Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What Happened To The "Original" Original Ba'al? (spoilers)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    What Happened To The "Original" Original Ba'al? (spoilers)

    So assuming that the Ba'al who arrives on the Achilles is the original one, what do you think happened to the Ba'al in the 1930s?

    Did he get killed, locked up....?
    "Yo, you wanna join SG-1?"

    sigpic

    #2
    Mitchell shot him in the head.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by jenks View Post
      Mitchell shot him in the head.
      When you go back in time, your other self in that timeline doesn't just disappear. For one thing, yes, Mitchell shot the one who came through the gate, yet the Ba'al from that timeline still lived to do everything he was meant to except successfully alter time. My guess is that he killed his 2nd self to prevent him from messing things up.



      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by jenks View Post
        Mitchell shot him in the head.
        That was the Ba'al SG-1 had had as their bad guy over the years, who used the failsafe to travel back in time to the 1930s. I was talking about the Ba'al living in that period.

        Edit: FallenAngel beats me to it Anyway...

        When you go back in time, your other self in that timeline doesn't just disappear. For one thing, yes, Mitchell shot the one who came through the gate, yet the Ba'al from that timeline still lived to do everything he was meant to except successfully alter time. My guess is that he killed his 2nd self to prevent him from messing things up.
        If our Ba'al killed the Ba'al in the 1930s, wouldn't that create a paradox where he wouldn't have existed because he was already dead in the 30s?
        "Yo, you wanna join SG-1?"

        sigpic

        Comment


          #5
          Ah right, I get what you mean. But do you mean in the alternate timeline that takes up the bulk of the movie, or 'our' timeline that we see at the end? If the former, I agree the time traveling Ba'al probably killed him.

          Comment


            #6
            the fact that baal sunk achilles resulted in the stargate never been found. and the baal that altered this timeline shuld then replace baal living in 1930 timeline or else that baal *from the past* would never have gotten the idea for building the timemachine from SG1.

            timetravel is far too complicated for humans to comperhand since we have no way of knowing what it will result in. in my opinion it would only be safe traveling into the future to see how certain things progress and then go back into your original timeline.

            the other possibility is that baal created an entirely separate timeline in which he had a distinct adavantage of foreseeing most of the things...obviously not all since quatesh killed him. i think this is what he has done and he says so to quatesh when he tells her he lived on earth in a nother time...
            sigpic

            Comment


              #7
              The grandfather paradox is moot, as changes in the past only translate forward in time.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by ziga1980 View Post
                the fact that baal sunk achilles resulted in the stargate never been found. and the baal that altered this timeline shuld then replace baal living in 1930 timeline or else that baal *from the past* would never have gotten the idea for building the timemachine from SG1
                This is why you have to take time travel in Sci Fi movies and shows with a grain of salt. You can't alter something in the past which is the reason you traveled to the past in the first place, because it's a paradox. I can't make a time machine because I want to go save my brother's life, because if he didn't die, I wouldn't have made the time machine in the first place.

                This leaves two options. The first is that it's impossible to change the past in a way that would cause a paradox. I can stop an event from happening, but another event with the same result will inevitably happen causing the same future. For example, I travel back in time and save my brother from being shot to death by a burglar, but the next day he gets hit by a car resulting in the same future where he is dead.

                Or, by changing the past it creates a completely separate time line from the original in which things have changed and can be completely different, which is what happened in Continuum. Cameron Mitchel existed in an alternate time line where he wasn't born, even though the grandfather paradox came true. There was no Mitchel from that time line, he was from a different one.
                Last edited by jrd231; 15 July 2008, 08:01 AM.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by gkyun View Post
                  If our Ba'al killed the Ba'al in the 1930s, wouldn't that create a paradox where he wouldn't have existed because he was already dead in the 30s?
                  Alternate timeline theory. When you travel back in time and change it, an alternate timeline is created. Your future ceases to exist, but you don't.

                  Because once Ba'al changed something so fundamental as the Tau'ris involvement with the developments of the galaxy, Ba'al's timeline ceased to exist, anyway. The Ba'al you knew wouldn't have ended up finding out about the way to travel through time and building his own time machine, etc., etc., etc., because he wouldn't have sent his clones into the SGC to steal intel.



                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by jrd231 View Post
                    This is why you have to take time travel in Sci Fi movies and shows with a grain of salt. You can't alter something in the past which is the reason you traveled to the past in the first place, because it's a paradox. I can't make a time machine because I want to go save my brother's life, because if he didn't die, I wouldn't have made the time machine in the first place.

                    This leaves two options. The first is that it's impossible to change the past in a way that would cause a paradox. I can stop an event from happening, but another event with the same result will inevitably happen causing the same future. For example, I travel back in time and save my brother from being shot to death by a burglar, but the next day he gets hit by a car resulting in the same future where he is dead.

                    Or, by changing the past it creates a completely separate time line from the original in which things have changed and can be completely different, which is what happened in Continuum. Cameron Mitchel existed in an alternate time line where he wasn't born, even though the grandfather paradox came true. There was no Mitchel from that time line, he was from a different one.
                    thats why i think it would only be safe to travel to the future. but i also think that past can't be undone. i imagine time line like a tape recording, you can rewind it and see "the past" but you cant change it. and if one did so he would have created an altered copy of the recording leaving the original the way it is.

                    and with future i like the concept mckay came up with when that old man showed him that vision where he says that seeing probable futures is possible. and that is why baal was so successful in continuum altered time line. he knew how things went the first time and he predicted it would be more or less the same but in the original time line quatesh is long dead so he could predict she was going to kill him.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                      #11
                      baal kidnapped his 1930's self and locked him away somewhere while having intel he took with him when he was in the sgc and biult his anubis ship

                      its basically the grandfather paradox but with a goauld and himself
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                        #12
                        So the original Baal and time traveling Baal would of been in the same timeline. The time traveling one would of probably killed the original one, and went in his place.

                        But since Cameron went back and shot the time traveling one, the original never new any better and went on to become the time traveling Baal later on.

                        That ruined the little fun about O'Niell being Cam's father. Maybe Cam ended up being O'Niell's grandfather since he still alive at that point.
                        Visit my Website

                        Comment


                          #13
                          See this is the problem you get when you try to figure out anything involved with time travel, it never really makes sense. Theres too many variables to think about.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Haven't seen the movie...

                            but I just gotta say that they title of this thread really cracks me up

                            Usually with time travel though it is best not to question or think out all the possibilities...I usually just assume things get fixed as they are meant to be fixed et voila time moves on...

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by jrd231 View Post
                              This leaves two options. The first is that it's impossible to change the past in a way that would cause a paradox. I can stop an event from happening, but another event with the same result will inevitably happen causing the same future. For example, I travel back in time and save my brother from being shot to death by a burglar, but the next day he gets hit by a car resulting in the same future where he is dead.

                              Or, by changing the past it creates a completely separate time line from the original in which things have changed and can be completely different, which is what happened in Continuum. Cameron Mitchel existed in an alternate time line where he wasn't born, even though the grandfather paradox came true. There was no Mitchel from that time line, he was from a different one.



                              both are equally possible and in the newest version of the movie "The Time Machine" at the end the big brain guy shows him exactly your point from the first and Multiverse theory says that the second can also happen

                              confused yet?
                              Last edited by QuantumDragon; 30 May 2009, 08:30 PM.
                              And the meek shall inherit the earth...............but only after the last soldier wills it to them

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X