 became fixed? The answer is yes. From everyone's perspective, everything leading up to Event 1 happened first, and everything following from Event 1 happened later.

But suppose that Person B travels back in time to 1850, and does something which we'll call Event 2. Person A then learns about Event 2 in 1900. Again, no matter what Person A does or learns about Event 2, he can't change anything because it happened in his past.

Now the question is, at what point did Event 2 become fixed? Well, we could say it became fixed in 1850 when the event occurred. But for Person B living in the year 2000 before time-traveling, those events haven't been experienced yet. In a sense, those events are both in his past and future. And even for Person A, who didn't time travel at all, the events after Person B's arrival in 1850 are in his past, but the events leading up to Person B's time travel are in the future.

So some of Person A's past is in Person B's future, and some of Person B's past is in A's future. Now there can no longer be a common point that is in everybody's past where everyone could agree that an event became fixed. Thus, if an event is fixed, the only possible explanation is that it never became fixed at any point in time, but was fixed to begin with.

But if all events are fixed, then we have no free will. And we are prevented from doing anything else not by any external force, but because we have no ability to do otherwise.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, technically it wouldn't matter whether they know it or not;... So the game is kind of cheating...


It certainly doesn't work as a theory of determinism, but it's entirely usable in a roleplaying game and far more internally consistent than most ways people handle time travel. (You think it's bad when scriptwriters use it sloppily, wait until you see a group of players who can time travel at will finding ingenious ways to beat every challenge. Why ever lose a fight if you can just go back and bring more troops this time?)

Anyway, it almost makes sense _except_ the part about agents not telling each other things. Whether _you_ know something happened or not doesn't really matter, if I know. That part is explained as being more of a "superstition" than a reality of temporal physics. However, it happens to be a convenient one for the players. If you couldn't change anything that _anyone anywhere_ knew, time travel becomes pretty unuseful. So the idea that you can't change what anyone in the game knows is the same as saying you can't change anything the fictional audience would know, if they were watching the game as a movie. It protects narrative, though perhaps not physics!

Which is why it's very like the Faraday Postulate on Lost. Serves the same purpose, too.



unicorngoddess said:


> Exactly like Back to the Future!


I sure hope you're kidding...


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Hunter Green said:


> So the idea that you can't change what anyone in the game knows is the same as saying you can't change anything the fictional audience would know, if they were watching the game as a movie. It protects narrative, though perhaps not physics!


It only protects the narrative to a limited degree, though. As a viewer, we have seen only a small percentage of what goes on in each character's lives. Scenes are cut often in a way that would allow writers to insert stuff before and after to change the meaning of a lot of scenes.

While a retcon can be done very cleverly, if you do it too often, viewers will lose interest because no matter what they see, the scene could completely change meaning a week later. That is why the Lost writers have to tread carefully when doing such things lest they lose the faith of their audience.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> Exactly like Back to the Future!





Hunter Green said:


> Why ever lose a fight if you can just go back and bring more troops this time?)


Which is exactly what I said while watching BttF II the first time. Marty asks Doc, "What if we don't succeed?" and Doc responds, "We MUST succeed." Why? Go back and do it again differently until you succeed, man!



TAsunder said:


> It only protects the narrative to a limited degree, though. As a viewer, we have seen only a small percentage of what goes on in each character's lives. Scenes are cut often in a way that would allow writers to insert stuff before and after to change the meaning of a lot of scenes.
> 
> While a retcon can be done very cleverly, if you do it too often, viewers will lose interest because no matter what they see, the scene could completely change meaning a week later. That is why the Lost writers have to tread carefully when doing such things lest they lose the faith of their audience.


You mean like, when adding Nikki & Paolo into scenes?

Greg


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

gchance said:


> You mean like, when adding Nikki & Paolo into scenes?
> 
> Greg


C'mon, anyone complaining about Nikki & Paolo after seeing the Expose episode isn't letting themself enjoy the joke. They were making fun of how other shows that don't plan things out just randomly throw people in that we're supposed to know (like Cousin Oliver on the Brady Bunch). They then proceeded to use the joke to give us info we'd never have had otherwise (seeing Ben & Juliette in the ? hatch, etc), and finished it off by killing them off in an immensely satisfying way, which wouldn't have been satisfying at all if their introduction hadn't been so other-show-ish. The whole Nikki & Paolo thing was %$#@ing brilliant.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Oh, I didn't think shoving Nikki & Paolo into those previous episodes wasn't brilliant, in fact I was one of the few who enjoyed it when it aired. I was more or less making a joke. 

Greg


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Plus, if the theory that Locke's "death" is really just an illusion ala the spider bites, then the Expose episode actually wound up containing a crucial setup.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

BitbyBlit said:


> Exactly. If the past cannot be changed, and time travel is possible, then that means all events are fixed, and our lives are predestined to go down a certain path.
> 
> But if all events are fixed, then we have no free will. And we are prevented from doing anything else not by any external force, but because we have no ability to do otherwise.


Not following your conclusion here. We have free will the first time we are presented with a choice--we just don't have free will to go back and change things that have already been fixed. Under these "rules," a time traveler is just an observer. He knows how part of eternity will unfold, so to maintain any stability, he must not be able to change it. The linear time line being set in stone actually protects your free will by not letting others move around and take away your original choices.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

gchance said:


> Oh, I didn't think shoving Nikki & Paolo into those previous episodes wasn't brilliant, in fact I was one of the few who enjoyed it when it aired. I was more or less making a joke.
> 
> Greg


Ok good.  I just had someone at a party the other night bemoan Nikki & Paolo and I had to defend it.

Plus, we get to see Billy Dee Williams!


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Hunter Green said:


> One of the many time-travel roleplaying games I've played over the years used this same approach. Anything you already knew happened, *happened*. You couldn't go back in time to change it. However, you could go back and change what those events _actually meant_.
> 
> So if you just saw one of your friends get shot, you can't travel back in time to prevent him getting shot. He already was shot, that's done. However, you can travel back in time to make sure that just around the corner there's some EMTs who are about to jump out. Or you can travel back in time to arrange that it wasn't really him that got shot, but a dummy rigged with fake blood-packs, etc. These things are only possible as long as you don't already _know_ something that contradicts them: for instance, you can't use the dummy approach if your friend was just talking, unless you can get the dummy to talk, too.
> 
> ...


http://www.lostisagame.com/


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

cherry ghost said:


> http://www.lostisagame.com/


I don't buy it, haven't bought it since they came up with that theory. Plus that's not what Hunter is trying to say. 

Greg


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

gchance said:


> I don't buy it,
> Greg


Me either, but thought he might like to take a look if he hadn't seen it already.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

stellie93 said:


> Not following your conclusion here. We have free will the first time we are presented with a choice--we just don't have free will to go back and change things that have already been fixed. Under these "rules," a time traveler is just an observer. He knows how part of eternity will unfold, so to maintain any stability, he must not be able to change it. The linear time line being set in stone actually protects your free will by not letting others move around and take away your original choices.


How do you define the "first time" you are presented with a choice? Without time travel, everyone affected by your choice (directly or indirectly) is affected after you make the choice, and thus your choice happens first.

But with time travel, some that are affected by your choice could end up traveling to before you made that choice. Thus, some effects of your choice will have already happened by the time you make it. But if the effects of your choice have already happened, then you can't choose anything that results in different effects without violating the principle that events cannot be changed. Therefore, your choice is predetermined.


----------

