130 replies to this topic

[mohammedali]

Fyxe, I wasn't sure which post of yours to respond to, so I decided to make a post about why your theory doesn't work, rather than responding.

Here is what would happen in your theory.
From the game we know this.
Child Link(1) removes MS (POINT A).
In doing so he(1) is trapped for 7 years (PERIOD B) i.e. PERIOD B follows straight after POINT A.
He(1) awakes as an Adult (POINT C). i.e. POINT C follows straight after PERIOD B.
He(1) goes to and fro from just after POINT A and just after POINT C.
He(1) then beats Ganon sometime after POINT C.
He(1) is sent back to a point after POINT A, during PERIOD B (a time Link(2) was in the SR).
During this time, there exists Link(2) in the SR. We know this cannot be the same as Link(1) as the Link(2) in the SR will eventually enter POINT B and beat Ganon, whilst the Link(1) has already beaten Ganon, and has left Hyrule (for Termina).
Link(2) who was in the SR whilst Link(1) was in Termina, awakens at POINT C.
He(2) travels to and fro between time untill he beats Gan sometime after POINT C.
He(2) is sent back to a point after POINT A, during PERIOD B (a time Link(3) was in the SR). We know this cannot be the same as Link(2) or Link(1) as the Link(3) in the SR will eventually enter POINT B and beat Ganon, whilst Link(2) and Link(1) have already beaten Ganon, and left Hyrule (for Termina or somewhere else).
This pattern will continue forever forsure. There is no doubt about that. This is why the theory cannot work.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

I spot the *clear* mistake in that straight away.

Child Link(1) removes MS (POINT A).  
In doing so he(1) is trapped for 7 years (PERIOD B) i.e. PERIOD B follows straight after POINT A.

He(1) is sent back to a point after POINT A, during PERIOD B (a time Link(2) was in the SR).

Who is Link(2) and where did he come from? Who IS Link(2), in your explaination?

That's right, he's Link(1). Yes, he's still Link(1).

Let me ask you, if you mohammedali(1) look back at old posts by the user 'mohammedali', are you looking at posts by mohammedali(1), or has mohammedali(2) somehow sprung out of existence?

My theory does work. It's time travel. Your problem with it seems to be an issue with the very nature of time travel itself, and I can't help you with that.

[mohammedali]

Who is Link(2) and where did he come from?  Who IS Link(2), in your explaination?

That's right, he's Link(1).  Yes, he's still Link(1).

Let me ask you, if you mohammedali(1) look back at old posts by the user 'mohammedali', are you looking at posts by mohammedali(1), or has mohammedali(2) somehow sprung out of existence?

My theory does work.  It's time travel.  Your problem with it seems to be an issue with the very nature of time travel itself, and I can't help you with that.

No it doesn't. Let me make it even more clear why the above explination I made is a correct annalysis of your theory.

Lets say I am in school (i.e. the SR) from 10:00 to 17:00 (i.e. 7 hours). After school, I go back in time to sometime after 10:00, say 12:00. However, instead of being in school, I go to see my friend, Majora. HOWEVER, there is still another 'me' who was in school at 12:00. This person doesn't just because I came back. This is one of the fundamentals of timetravel. You can go back to the past and 'meet yourself'.
Now let's assume I decide to sleepover at Majora's house. The other 'me' that was in school whilst I was with Majora then finishes school at 17:00. He then goes back in time to 12:00. See the problem here? It's unavoidable. I'm really sorry but your theory doesn't work, I promise you.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

That other you is still you. I honestly don't know why my theory doesn't work. I don't even understand your objection. There are two of you for a little while. Then your past self goes back in time. So what?

[mohammedali]

That other you is still you.  I honestly don't know why my theory doesn't work.  I don't even understand your objection.  There are two of you for a little while.  Then your past self goes back in time.  So what?

Because at 12:00, there will be more and more 'mes' coming back in time. They will also stay there. Anyone who has played games like "Day of the Tenticle" will see how some timetravellers use this to have multiple versions of themselves all at the same place. This is an unavoidable aspect of timetravel that always happens. It can't be avoided. If you send yourself back in time to a time where you already existed, there will be one more of you on the planet than before. If you keep doing this without fail, there will be an infinite loop created and you will forever near an infinite number of duplicates of yourself at that time.

Mohammed Ali

[Billy Goat]

Now that it's put that way, it does seem like it would repeat itself...

That answers one thing, but how does Ganon even enter the sacred realm if the Link from MM seals the entrance? Unless he doesn't... But if he did, then the Link from the 'Limbo' would not be able to come out, would he?

Fyxe, I decided to follow you theory, but could you answer this for me?

right, sorry for butting in again...

[Fyxe]

Because at 12:00, there will be more and more 'mes' coming back in time. They will also stay there. Anyone who has played games like "Day of the Tenticle" will see how some timetravellers use this to have multiple versions of themselves all at the same place. This is an unavoidable aspect of timetravel that always happens. It can't be avoided. If you send yourself back in time to a time where you already existed, there will be one more of you on the planet than before. If you keep doing this without fail, there will be an infinite loop created and you will forever near an infinite number of duplicates of yourself at that time.

Mohammed Ali

Ah, I finally see your point. However, that's not the case.

It WOULD be the case if this happened...

Link(1) goes back in time, at the same time as his past self is about, Link(2). Link(1) later goes back in time again at the same time as Link(2) and his own past self, Link(3), repeat ad infinum.

But this doesn't happen, instead...

Link(1) goes back in time, at the same time as his past self is about, Link(2). Link(2) (note, not Link(1)) then goes back in time. But, of course Link(2) is Link(1)'s past self (from Link's perspective). Therefore, Link(2) becomes Link(1). It's physically impossible for Link(2) to appear in the same place as Link(1) without BEING Link(1).

Oh, and germanlink, he doesn't seal the entrance. He just puts the Master Sword back and closes the Door of Time. But this wouldn't stop Ganon armed with the Triforce of Power. Ganon needs to be sealed by the Seven Sages, so the Master Sword and the Door of Time would not hold him, he'd just open it, which is why it is open when the Link in limbo wakes up.

[Billy Goat]

I understand it ... Fyxe, are you ignoring me?

[mohammedali]

Ah, I finally see your point.  However, that's not the case.

It WOULD be the case if this happened...

Link(1) goes back in time, at the same time as his past self is about, Link(2).  Link(1) later goes back in time again at the same time as Link(2) and his own past self, Link(3), repeat ad infinum.

But this doesn't happen, instead...

Link(1) goes back in time, at the same time as his past self is about, Link(2).  Link(2) (note, not Link(1)) then goes back in time.  But, of course Link(2) is Link(1)'s past self (from Link's perspective).  Therefore, Link(2) becomes Link(1).  It's physically impossible for Link(2) to appear in the same place as Link(1) without BEING Link(1).

I see where you're comming from. Thing is, if the first Link that beat Ganon does so in different circumstance to the second Link that beat Ganon. This is because the second Link who beat Ganon also had the first Link who beat running around somewhere. Even if this Link didn't interfere directly, there will be some reprucussions. One we know of is that Zelda is back in the castle. This fact alone would make Link1 and Link2 out of sinc for at least a few seconds. Hence there would be another Link created when Link2 warps back. It can then be argued (by chaous theory if nothing else) that as inevitably something will be slightly different each time, a new Link will be formed each time.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

No, I edited my post in response to your question, do you see?

mohammedali, that's just my point. The FIRST Link who beat Ganon *also* had himself running around somewhere else in the world. As we see by the Song of Storms sequence and other events, all the actions Link has taken when he goes back in time have already happened when Link first awakens.

This is how time travel appears to work in OoT.

[mohammedali]

No, I edited my post in response to your question, do you see?

I take it that was to germanlink.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

Yes. And now now I did the same for your post.

By the way, that's not chaos theory. Chaos theory is just unpredictability, not indeterminability. I think we should leave heavy science out of this, anyway. O.o''

[mohammedali]

mohammedali, that's just my point.  The FIRST Link who beat Ganon *also* had himself running around somewhere else in the world.  As we see by the Song of Storms sequence and other events, all the actions Link has taken when he goes back in time have already happened when Link first awakens.

This is how time travel appears to work in OoT.

That still doesn't work, as someone would have to have been before that Link, and then someone before that. An infinite number of Link's backwards is impossible, as there had to be SOME Link that was the first to timetravel, and even if there was an infinite number of previous Links this still wouldn't explain where the song came from.
Hence, the Song of Storms doesn't support your theory. It remains a paradox of somesort. Either that, or someone other than Link taught the Song of Storms to the guy (much more likely).
Another reason why the Link we are playing with could not have been the second version is because we see this Link from before the timetravel being happens, and we know from timetravel in a game that even if something will eventually happen, Link still has to do it for it to become true. e.g. even thouigh Link will find the Lens of Truth in the past, he doesn't get it in the future until we actually see his past find the Lens. These are 2 reasons why your theory still doesn't work.
Also, don't bother making a new post, only to tell me you answered my current post in your last post. It's really annoying and unneccesarry.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

That's because I edited my post and both you and germanlink missed the edits. And I was answer your question about whether I was addressing germanlink or not. Lay off me...

Anyway, it may be a paradox but that's time travel for you. There's nothing more I can say about it than that. That's just how time travel works. There doesn't need to be a first. Events happen.

[Crazy Penguin]

You're all putting way much more thought into this than Nintendo ever did.

[Hero of Slime]

You're all putting way much more thought into this than Nintendo ever did.

I agree. The end result of OoT does not matter because we know it is before TWW. The ending of OoT does not effect the timeline.

[mohammedali]

That's because I edited my post and both you and germanlink missed the edits.  And I was answer your question about whether I was addressing germanlink or not.  Lay off me...

Wow Fyxe. I make one comment on your replys and you get all touchy, but when I see the things you write to other people, you say a whole lot worse. Sure I'll 'lay off you'.

Anyway, it may be a paradox but that's time travel for you.  There's nothing more I can say about it than that.  That's just how time travel works.  There doesn't need to be a first.  Events happen.

That's the ultimate cop out, there has to be a first as otherwise it never happens. The way you explained it is not how timetravel works. Come up with a new theory if you have to, but don't stick to the same old thing for the sake of not being wrong. You're theory doesn't work, just get over it already.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

Touchy?

You know what, you're an ass.

Yes, NOW I'm being touchy, but I think I have good reason to. My theory does work, you just can't get your one-dimensional brain around it.

[mohammedali]

Touchy?

You know what, you're an ass.

Yes, NOW I'm being touchy, but I think I have good reason to.  My theory does work, you just can't get your one-dimensional brain around it.

Silence Fool. Don't think you can say shit to other people and not get anything back. I call you touchy and you call me an ass, just shows how much of an immature little girl you really are. You need to grow up Fyxe, try to start acting your age.

As for your theory, I've just explained why it doesn't work, and your answer was "that's just how time travel works". Well here's news for you, that's not a very convincing arguement even for my 'one-dimentional brain'. I'll let the insults go this time, but next time your theory sucks and you want to lash out, you can be sure I'll resond in kind.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

I was more bothered by your stupid 'get over it already' comment, although you had no reason to call me touchy. And I don't say shit to people unless they throw it first.

You need to drop the arrogant act, and start realising that maybe, just maybe, you can be WRONG. That's what bothers me. Your bleedin' ego.

Seriously, you're looking at time travel from the perspective that time works as a straight line. I can't persuade you to think otherwise if you're not willing to.

[mohammedali]

I was more bothered by your stupid 'get over it already' comment, although you had no reason to call me touchy.  And I don't say shit to people unless they throw it first.

Firstly, you were being touchy, and secondly, you say plenty of shit to people for no good reason. But quite frankly, that's all irrelevent. I didn't say anything that harsh to you for you to be calling me an ass. That was just bang out of order. However, I've got better things to do than to continue this topic on 'how I hurt your feelings'. I'm not bothered with what you said, providing you don't say something like that again, and you shouldn't get so bothered either. Don;t take yourself so seriously and we can avoid eposodes like this all together.

You need to drop the arrogant act, and start realising that maybe, just maybe, you can be WRONG.  That's what bothers me.  Your bleedin' ego.

lol. You need to be taking your own advice there Fyxe. Not only are you arrogant, but it's you who can't bare the thought of your theory being wrong. See, I'm questioning your theory so there's nothing for me to be wrong about, other than perhaps saying that as it stands your theory doesn't make sence. And as it stands you're theory *doesn't* make sence. You on the other hand ARE refusing to believe you could be wrong despite all the flaws I've shown you in what you have said.

Seriously, you're looking at time travel from the perspective that time works as a straight line.  I can't persuade you to think otherwise if you're not willing to.

Im being very open minded about all the possibilities, but the fact is that what you are saying doesn't work. Some of the points your theory depends on are shown to be inconsistant from the way the game works. Other things don't work for logisical reasons. I'm not trying to be nasty, but the fact is that it simply doesn't work.

Mohammed Ali

[FDL]

Yeaaahhh, um, I agree with Fyxe that OoT's time travel works that way. The Song of Storms is sure proof of this. Even when you don't yet play the SoS in front of Guru Guru the well is already dried up and he remembers Link. It wasn't that another person did it and the man just thought it was Link. It was that it happened later in time from when Link first went forward in time 7 years. Anyway, mohammedali, you're only using the split timeline because you want to believe ALTTP is OoT's direct sequel. It's not likely that it is anymore. You get over it.

[mohammedali]

Yeaaahhh, um, I agree with Fyxe that OoT's time travel works that way. The Song of Storms is sure proof of this. Even when you don't yet play the SoS in front of Guru Guru the well is already dried up and he remembers Link. It wasn't that another person did it and the man just thought it was Link. It was that it happened later in time from when Link first went forward in time 7 years. Anyway, mohammedali, you're only using the split timeline because you want to believe ALTTP is OoT's direct sequel. It's not likely that it is anymore. You get over it.

Then everything that Link has to do in the future that he will do as a kid should also be done but it's not. We know Link will get the Lens of Truth as a kid, but only when he actually does get the Lens does the Adult Link get to use it. OoTs time travel doesn't work that way on this basis alone. The Song of Storms is an isolated insident that can be explained by the Song of Storms being taught by someone else. You can't just ignore that everything other than the SoS requires Link to do it as a child before any effect in the Adult World. Even if we agree that Link WAS the one that first played the song, it's like 1 example against about a hundred that say you have to do it before the Adult world is changed.
And Fierce, I use the split timeline for more than just one reason. Not only do I believe that the other games fit better with a split, but I truely believe OoT implies it happened. I have nothing to get over as no one can disprove that aLttP is a sequal to OoT.

Mohammed Ali

[Fyxe]

Then everything that Link has to do in the future that he will do as a kid should also be done but it's not. We know Link will get the Lens of Truth as a kid, but only when he actually does get the Lens does the Adult Link get to use it.

That's because it's time travel. You can't say time travel works one way in one instance and another way in another instance.

Lets say you get put in limbo for seven years yourself. When you wake, you'll have all the possessions you had when you were first put in limbo, correct?

Buts lets say you later use a magical sword or a time machine or something and go back in time. You pick up something, and take it back to the future.

Now, while when you first woke up from limbo that item no longer existed in the world, you now have it in the future.

Link would NOT have the item when he first wakes up, because he did not take it with him when he put himself in limbo, only when he travelled back and forth through time.

The only exception to these things in OoT are gameplay elements like chests and the Magic Beans, not storyline events like the Song of Storms and Nabooru being kidnapped and brainwashed.

[Tri-Enforcer]

The only exception to these things in OoT are gameplay elements like chests and the Magic Beans, not storyline events like the Song of Storms and Nabooru being kidnapped and brainwashed.

So why are you making exceptions to things that help make your theory work? Looking at this would make me wanna say, the time travel element in OOT wasn't worked out very well and we'll just have to accept the creators inconsitencies, just like with the ones with the OOT and LTTP connection. Please don't take offense to this Fyxe, but I noticed something about you and many others. You accept certain inconsistent points, and disregard others all in an attempt to make the basic structure that you prefer, work.

[Fyxe]

I was merely disregarding gameplay elements.

I always look at everything from a game designers point of view. Storyline is sometimes compromised for good gameplay.

The reason chests aren't open when you're an adult is because the game doesn't know what chests you will open as a child. This is a distinctive gameplay element, unless you could create a game that could predict what you're going to do, it's impossible for it to occur any other way.

I believe we do have to accept a few inconsistencies. It's harsh to expect the creators to avoid absolutely every plot hole, or to change the effectiveness of a particular game for the sake of overall timeline.

For example, the reason why they often change the geography of Hyrule is because it would be dull if it was the same all the time. This is a distinctive gameplay element, and thus geography isn't a particularly good way of arguing about the overall timeline.

[MikePetersSucks]

there had to be SOME Link that was the first to timetravel

As in, the only Link? Anyway, it's called a self referencing loop. Time Travel doesn't have to make sense.

[Fyxe]

Here's an article in Wikipedia explaining *exactly* what I meant, the self-referencing loop that MPS just mentioned.

http://en.wikipedia....ination_paradox

Basically, yes, it's a paradox. That's what happens with time travel.

As you can see, it is common in fiction. And it also does not require a 'first'. It just doesn't. It wouldn't even work properly like that. Time isn't a straight line.

There's even an example of OoT on that site.

In a section of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, the adult Link enters a windmill where he meets a musician who says that seven years ago, a child came to the windmill and played a song, causing the windmill to go out of control (and opening a gameplay area). He tells the adult Link what the song is, after which the player then goes back in time and becomes child Link, who goes to the windmill and plays the song, causing the effects. No one knows where the song came from.

However, as you can see this effect is common in fiction and is never explained. It doesn't require an 'original' event to inspire the loop. Time travel is a fictional medium anyway, and makes about as much sense as magic, which Zelda is full of.

[Fatgoron]

Yeah, there really wouldn't be much point using time travel as part fo the plot if it didn't enable the creators to negate the effects and rules of causality.
Destiny is also a large theme in OoT, so it's no leap of the imagination to believe that something can happen solely because it must. Particularly in a world with Gods and magic.

The Legacy of Kain series hs a great example of a causal loop with no distinct beggining or end, where pretty much every event relies on the others before and after it. The creation of the Soul Reaver is dependent upon the events of the future, and those events are dependent upon the Soul Reaver's creation.

There's also an hypothetical example I read of once, where a hermaphrodite goes through several stage of their life travelling through time, and it turns out that they are both their own father and mother.

[FDL]

That's screwed up. How could you be your dad AND your mom?