1978: "Congressional Testimony"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3274
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Apr 09, 2018 3:11 pm UTC

Image
Title text: James Cameron's Terminator 3 was the REALLY prophetic one. That's why Skynet sent a robot back to the 1990s to prevent him from ever making it, ultimately handing the franchise over to other directors.


All temporal incongruities in the Terminator films can be explained away by the future-selves (human and cyborg) being deliberately misinformed about the past, and their own history that is the future of the past. Fake News on the intertubes!

jozwa
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:16 pm UTC
Location: Finland

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby jozwa » Mon Apr 09, 2018 4:09 pm UTC

The title text is really mandela-effect-esque

User avatar
Reka
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:21 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Reka » Mon Apr 09, 2018 5:31 pm UTC

I don't get it, and explainxkcd isn't being helpful. :(

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1883
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby cellocgw » Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:58 pm UTC

Reka wrote:I don't get it, and explainxkcd isn't being helpful. :(


Skynet has blocked explainxkcd from explaining anything to do with Skynet.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4584
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Pfhorrest » Mon Apr 09, 2018 7:51 pm UTC

If what you're not getting is the title text:

In our timeline, there was no Terminator 3 by James Cameron. There was a Terminator 3, but it was directed by Jonathan Mastow. The title text is insinuating that in the original timeline, James Cameron did direct Terminator 3, but it was so prophetic (and therefore advantageous to humanity) that Skynet in the future of that timeline sent back machines to make sure that Cameron never made that movie, but instead let Mastow (and later others) take over the franchise, resulting in the timeline we're in now.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby somitomi » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:06 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:If what you're not getting is the title text:

In our timeline, there was no Terminator 3 by James Cameron. There was a Terminator 3, but it was directed by Jonathan Mastow. The title text is insinuating that in the original timeline, James Cameron did direct Terminator 3, but it was so prophetic (and therefore advantageous to humanity) that Skynet in the future of that timeline sent back machines to make sure that Cameron never made that movie, but instead let Mastow (and later others) take over the franchise, resulting in the timeline we're in now.

In which there's no Terminator 3 by James Cameron, therefore Skynet doesn't send anyone back to warn us that fiction should really think twice before introducing time travel.
—◯-◯

DanD
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 12:42 am UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby DanD » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:45 pm UTC

somitomi wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:If what you're not getting is the title text:

In our timeline, there was no Terminator 3 by James Cameron. There was a Terminator 3, but it was directed by Jonathan Mastow. The title text is insinuating that in the original timeline, James Cameron did direct Terminator 3, but it was so prophetic (and therefore advantageous to humanity) that Skynet in the future of that timeline sent back machines to make sure that Cameron never made that movie, but instead let Mastow (and later others) take over the franchise, resulting in the timeline we're in now.

In which there's no Terminator 3 by James Cameron, therefore Skynet doesn't send anyone back to warn us that fiction should really think twice before introducing time travel.


Ah, but you're assuming that cause and effect is more important than chronological primacy. If you reverse that assumption, it is sufficient that a the machines appeared in our timeline, and made the change. Whether or not the ficton they come from exists is irrelevant. There are many ways to make the math perfectly accepting of this, although many of them involve the "many worlds" interpretation, wherein the new timeline is not an alteration of the old timeline, but an alteration of a (to that point identical) timeline.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3274
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:59 pm UTC

In order to maintain the No-Cameron reality, the No-Cameron future Skynet sends back a terminator to force the No-Cameron reality. It can't not do it, as it always had already will-have-done-it and created the chronology in which it was always going to do so in order to have-done-it-already.

User avatar
Heimhenge
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:35 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Heimhenge » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:16 pm UTC

Soupspoon wrote:In order to maintain the No-Cameron reality, the No-Cameron future Skynet sends back a terminator to force the No-Cameron reality. It can't not do it, as it always had already will-have-done-it and created the chronology in which it was always going to do so in order to have-done-it-already.


I think that actually made sense, but I challenge anyone to try diagramming that second sentence. Or for that matter, identify the tense of each verb. :)

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby moody7277 » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:35 pm UTC

Soupspoon wrote:In order to maintain the No-Cameron reality, the No-Cameron future Skynet sends back a terminator to force the No-Cameron reality. It can't not do it, as it always had already will-have-done-it and created the chronology in which it was always going to do so in order to have-done-it-already.


I see you got an A in Professor Streetmentioner's course.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.

jackal
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:16 am UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby jackal » Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:43 am UTC

Heimhenge wrote:
Soupspoon wrote:In order to maintain the No-Cameron reality, the No-Cameron future Skynet sends back a terminator to force the No-Cameron reality. It can't not do it, as it always had already will-have-done-it and created the chronology in which it was always going to do so in order to have-done-it-already.


I think that actually made sense, but I challenge anyone to try diagramming that second sentence. Or for that matter, identify the tense of each verb. :)

In the future past, that progressive sentence would have presently been perfect.

Mikeski
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Mikeski » Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:33 am UTC

I am about to receive a message from Zog, the transdimensional explorer. He will have said, "You humans and your one-dimensional time. It is so easy to keep track of things then."

herbstschweigen
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:03 am UTC
Location: Arrival City

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby herbstschweigen » Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:59 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote: ... "You humans and your one-dimensional time. ..."


I am developer for a software that uses two-dimensional time. Item validity time is one dimension and update timestamps the other. Add to that user permissions, status workflows, and links between data entities and you have real fun determining what data is finally displayed to the user.

And one a more general note, of course this applies: https://www.h2g2.com/entry/A1126595
It's cooler up here.

syrrim
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:28 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby syrrim » Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:34 pm UTC

DanD wrote:
somitomi wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:If what you're not getting is the title text:

In our timeline, there was no Terminator 3 by James Cameron. There was a Terminator 3, but it was directed by Jonathan Mastow. The title text is insinuating that in the original timeline, James Cameron did direct Terminator 3, but it was so prophetic (and therefore advantageous to humanity) that Skynet in the future of that timeline sent back machines to make sure that Cameron never made that movie, but instead let Mastow (and later others) take over the franchise, resulting in the timeline we're in now.

In which there's no Terminator 3 by James Cameron, therefore Skynet doesn't send anyone back to warn us that fiction should really think twice before introducing time travel.


Ah, but you're assuming that cause and effect is more important than chronological primacy. If you reverse that assumption, it is sufficient that a the machines appeared in our timeline, and made the change. Whether or not the ficton they come from exists is irrelevant. There are many ways to make the math perfectly accepting of this, although many of them involve the "many worlds" interpretation, wherein the new timeline is not an alteration of the old timeline, but an alteration of a (to that point identical) timeline.


But under the many worlds model (and I assume any such model) there is no point in sending someone back to the past, because it is impossible to change the future for your timeline. You can create a new timeline in which things have changed, but your timeline remains fixed.

Leovan
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:31 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Leovan » Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:58 am UTC

Yeah, the only ones that would profit would be the people living in the new timeline and the people who went back in time to change it. The ones who don't go back only have the advantage of the hope that there is a timeline out there where things were different, thanks to their sending someone back.
If you did want to send someone else to change the timeline then move to that one, you'd have to find a way to move sideways in time as opposed to just forward/back. Of course if you believe in infinite timelines, you could skip sending someone back and simply move to a timeline where you got the result you wanted, without having to worry about how that result was achieved. You don't care if Hitler got killed in WWI, died of the measles as a kid or if another timeline that hasn't invented sideways time travel sent someone back to off him, as long as the result is the same. Navigating in infinite timelines is a whole other problem though...

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3274
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:03 pm UTC

Likely something like the "infinite infinities of one of the waves of Hilbertian guests linked by one single infinite diagonal back-n-forth", except across further dimensions, one dimension each for every divergence opportunity per instance. Then you 'just' need to find the number of steps across the single linear 'diagonality' that gives you the alternate onward path you desire (a lot easier than finding the (nth-root-of-infinity?)-over-infinity displacement along the diagonalisation that actually lands you back on your own precise current timeline but in your own past or future.

(Actually, more complicated than that, if it's a binary branching decision-tree structure, but still a single path that ultimately visits all of the infinite nodes, with a finite step-difference betwixt any two nodes (well, there's always more nodes, countably infinite, 'above' the highest indexing of the nodes you choose, and the lower one is never before the origin point, so take that makes it practically finite) and a similar non-likelihood that a number of definite steps in either direction will land only upon a differing branch (past or future, and passing many co-presents before you even get that), which might account for temporal preservation against most trips around the structure, and yet still alow a chance self-reinforcing pattern (either single-loopback, or a set of complimentary loop-backs) already factored into the chronodendrology of timeless existence itself. Right?)

Leovan
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:31 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Leovan » Thu Apr 12, 2018 2:48 pm UTC

It gets even better. If time is like a physical dimension, then moving yourself will, like moving a square that is part of a cube, move infinite other yous in the same direction. Every you will be torn across timelines until the one that's in control arrives at his destination, leaving half of the yous in a worse timeline and the other half in a better. But because there are infinite timelines with infinitely small deviations, there will be infinite yous in control, all trying to arrive at the same (best, by whatever metric you set) timeline.

User avatar
GlassHouses
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:41 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby GlassHouses » Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:15 pm UTC

herbstschweigen wrote:
Mikeski wrote: ... "You humans and your one-dimensional time. ..."

I am developer for a software that uses two-dimensional time.

You mean git?

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5544
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony regarding Best Terminator"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Apr 13, 2018 2:53 am UTC

I'm surprised we lasted this long discussing Terminator and No-Cameron reality without anyone signing their post "-Summer Glau".
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

Mikeski
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony regarding Best Terminator"

Postby Mikeski » Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:19 am UTC

Eternal Density wrote:I'm surprised we lasted this long discussing Terminator and No-Cameron reality without anyone signing their post "-Summer Glau".

We know she doesn't have time to post here. She's busy beating up everyone.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby rmsgrey » Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:52 pm UTC

Leovan wrote:It gets even better. If time is like a physical dimension, then moving yourself will, like moving a square that is part of a cube, move infinite other yous in the same direction. Every you will be torn across timelines until the one that's in control arrives at his destination, leaving half of the yous in a worse timeline and the other half in a better. But because there are infinite timelines with infinitely small deviations, there will be infinite yous in control, all trying to arrive at the same (best, by whatever metric you set) timeline.


How far is parallel you still you? Are you trapped in the sheaf of universes where your parents had baby you, or can you (or whichever you is on the end) reach a universe where there never was a you?

Leovan
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:31 pm UTC

Re: 1978: "Congressional Testimony"

Postby Leovan » Sat Apr 14, 2018 3:21 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:
Leovan wrote:It gets even better. If time is like a physical dimension, then moving yourself will, like moving a square that is part of a cube, move infinite other yous in the same direction. Every you will be torn across timelines until the one that's in control arrives at his destination, leaving half of the yous in a worse timeline and the other half in a better. But because there are infinite timelines with infinitely small deviations, there will be infinite yous in control, all trying to arrive at the same (best, by whatever metric you set) timeline.


How far is parallel you still you? Are you trapped in the sheaf of universes where your parents had baby you, or can you (or whichever you is on the end) reach a universe where there never was a you?


The further over (sideways/up) you move the further reality will have diverged. First you get to the reality where you had pancakes this morning, then you get to the one where you were born a day earlier, then you get to the one where you are a different gender, then at some point your parents never had a baby and then you get to where your grandfather was shot in WWII before he ever met your grandmother. Not all realities have a you, just like the cube ends at some point. Or sphere if you prefer, since the two dimensional objects that are part of you diverge slightly the more you move from the center.
I figure you can get there, but you'd probably drag all the others around the room with you. Unless you somehow cut yourself from the center of the sphere, in which case maybe it falls apart with a 2D cut in the center? But then again the nearby yous are also cutting themselves out. will you all end up in the same place?


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests