Re: EarthBound's Paradox
I'm glad that someone finally asked this question about the paradox of Earthbound. For quite some time, I too, have followed this sort of logic, wndering about how it could work out. I find Chris's explanation a bit confusing though, so I will clear things up if I can. This is how the theory goes (when applied to anything).
Let's say, for example, someone had built a time machine. Time machines now exist in the rest of this paragraph. Now, let's say someone went back in time to destroy the first time machine, just to keep this simple. If they do succeed in destroying the first time machine, then they, in the future, seemingly have no reason and/or means to go back and destroy it. However, if they do not have a reason, they do not go back in time to destroy it, therefore it is rebuilt, and this cycle continues.. Right? Wrong.
If time travel is truly possible, then I also believe that alternate dimensions also exist. There are an infinite amount of dimensions, each with something slightly different, or drastically different. ANYTHING you can imagine is a dimension, let's say. And let's also say that time is made up of infinitely small frames of time. These are so to say, "freeze-frames," and there are also an inifinite number of different ones. Time is then made up by selecting each of these frames and moving them along a line, similar to a movie or slideshow, and each universe is a string of these frames. Now, at each frame in existence, there is a possiblitity of going to any another frame. If you were to go back in time, you would have to precisely select one of these frames to start at, which is impossible. It is impossible to pinpoint something infinitely small, which makes time machines impossible. Anyway, let's just say it IS possible to go back in time. When you did, you would stop at a certain frame. From there you would change which of these frames comes next.
Ok, we're finished with the hard part. Here comes something easy. Now, when you change which frame comes next, you have actively changed the dimension. When you go back forward in time, or progress through time normally, whatever you have changed stays as it is. The person or thing that changed what has been did not come from that dimension. It came from another. Therefore, the reason to go back in time has come from another dimension where it is still the same, therefore you still choose to go back in time to change it. You have now switched into a dimension where you have changed what you wanted to change. In your old dimension, what you would have changed was not changed, and is therefore still the same. This is why it is impossible to disprove someone who went back in time.
To translate that in Earthbound terms, Buzz Buzz went back in time, and changed the future for himself. He (or his body or something) progressed into a future where Giygas had been defeated. However, where he came from, Giygas was not defeated, at least not before he had gone back in time. Get it? Probably not. I realize it's hard to understand, but if you email me, I can answer questions and go into more detail. The main point of this article is:
There is no paradox.
I'm glad that someone finally asked this question about the paradox of Earthbound. For quite some time, I too, have followed this sort of logic, wndering about how it could work out. I find Chris's explanation a bit confusing though, so I will clear things up if I can. This is how the theory goes (when applied to anything).
Let's say, for example, someone had built a time machine. Time machines now exist in the rest of this paragraph. Now, let's say someone went back in time to destroy the first time machine, just to keep this simple. If they do succeed in destroying the first time machine, then they, in the future, seemingly have no reason and/or means to go back and destroy it. However, if they do not have a reason, they do not go back in time to destroy it, therefore it is rebuilt, and this cycle continues.. Right? Wrong.
If time travel is truly possible, then I also believe that alternate dimensions also exist. There are an infinite amount of dimensions, each with something slightly different, or drastically different. ANYTHING you can imagine is a dimension, let's say. And let's also say that time is made up of infinitely small frames of time. These are so to say, "freeze-frames," and there are also an inifinite number of different ones. Time is then made up by selecting each of these frames and moving them along a line, similar to a movie or slideshow, and each universe is a string of these frames. Now, at each frame in existence, there is a possiblitity of going to any another frame. If you were to go back in time, you would have to precisely select one of these frames to start at, which is impossible. It is impossible to pinpoint something infinitely small, which makes time machines impossible. Anyway, let's just say it IS possible to go back in time. When you did, you would stop at a certain frame. From there you would change which of these frames comes next.
Ok, we're finished with the hard part. Here comes something easy. Now, when you change which frame comes next, you have actively changed the dimension. When you go back forward in time, or progress through time normally, whatever you have changed stays as it is. The person or thing that changed what has been did not come from that dimension. It came from another. Therefore, the reason to go back in time has come from another dimension where it is still the same, therefore you still choose to go back in time to change it. You have now switched into a dimension where you have changed what you wanted to change. In your old dimension, what you would have changed was not changed, and is therefore still the same. This is why it is impossible to disprove someone who went back in time.
To translate that in Earthbound terms, Buzz Buzz went back in time, and changed the future for himself. He (or his body or something) progressed into a future where Giygas had been defeated. However, where he came from, Giygas was not defeated, at least not before he had gone back in time. Get it? Probably not. I realize it's hard to understand, but if you email me, I can answer questions and go into more detail. The main point of this article is:
There is no paradox.
