Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark Chance" data-source="post: 987545" data-attributes="member: 2795">* <--- The point................People who miss. -----> #<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Funny, but still doesn't really address the central paradox of the films. Judgment day and John Connor's eventual success as leader of the resistance, et cetera, are all already facts prior to the time-travel in T1. The only reason for time-travel in T1 is to prevent John Connor's success. Remove John Connor's success, and the time-travel never occurs. But if there the time-travel never occurs, John Connor's success cannot be prevented. One fact (John Connor's success) cannot be changed without negating another fact (the time-travel mission that prevented John Connor's success).This is the fundamental "flaw" in many time-travel stories.There was an old pulp magazine science fiction story that C.S. Lewis makes reference to in the introduction to one of his books (I forget which one). The protagonist goes back in time only to discover that the past is immutable. Nothing that has happened can be changed. He tries to lift a sandwich from the table, but cannot, because at that point in time in the past, the sandwich was not lifted. He gets caught out in the rain, and the raindrops rip through his flesh to fall exactly where they fell in the past.</blockquote>

Verification