>Terminator 1>Heavily implied Novikov self-consistency principle; future cannot be altered, and attempts to alter the future result in it occurring (Reese getting with Sarah Connor creates John Connor, the Terminator's hand allows SkyNet to reverse engineer)>Terminator 2>lol actually you can change the futureDoes Cameron not understand how time travel works, or did Gale Anne Hurd and William Wisher do the heavy lifting for the scripts and just weren't on the same page?
Wouldn't they have won if he never went back
>>217365039>dude can't change da futureJohn's dad changed. Timeline is called a timeline for a reason. Its not a time circleT2 > T1Ahnuld > Hobo pants
>>217366678>John's dad changed. Source?Oh, yeah, you got none. His dad was always Reese.
>>217365039We've been over this, the Terminator timeline shifts each time they send Reese back. There was an original timeline where Reese had never gone back in time and John had a different father.1st timeline - Skynet was created most likely around now. John is a prisoner in one of the work camps and leads a revolution and become hero of the resistance. Skynet develops time travel, sends a Terminator back, Kyle goes, ends up fathering John, the chip is discovered and accelerates the timeline.2nd timeline - Judgement Day now happens in 1997, John is now fathered by Kyle Reese, John knows of the future due to Kyle's information from the previous timeline, sends Kyle back.3rd timeline - Movie we see.
>>217367543>John is a prisoner in one of the work camps and leads a revolution and become hero of the resistance.In the first movie Reese says that Sarah had trained John in resistance. Why would she do that if his dad was someone else and Sarah didn't know the war was coming?
>>217365039They go back and forth on it. I don't even think Skynet knows exactly how it works or it would have won.
>>217367713John gets his training in the second timeline. In the original he was just a guy who fought back. No training, just willpower. Maybe he got lucky and managed to take down a Terminator and taught other people where the weak spot is.
>>217367543>We've been over this, the Terminator timeline shifts each time they send Reese back. There was an original timeline where Reese had never gone back in time and John had a different father.
>>217367186>i-it was always ReeceYou have no source for that gayness.If someone takes a dump in a rallys bathroom and someone time travels back in time and breaks the toilet it doesnt mean the toilet was broke originally
>>217367827You'd have to have an intelligence of 2 not to figure it out on your own.
>>217365039Correct. Terminator 1 only has a single immutable timeline (its like 12 monkeys and interstellar). The sequels aren't canon.
>>217367817So it's just your headcanon then? Because nothing indicates there was ever a timeline where John didn't get training.>>217367859Why would John have been trained and prepared for the war if Reese wasn't his father?
>>217367884The idea of stopping Judgement Day was already a concept in Cameron's head in the first film.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIhwu--9AoICameron cut this scene for other reasons and was then able to use the idea presented in the scene of Sarah becoming pro-active and wanting to take down Cyberdyne and build the whole second film around it. T1 and T2 are a single story.
>>217367543Troll or retarded?: THE POST
>"in the first timeline..."^ How to spot a filtered brainlet
>>217365039>Terminator 2>lol actually you can change the futureAnd then the third movie happens and Judgment Day happens anyway.
>>217368048>Because nothing indicates there was ever a timeline where John didn't get trainingThere would have to be some kind of alpha or primary timeline that existed before all of it because a closed timeline causal loop cannot exist, it's a paradox, it has to be fed from an earlier iteration in order for it to exist.>Why would John have been trained and prepared for the war if Reese wasn't his father?John doesn't have to train and prepare for the war beforehand to become a leader of the resistance. He could have (and probably was) just an ordinary person who learned how to defeat Terminators while in a work camp, and then taught others and became a leader. You're making the assumption that John always has foreknowledge but that doesn't have to be the case for him to become a leader.
>>217365039Terminator was never supposed to be very hard sci-fi. It was a means to an end for a cool concept. >Robot infiltrator hunts down regular white chickThat was Cameron's original vision. And anyway, who cares? T2 is probably still the best action movie of all time. I couldn't give a single shit if not every tiny time travel plot point doesn't synch up, because I DON'T FUCKING CARE. Get a life.
>>217368196>There would have to be some kind of alpha or primary timeline that existed before all of it because a closed timeline causal loop cannot exist, it's a paradox, it has to be fed from an earlier iteration in order for it to exist.
>>217368071>Cameron cut this scene I believe you
Yes T2 threw out the time travel logic from 1 because Cameron knows most people don't care and just want Arnold back with a bigger budget
>>217368048>Why would John have been trained and prepared for the war if Reese wasn't his father?Because his mom freaked out over Ai like many Americans currently are and became a prepper?
>>217368196>a closed timeline causal loop cannot existSo you just don't understand Novikov's self-consistency principle, then?>You're making the assumption that John always has foreknowledge but that doesn't have to be the case for him to become a leader.I'm going off what the film literally tells us. 1 hour and 7 minutes in, Kyle Reese says Sarah Connor,>Taught her son to fight, organize, prepare, from when he was a kid. When you were in hiding before the war.1 hour and 41 minutes in, right at the end, Sarah says,>If you don't send Kyle, you can never be.Your idea of an unreferenced first timeline stems from your inability to understand the Novikov self-consistency principle. Travelers from the future will have always visited the past.
>>217368267>because Cameron knows most people don't care and just want Arnold back with a bigger budgetAnd he was right. Give me titanic 2 with Arnold fighting Billy Zane and ill go to the theater
>>217367543>Originally, Reese wasn't John's father>Originally, Judgement Day happened much later, when Sarah was an old lady who obviously couldn't have children...Soooooo... John Connor wasn't originally John Connor, but an entirely unrelated person coincidentally also called John Connor?Great theory. Really great. Primo. Top shelf.... Let's not even get into Reese coming back because he fell in love with the photograph of Sarah Connor taken at the end of the film
>>217367827>>217368102>>217368134>>217368237It's a really simple concept, and it's astounding that you people are too stupid to understand it. A causal loop is called a "bootstrap PARADOX" for a reason, because it cannot exist. At best you would have an iterative recursive loop.
>>217365039>John A grows up in a normal timeline>his best man goes back in time and fucks his mom>John B, a half-brother to John A, is born and becomes leader of the resistance insteadThat seems fairly straight forward.
>>2173684131 hour and 7 minutes in, Kyle Reese says Sarah Connor,>Taught her son to fight, organize, prepare, from when he was a kid. When you were in hiding before the war.1 hour and 41 minutes in, right at the end, Sarah says,>If you don't send Kyle, you can never be.There is no "normal timeline." John Connor was always described by Kyle Reese as having been trained by Sarah Connor before the war. Sarah Connor acknowledges that no Reese means no John.
>>217368390The Novikov self-consistency principle makes the bootstrap paradox moot.
>>217368269I understand the principle, but it simply doesn't apply. If it was just the first movie then sure, you could argue for it, but T2 removes the possibility which then shows that the timeline is not a closed loop. Kyle Reese explaining details about John are from HIS timeline experience. He would have no awareness of earlier iterations and therefore would not know to say anything different.
>>217368382>John Connor wasn't originally John Connor, but an entirely unrelated person coincidentally also called John Connor?Yes.
>>217368447Oh, so it's just bootstrap paradox. Man, it's been so long since I watched T1 that I forgot about that interaction. Thanks, anon.
>>217368196>There would have to be some kind of alpha or primary timeline that existed before all of it because a closed timeline causal loop cannot exist, it's a paradox, it has to be fed from an earlier iteration in order for it to exist.They're both Predestination Paradoxes, just different kinds. Either it's paradoxical because of:Infinite Regression (A was caused by B, which was caused by A, which was caused by B, which was caused by A, which was caused by... )Or because of:An Acausal Event (A was caused by B, nothing caused B. It just popped into existence in violation of all natural laws) Both Infinite Regression and Acausality are examples of the Predestination Paradox, you're just replacing one problematic form with another.
>>217366678>John's dad changed.The past doesn't magically change. Kyle Reese is always Connor's dad and if you fuck with that you create a time paradox.
>>217368478And Terminator 2 make the Novikov principle moot.
>>217368498>If it was just the first movie then sure, you could argue for itThe point of this thread is that the second movie kills the time travel logic the first movie used.
>>217368515
>>217368534See >>217368537That's the subject of this thread.
>>217368390>A causal loop is called a "bootstrap PARADOX" for a reason, because it cannot exist.They can exist just fine, as seen in this movie. Its just the name. Are you confusing paradox with plotbole or something? The only way it cant exist is if something changes/deviates. But that doesnt happen in this film.
>>217365039Have you time traveled? No? Then you don’t know how time travel works.
>>217368537But it does not
>>217366678>Its not a time circleyeah they’re called time loops when effect has to precede cause
>>217368537...We don't actually know that. It only breaks the logic IF JUDGEMENT DAY DOESN'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN, and while Sarah feels optimistic, we don't REALLY know that Cyberdyne doesn't just promote Dyson's technical director and make everything happen anyway. ...And, indeed, according to all the shitty sequels, that's exactly what happens
>>217368631It's pretty heavily implied that they prevented Judgement Day at the end of Terminator 2, at least when it was supposed to. They even filmed a cut ending where Judgement Day comes and passes without incident.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEaS8X1_gcUI think it's kinda clear the intent was that they changed the future in the sequel, which doesn't mesh at all with the first film's logic.
>>217368771You're right that it was IMPLIED - BUT WE DON'T ACTUALLY *KNOW*Cut scenes aren't canon.
Here's a picture that should make things simple.On the left we have T1 existing as it's own self-contained causal loop. On the right we have how the franchise actually works.
>>217368834Even in Terminator 3 Judgement Day was pushed forward from 1997 to 2004.
>>217368885Based>/ThreadSequels arent canon. They are alternate retellings.
>>217368957>Terminator 3
>>217368885all I see is feet. sssssssslurrrrrrp
>>217368996>Sequels arent canonT2 is canon, after that is where the timeline really gets screwy.For me my personal canon is T1 and T2 Extended edition.
>>217369059>...And, indeed, according to all the shitty sequels, that's exactly what happens >>217368631
One of the interpretations of the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiment (indeed, the standard one) is that retrocausality (effect preceding cause) CAN occur as long as no definitive evidence is left that this has occurred....So, seen this way, Terminator 2 is actually REQUIRED by Terminator 1.The first Terminator has a massive effect (the destruction of the world) being caused by an acausal event (the discovery of time-displaced super-advanced Neural Net technology by Cyberdyne).The second movie ERASES most of these effects, thus arguably making the time-loop that causes them possible in the first place. At the end of Terminator 2, the number of paradoxical events is greatly reduced. Arguably, there are none left at all - the effects of the Terminators and Kyle Reese could conceivably be the result of a Boltzmann Baby-type occurrence: an incredibly unlikely event creating a short-lived living thing. Mindboggling unlikely, but not necessarily paradoxical as long as it doesn't violate conservation laws....And now, having written the Nerdiest thing that anyone in the world will write today, I will go and do something more constructive: I will watch television.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-choice_quantum_eraserhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain
>>217368885No - I think this diagram sums your theory up much better:>>217368237
I want a small, lower-budget Terminator with just one classic T-800 and a few people almost powerless to stop it. Maybe have SkyNet toss one final Hail Mary Terminator who's all business back to the very early days of computers to insert SkyNet programming into one of those building sized centers they had in the desert in the late 50s
>>217367543It is a bit interesting how in 3, CRS was able to make a slightly better T-800 (T-850) than Cyberdyne. In 3's timeline it's shown in a deleted scene that CRS just took the patents Cyberdyne made and continued their work, so throwing the arm and chip into the molten steel in 2 meant nothing. Judgment day is inevitable
>>217365039>>Heavily implied Novikov self-consistency principleYour very first assumption is wrong. Its implied to be in a loop period. A loop can be a product of self consistency principle or can be produced (Dark/Looper). Also, a loop can either happen just once (Looper), X times (Dark) or keep going indefinetely. Heck, it can ba an spiral.Lets call JC from T1's prologue JC1. We don't know if his father was sent to the past by JC0 or someone else. Even if it was by JC0, we don't know if JC-1 existed and so on. So nothing on T2 goes against it.Besides, self-consistency is dumb as fuck
>>217369314Your phone is like hundreds of thosands of times more powerful than those building sized computers they had in the 50s. Skynet programming would not work on shit that primitive
>>217368267Nigga just watch Dark last episode. Apply it to T1+T2. Done. T2 wasn't a retcon
>>217367543>We've been over this,Who's "we"?
>>217368519You are counting on either B not being the natural course or whatever comes after A being exactly the same A again, which, going by principle, is another impossibility unless made artificially
