But if he went back in time and did something as drastic as creating a series about technology in the future, thus sparking a demand for this
technology sooner, how do we know the future would not change so he does not travel back in time?
A good point.
I would like to add, that what the OP suggests creates an 'impossible loop', just like the watch in the movie "Somewhere in Time". A cute, though
syrapy and silly, and pretty ridiculous and predictable romance movie (aren't they all?), but the non-manufacturing of the watch makes it impossible
for the watch to even exist. I mean, for something like a complicated watch to even exist, it would have to be painstakingly manufactured. It can't
just exist. Someone has to make it.
The same way, if Roddenberry came from the future, where cell phones were inspired by his tales from the future, where did the cell phone idea come
originally? No one created it, because Roddenberry learned it from the guy who created it because he was inspired by Roddenberry's visions of it, who
only had those visions because in his reality, cell phones were created, because a guy was inspired by Roddenberry's visions of it..
It would be another impossible loop, just like the watch in 'Somewhere in Time'. It's one thing to make a sloppy script and not explain a phenomenon
like that in a silly movie, but it's a completely different thing to have to accept that such a thing could 'just happen' in reality, without any
It's a lot like the japanese comedy movie about a time machine, that a scientist in in the future will build, because he saw the blueprints of the
time machine that came from the future.. so where did the tech/blueprints/time machine originate from? It can't 'just exist', without someone
ORIGINALLY getting the idea and working through it and creating it.
1) Time machine came from the future.
2) A scientist researched it and created blueprints for a time machine based on the actual time machine
3) In the future, the scientist manages to create the actual time machine, that goes into the past..
4) .. to inspire the scientist -> go to 1)
That is impossible, because for the time machine (a complicated machine) and its blueprints and plans for it to exist, someone would have to create it
FIRST, and only then it could inspire SOMEONE ELSE. It can't exist because its existence inspires someone to create that very machine itself..
For this same reason, Roddenberry can't have come from the future to inspire the past to create the future he came from, because someone would have
had to create the cell phone in the first place, before it can become something Roddenberry could use and bring past to inspire someone to create the
Time travel is not impossible, but 'impossible loops' are. Which renders time travel very problematic, and time travel stories almost always very
flawed in various ways (even the 'predestination paradox' has a major flaw in it; the information from the future would change the past! I mean, in
"The Terminator (1984)", for example, why would Sarah just blindly OBEY Kyle Reese and call her son JOHN? Why wouldn't she at least have the human
tendency to TEMPT THE FATE and see what happens? Does she have absolutely zero curiosity? Even if you think the whole reality would be destroyed,
wouldn't you still want to see what happens? I mean, it's pretty impossible for a regular human being to believe that the whole fate of all existence
could be suddenly on their tiny shoulders.. reality is vast and complex, and a human being is cosmically smaller than a grain of sand.
(I mean that the way human beings think of a grain of sand, cosmically thinking, human beings are even smaller than that size, by comparison to all
And even if reality does get destroyed, so what? It hasn't been such a great reality anyway.. - another example is the short story "By his
Bootstraps", where the protagonist gets a book from his future self, and then when he actually becomes that future self, COPIES the book to another
book, BY HAND, and then hands THAT version to his younger self (this would already ALTER the sequence of events, because now it's no longer the same
book! The writing would be different, and in any case, the atoms would be in different order. He would have HAD to have gotten that book from
somewhere ELSE first for it to be possible), destroying the otherwise plausible and well-working paradox completely).
Time travel just requires a lot more thought than story-writing people are seemingly willing to give it. I think in higher planes, these things become
different, and easier to understand. In the astral plane, for example, the concept of time is completely different from what we think of it here - we
only see through a tiny slit, and we imagine time being a straight line, going forward at a certain, LOCKED PACE (which of course doesn't have to be -
why would it? What sets the pace anyway, and what force locked it?). But in higher dimensions, time becomes more 'multidimensional' and
'all-encompassing' instead of just a separate, easily drawn, straight line.
edit on 11-4-2014 by Shoujikina because: (no reason given)