| MAJOR SPOILERS |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| Yeah,and? The story and characters and twists were AMAZING,nobody said that this is the peak of time travel,and also,nothing has to be perfect to be good. |
 |
Mq84jdk said: If nothing stands out to you in regards to how it all comes together, then I honestly wouldn't know where to begin. Can you explain any plot holes then? Not saying you are wrong, I’m just curious. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
Madhav001 said: Everything is explained in a way that's supposed to fool you into thinking it all fits, that's what these complex time travel narratives are about. I don't know about Time travel stuff, but if you are talking about Steins Gate specifically, everything is explained and there ain't any plot hole. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
KP_SENSEI said: I literally said that it's supposed to be like this, it shouldn't be perfectly logical, it should only seem plausible through the narrative. Yeah,and? The story and characters and twists were AMAZING,nobody said that this is the peak of time travel,and also,nothing has to be perfect to be good. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| Steins; Gate doesn't make sense at the end where the branch of two major world lines is only in the perception of the MC. |
"The Slave is the have-not, the oppressed one with nothing to spare. But because the Slave is in that despairing situation, having nothing, it can kill the Emperor !" |
official_brown said: Like I said in the last part, it doesn't have to make sense. Some stories have very clear time travel mechanics and they don't break them, but they have to compensate in other areas. There's nothing wrong with telling a crazy ambitious story that only makes sense if you don't scrutinize it. I'm guessing the majority of people don't want to look outside the narrative explanations, because why would you want to try and pick apart the logic of something you enjoyed? That's unfortunately the case with time travel, you often can't obsess over the details or you just ruin some of the magic for yourself. I thought I kinda understood when I was SG and SG0 but it’s been awhile, plus I played the SG0 VN. But tbh if I’m honest idc if it makes sense or not, SG has impacted me the most and I’ve never felt so related to in a show. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| I'm not alluding to OP but, Nothing about time travel described in Steins;Gate makes any logical sense and there is no one defending it. If they are, that's pretty funny. Trying to justify a waste of time, (your hobby) while not a waste of time to you may be a waste of time to a real scientist in this field who accepts it as fiction. It doesn't need explaining, it tries already in the show. If you can't figure out 'fiction' I'd suggest not watching it. Science-fiction exists to be fiction, fiction, while imperfect, can inspire people. If you're having a cognitive dissonance about how it can't be explained therefore it is not 'perfect' that's on you for prescribing fiction in the non-fictional department. |
| Lie until what you want to be true becomes truth. Lie until you can't remember what's a lie and what isn't. Lie until you aren't lying anymore! [url=https://myfigurecollection.net/profile/Femboy[/url]  |
official_brown said: For me it's just about whether it makes sense given the "rules" of time travel that have been established in the show/book/movie. I'm not trying to make any other assumptions on my own about why their model of time travel wouldn't work. I just look at the logic behind the narrative explanations to see whether or not they are consistent, and they often aren't, because they need to bend the rules to do interesting stuff. All that should matter is whether you believe it in the moment, and I was certainly enthralled on my first viewing. LostSpectre said: Like I said in the last part, it doesn't have to make sense. Some stories have very clear time travel mechanics and they don't break them, but they have to compensate in other areas. There's nothing wrong with telling a crazy ambitious story that only makes sense if you don't scrutinize it. I'm guessing the majority of people don't want to look outside the narrative explanations, because why would you want to try and pick apart the logic of something you enjoyed? That's unfortunately the case with time travel, you often can't obsess over the details or you just ruin some of the magic for yourself. Nah I understand what you mean completely. It’s like when I watched FLCL, SG, NGE, and other shows like that with explanations if I don’t fully understand it myself. When I first watched them me and my friend talked a lot about it. Of course since it’s fiction and time travel is a theory that more than likely won’t ever happen, I think their explanation was fine. And I honestly thought SG0 kinda tied it together well. But I don’t consider myself the smartest person nor could I theorize the possibility of how time travel could actually work. But the show is definitely a work of art for me. Ngl Okabe feels like one of the most human characters in most anime tbh. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
Fluoxetine_50mg said: I believe that both myself and the people I'm referring to are not under any impression that it's anything other than fiction. Where we differ is that they seem to think the rules/logic used in the show can be perfectly justified in the narrative, while for me it only seems to take a small amount of consideration to realize that the narrative demands a lot of contradictory elements, but this shouldn't be surprising in a work that is largely concerned with telling a story, and not trying to fool an MIT professor. Don't worry, I'm well aware that this thread is completely pointless, but thanks for the input.I'm not alluding to OP but, Nothing about time travel described in Steins;Gate makes any logical sense and there is no one defending it. If they are, that's pretty funny. Trying to justify a waste of time, (your hobby) while not a waste of time to you may be a waste of time to a real scientist in this field who accepts it as fiction. It doesn't need explaining, it tries already in the show. If you can't figure out 'fiction' I'd suggest not watching it. Science-fiction exists to be fiction, fiction, while imperfect, can inspire people. If you're having a cognitive dissonance about how it can't be explained therefore it is not 'perfect' that's on you for prescribing fiction in the non-fictional department. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
Chiribei said: The point was that I don't get how they can be "experts" while also not realizing that it just doesn't work. Granted, if they stick to nothing but the narrative, and don't challenge the information they're being presented with, then I guess that could explain why they stay in a bubble where all the pieces click together. Yawn. They can't explain all the sci-fi stuff but apparently you can? |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| I mean you know you're being vague, as you've clearly implied. I don't see any productive discussion coming out of this thread if you don't elaborate what exactly you're referring to. You're gonna keep repeating your orignal post, and people will keep challenging you to bring up plotholes, even though you weren't even talking about plot holes. You won't get across to other people on the internet without elaborating what's on your mind. Besides, the way you've framed your original post comes off as quite conceited. Which is ironic, because you're calling out certain people who claim to know it all. Yet you act like your interpretation of the story is 'superior' and more factual. |
certifiedbingerMar 24, 2022 12:41 AM
certifiedbinger said: I'm not exactly trying to claim I'm the only person who knows the real interpretation, I'm just saying it should be really obvious that the logic doesn't hold up, which shouldn't be surprising to anyone. Think of it like a rhetorical question if you will, I just don't understand how someone can be an expert of every single detail, and then also be willfully ignorant of the fact it clearly doesn't make sense. I don't see how it is conceited, because i don't think it is special at all to realize the holes, that's all the more reason that it confuses me. As for elaborating on everything, that won't amount to anything if the other person refuses to use any explanations other than story contrivances. I mean you know you're being vague, as you've clearly implied. I don't see any productive discussion coming out of this thread if you don't elaborate what exactly you're referring to. You're gonna keep repeating your orignal post, and people will keep challenging you to bring up plotholes, even though you weren't even talking about plot holes. You won't get across to other people on the internet without elaborating what's on your mind. Besides, the way you've framed your original post comes off as quite conceited. Which is ironic, because you're calling out certain people who claim to know it all. Yet you act like your interpretation of the story is 'superior' and more factual. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
Avalokari said: I know all the relevant details from the VN, but I wouldn't say the anime cuts out the mechanics, they're explained well enough.Almost all of the actual mechanics and explanation of it was cut from the anime. Check the VN out |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
Nitroade24h said: It isn't exactly complicated to explain if you just regurgitate the plot details and make a plausible explanation for anything that could be ambiguous. They are correct in the sense that these events happen in the story, and these other things are the justification, that still doesn't solve whether or not it should actually work or if it makes sense as a whole. The "plot hole" is essentially the entire overarching story, because the narrative is clearly more important than making perfect sense of the mechanics. What are the plot holes then? I find the people that can explain it all are usually correct and don’t make big leaps in their explanations, just using information from the visual novels and anime. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
LostSpectre said: certifiedbinger said: As for elaborating on everything, that won't amount to anything if the other person refuses to use any explanations other than story contrivances. I mean you know you're being vague, as you've clearly implied. I don't see any productive discussion coming out of this thread if you don't elaborate what exactly you're referring to. You're gonna keep repeating your orignal post, and people will keep challenging you to bring up plotholes, even though you weren't even talking about plot holes. You won't get across to other people on the internet without elaborating what's on your mind. Besides, the way you've framed your original post comes off as quite conceited. Which is ironic, because you're calling out certain people who claim to know it all. Yet you act like your interpretation of the story is 'superior' and more factual. Who knows, maybe you'll convince somebody? Right now, you're not really promoting discussion at all. I like to think of myself as a pretty reasonable person. I'd love to hear your points. |
| I've actually had long philosophical discussions about this topic with some people on MAL, and as far as we can tell, the only "plot hole" if you want to call it that is the Reading Steiner ability. But it's not really a plot hole. It's not inconsistent with anything. It's just a necessarily unexplained mechanic that makes the plot continuous. OP claims the plot unravels but couldn't give any examples, except in vague terms like "in the end" or "if nothing stands out to you, I don't know where to start". Well, if you don't know where to start, then I guess I don't know where to start. As far as time travel stories go, Steins;Gate (note: not the sequel) is among the most consistent and cohesive in all of sci-fi. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
Kot_Schlyopa said: I mean if someone wants to nitpick at details they could point out that a TV power surge or a microwave provide nowhere near the energy for time travel and such, and there are examples of these that may be true. But if something like this is the "overarching narrative" that OP has trouble with, I wonder whether there's any anime -- or any piece of fiction period -- that doesn't have a plot hole.Steins;gate has bizarre sci-fi elements like gelatin bananas |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
certifiedbinger said: I know it's futile, but I'll give you a cliff notes version. The simple fact is that SG blends different theories and modes of time travel, in ways that contradict each other, because this creates a more exciting narrative. The "truth" is that there's major problems with the whole idea of the video-mail, whether or not we're actually supposed to believe there's a predetermined nature or we're just supposed to believe this causes the worldline to shift, creating a new future, where Okabe's past self hadn't received the video. LostSpectre said: As for elaborating on everything, that won't amount to anything if the other person refuses to use any explanations other than story contrivances. Who knows, maybe you'll convince somebody? Right now, you're not really promoting discussion at all. I like to think of myself as a pretty reasonable person. I'd love to hear your points. Long story short, it can't be predetermined, not only is the divergence different, but it doesn't make sense to have a predetermined event that should only exist if it's immutable, but then which can be changed through a d-mail (video). Except, if it isn't predetermined, then that would mean there's a timeline without a time machine. That doesn't outright contradict the story, but it means there's at least two time loops before the Okabe we're following even comes onto the scene. Then there's issues between continuity of reading-steiner compared to the time machine and which has priority. The entire concept of Okabe needing to not change his past self is bullshit, he has reading-steiner AKA god mode, causality does not apply to him, his memories remain intac evein if he changed his past self from ever starting his loop. The loop is flawed in other ways as well, if past Okabe sends the first d-mail it should start the whole trip over again, that should shift the worldline, because the whole nature of his ability is insane. Anyway, that's just a quick sample, I guess. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
katsucats said: How can you possibly think that when it tries to mold so many theories together? There's no logic behind the idea of time travel both changing the past and changing the worldline, and then also trying to incorporate this idea of it being a time loop, where Okabe has to recreate the events of Kurisu's "death" exactly as he has witnessed them in the past. Except, we know Okabe's power doesn't work like that, so I'm not even entirely sure what the show is trying to imply (mechanics wise) is happening in the SG worldline. I've actually had long philosophical discussions about this topic with some people on MAL, and as far as we can tell, the only "plot hole" if you want to call it that is the Reading Steiner ability. But it's not really a plot hole. It's not inconsistent with anything. It's just a necessarily unexplained mechanic that makes the plot continuous. OP claims the plot unravels but couldn't give any examples, except in vague terms like "in the end" or "if nothing stands out to you, I don't know where to start". Well, if you don't know where to start, then I guess I don't know where to start. As far as time travel stories go, Steins;Gate (note: not the sequel) is among the most consistent and cohesive in all of sci-fi. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
LostSpectre said: certifiedbinger said: I know it's futile, but I'll give you a cliff notes version. The simple fact is that SG blends different theories and modes of time travel, in ways that contradict each other, because this creates a more exciting narrative. The "truth" is that there's major problems with the whole idea of the video-mail, whether or not we're actually supposed to believe there's a predetermined nature or we're just supposed to believe this causes the worldline to shift, creating a new future, where Okabe's past self hadn't received the video. Who knows, maybe you'll convince somebody? Right now, you're not really promoting discussion at all. I like to think of myself as a pretty reasonable person. I'd love to hear your points. Long story short, it can't be predetermined, not only is the divergence different, but it doesn't make sense to have a predetermined event that should only exist if it's immutable, but then which can be changed through a d-mail (video). Except, if it isn't predetermined, then that would mean there's a timeline without a time machine. That doesn't outright contradict the story, but it means there's at least two time loops before the Okabe we're following even comes onto the scene. Then there's issues between continuity of reading-steiner compared to the time machine and which has priority. The entire concept of Okabe needing to not change his past self is bullshit, he has reading-steiner AKA god mode, causality does not apply to him, his memories remain intac evein if he changed his past self from ever starting his loop. The loop is flawed in other ways as well, if past Okabe sends the first d-mail it should start the whole trip over again, that should shift the worldline, because the whole nature of his ability is insane. Anyway, that's just a quick sample, I guess. I completely agree about the first part. Out of the three existing time travel models followed by the majority of scifi media, S;G's take on the matter is quite contradictory. Static, Dynamic and Multiversal models all somehow find their way into the story, even though it would be fundamentally incorrect to follow more than one model. Something similar to what I observed in the recent film Avengers:Endgame. I don't know if you've seen the film, however it clearly stated they followed the multiversal structure. If you change the past, you create a new timeline and the orignal remains intact. However, a character who went back to permanently live in the past, somehow appeared as an old man in the present. Which would imply the presence of either a Static or Dynamic timeline. This would contradict the orignal rules; the man clearly should've disappeared from the orignal timeline entirely, and would've created a new timeline where he lives in the past, and grows old by the time he reaches the present again. And the movie was universally acclaimed. Either way, I too looked past the contradiction, because the film tried to convey something else. Similiar to S;G trying to convey Okabe's pain and struggles more than anything else. Steins:Gate, in a way, followed all three of the models. The concept of worldlines itself stems from the Multiversal model, the fact that the story implies everything that happened was meant to happen the exact same way implies causality and by extension, the presence of a Static Model. And the fact that they aim to retroactively change the current state of events entirely implies a Dynamic structure. Despite the obvious contradictions, I somehow loved the way the three models complemented each other in this particular show, something I hadn't seen in any time travel film/series before. About the second part, it WOULD be realistic if Okabe were to stop his past self, however the narrative wouldn't be nearly as complex if he did. I see where you're coming from again, however that would compromise the story entirely, as it would be just another story that follows the Dynamic structure trope; change ONE certain incident from occurring and everything is fairyland again. This is definitely a plot contrivance, but one that adds depth and complexity to the story. That's the reason I appreciated it. |
LostSpectre said: Since you claim to have read the VN, you'd know that the canon is that there are parallel possibilities that come into existence when Okabe shifts into a different line. I don't know what you mean by "predetermined", but there's no issue with the idea that the Okabe we're following not existing as "Okabe" in every world line at every time.certifiedbinger said: I know it's futile, but I'll give you a cliff notes version. The simple fact is that SG blends different theories and modes of time travel, in ways that contradict each other, because this creates a more exciting narrative. The "truth" is that there's major problems with the whole idea of the video-mail, whether or not we're actually supposed to believe there's a predetermined nature or we're just supposed to believe this causes the worldline to shift, creating a new future, where Okabe's past self hadn't received the video. Who knows, maybe you'll convince somebody? Right now, you're not really promoting discussion at all. I like to think of myself as a pretty reasonable person. I'd love to hear your points. Long story short, it can't be predetermined, not only is the divergence different, but it doesn't make sense to have a predetermined event that should only exist if it's immutable, but then which can be changed through a d-mail (video). Except, if it isn't predetermined, then that would mean there's a timeline without a time machine. That doesn't outright contradict the story, but it means there's at least two time loops before the Okabe we're following even comes onto the scene. LostSpectre said: Reading Steiner does not mean that causality does not apply to him. It only means that he is able to maintain his memory between jumps. If Okabe's goal was to revert the major events of the world back to the original world line, then it makes complete sense that he wouldn't throw a wrench into the plan by letting people see two copies of himself. If having Reading Steiner means that he controls causality, then he would have just been able to entirely dictate consequences in every world line, which is obviously not the case.Then there's issues between continuity of reading-steiner compared to the time machine and which has priority. The entire concept of Okabe needing to not change his past self is bullshit, he has reading-steiner AKA god mode, causality does not apply to him, his memories remain intac evein if he changed his past self from ever starting his loop. LostSpectre said: Either past Okabe does not share consciousness with current Okabe -- which is obviously true -- or past Okabe in a different disactivated world line doesn't strictly speaking exist. You could see it both ways, and either way doesn't present a plot hole.The loop is flawed in other ways as well, if past Okabe sends the first d-mail it should start the whole trip over again, that should shift the worldline, because the whole nature of his ability is insane. LostSpectre said: The VN (and the anime if you pay attention) specifies the exact theory. I don't know where you keep getting this multiple theories thing.How can you possibly think that when it tries to mold so many theories together? LostSpectre said: The world lines are like a tree, where if a past event is changed, it alters the future from that point on into a new branch. When Okabe travels back to the future using the time machine, he is shifted into the world line caused by the actions in the past and of past Okabe. So if past Okabe's perceptions change, then the world line becomes unpredictable.There's no logic behind the idea of time travel both changing the past and changing the worldline, and then also trying to incorporate this idea of it being a time loop, where Okabe has to recreate the events of Kurisu's "death" exactly as he has witnessed them in the past. LostSpectre said: I have no idea what you're not getting. The only point of Reading Steiner is to solve the problem that's inherent in all time travel fiction using some variant of the multiverse theory, that if a person travels to another world line, a copy of himself is left behind in the original, making any time travel pointless. Reading Steiner allows the active world to be the one Okabe jumps to so that we get plot continuity. It doesn't break causality or any of the other things you're insisting on. It isn't "God-mode". It just allows for one synchronized copy of Okabe from the audience's perspective.Except, we know Okabe's power doesn't work like that, so I'm not even entirely sure what the show is trying to imply (mechanics wise) is happening in the SG worldline. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
certifiedbinger said: Yeah, I'm in agreement with all of that. The story wants you to believe that somehow this is all connected, even though there's no way you piece it together, but more along the lines that it just exists. After all, Mayuri was literally fated to die, so it isn't a stretch that somehow the shifting worldlines and seemingly predetermined events mesh together in a way that somehow changes time without changing time. LostSpectre said: I know it's futile, but I'll give you a cliff notes version. The simple fact is that SG blends different theories and modes of time travel, in ways that contradict each other, because this creates a more exciting narrative. The "truth" is that there's major problems with the whole idea of the video-mail, whether or not we're actually supposed to believe there's a predetermined nature or we're just supposed to believe this causes the worldline to shift, creating a new future, where Okabe's past self hadn't received the video. Long story short, it can't be predetermined, not only is the divergence different, but it doesn't make sense to have a predetermined event that should only exist if it's immutable, but then which can be changed through a d-mail (video). Except, if it isn't predetermined, then that would mean there's a timeline without a time machine. That doesn't outright contradict the story, but it means there's at least two time loops before the Okabe we're following even comes onto the scene. Then there's issues between continuity of reading-steiner compared to the time machine and which has priority. The entire concept of Okabe needing to not change his past self is bullshit, he has reading-steiner AKA god mode, causality does not apply to him, his memories remain intac evein if he changed his past self from ever starting his loop. The loop is flawed in other ways as well, if past Okabe sends the first d-mail it should start the whole trip over again, that should shift the worldline, because the whole nature of his ability is insane. Anyway, that's just a quick sample, I guess. I completely agree about the first part. Out of the three existing time travel models followed by the majority of scifi media, S;G's take on the matter is quite contradictory. Static, Dynamic and Multiversal models all somehow find their way into the story, even though it would be fundamentally incorrect to follow more than one model. Something similar to what I observed in the recent film Avengers:Endgame. I don't know if you've seen the film, however it clearly stated they followed the multiversal structure. If you change the past, you create a new timeline and the orignal remains intact. However, a character who went back to permanently live in the past, somehow appeared as an old man in the present. Which would imply the presence of either a Static or Dynamic timeline. This would contradict the orignal rules; the man clearly should've disappeared from the orignal timeline entirely, and would've created a new timeline where he lives in the past, and grows old by the time he reaches the present again. And the movie was universally acclaimed. Either way, I too looked past the contradiction, because the film tried to convey something else. Similiar to S;G trying to convey Okabe's pain and struggles more than anything else. Steins:Gate, in a way, followed all three of the models. The concept of worldlines itself stems from the Multiversal model, the fact that the story implies everything that happened was meant to happen the exact same way implies causality and by extension, the presence of a Static Model. And the fact that they aim to retroactively change the current state of events entirely implies a Dynamic structure. Despite the obvious contradictions, I somehow loved the way the three models complemented each other in this particular show, something I hadn't seen in any time travel film/series before. About the second part, it WOULD be realistic if Okabe were to stop his past self, however the narrative wouldn't be nearly as complex if he did. I see where you're coming from again, however that would compromise the story entirely, as it would be just another story that follows the Dynamic structure trope; change ONE certain incident from occurring and everything is fairyland again. This is definitely a plot contrivance, but one that adds depth and complexity to the story. That's the reason I appreciated it. Narratively, I think it's phenomenal, I'm just the only person I know of that has ever admitted it doesn't all make perfect sense, because the story is the main focus, and the characters, their joy, sadness, loss, etc. and the harem romance elements all combine into an incredible product. At the time of watching I completely bought that he needed to retrace his steps so he would have the knowledge he currently does, and that Suzuha and the machine could no longer exist in that time. I don't think it's wrong the way they're portrayed at all, I just think that realistically it should be obvious looking back that the show takes huge liberties with the time travel mechanics in order to focus on the most compelling story, and that's exactly what they should do. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
LostSpectre said: katsucats said: How can you possibly think that when it tries to mold so many theories together? There's no logic behind the idea of time travel both changing the past and changing the worldline, and then also trying to incorporate this idea of it being a time loop, where Okabe has to recreate the events of Kurisu's "death" exactly as he has witnessed them in the past. Except, we know Okabe's power doesn't work like that, so I'm not even entirely sure what the show is trying to imply (mechanics wise) is happening in the SG worldline. I've actually had long philosophical discussions about this topic with some people on MAL, and as far as we can tell, the only "plot hole" if you want to call it that is the Reading Steiner ability. But it's not really a plot hole. It's not inconsistent with anything. It's just a necessarily unexplained mechanic that makes the plot continuous. OP claims the plot unravels but couldn't give any examples, except in vague terms like "in the end" or "if nothing stands out to you, I don't know where to start". Well, if you don't know where to start, then I guess I don't know where to start. As far as time travel stories go, Steins;Gate (note: not the sequel) is among the most consistent and cohesive in all of sci-fi. This helps me see your POV more clearly. See the thing with all these time travel theories existing together is what made this particular story stand out to me. First off, the causality loop or the Bootstrap Paradox theory forms the Static Timeline format, something we're currently seeing in Attack on Titan. Fate. Destiny. In a way, God. The show ingeniously melded together the Dynamic and Multiversal formats, the way he was 'erasing' timelines he had previously created one at a time until he reached the first branch. Changing the Past, and erasing the other worlds at the same time. Now this is where the first model comes in. The show, in the end, tells us that all of this, Okabe creating every single timeline, and then working to erase all of them, one at a time was all exactly how it was destined to happen in the grand scheme of things. They don't change previously existing rules, as that would be a clear contradiction. They slowly add more layers to the time travel till the audience has the complete picture. They had worked to defeat Fate, Destiny and God this entire show, and in the end, it was all Destined to work from the beginning. Overall, the show works on the Static model, as used in AoT and as theorized by Einstein, but they incorporate the multiverse within the static model, with certain elements from the dynamic model. The thing could get confusing in the beginning, but retroactively, everything makes sense. |
| @katsucats - Predetermined means that the events happen in the past/future simultaneously with seemingly no origin point. The machine exists in the past because it will be built in the future and be sent back through time, etc. This is the kind of logic that is being implied by the idea of Okabe needing to maintain a loop to ensure that he becomes his future self, with all of his accumulated knowledge. Except, we know this is demonstrably false, the loop already happened, and these events being predetermined poses way more problems than if there's multiple loops we never see happen. There's no reason that Okabe would have to orchestrate these events again, because his past self sending a d-mail is no longer necessary, if anything it could easily cause problems. I'm not sure what your point is about past Okabe not sharing a consciousness with future Okabe, but if past Okabe sends a d-mail, then I don't see why this wouldn't shift the worldline back to beginning, since seemingly anyone can rewrite the world through time travel, but only Okabe would remember it if it doesn't involve a time machine. You say that the goal of tricking his past self was in order to not change the worldline, causing divergence, but the opposite seems to be true. If he is allowed to continue the "loop" so to speak, then his accidental d-mail will alert SERN and should in fact shift the worldline. Technically, future Okabe would get back in the machine first, and then time travel into the future, but I don't see how that stops past Okabe from continuing his loop. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
certifiedbinger said: There's no inherent incorrectness in following any combination of any model or some new mode altogether. These theories are not cold facts drawn into stone. What matters is that the narrative constructs the mechanic cohesively, and not whether they follow some convention created by another author.Static, Dynamic and Multiversal models all somehow find their way into the story, even though it would be fundamentally incorrect to follow more than one model. In Steins;Gate, there are major key events that tend to persist in worlds that are considered to be close, as far as the future Okabe, the inventor of the whole world line system is concerned. This does not confer a static model, since Okabe does manage to change the results, causing him to jump into different world lines. The entire point of the show is that future Okabe is trying to instruct past Okabe on how to achieve a certain result. If Okabe is satisfied with radically changing the future to some unknown world line, then he could violate the grandfather paradox and who knows what would've happened. But that's not what he was trying to do. The Reading Steiner ability essentially marries the multiverse and dynamic models. We could reconcile with it by imagining parallel worlds, but with all of them deactivated except for the one where Okabe currently exists. And when Okabe jumps to another world, that one is activated and the original is deactivated or ceases to exist. There's absolutely no contradiction here. I believe the canon states this, but you could as well think parallel Okabe's exist in a multiverse and it would change nothing from the perspective of the protagonist Okabe. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| @katsucats - Oh, and there's the whole deal with the machine/suzuha disappearing and somehow there's only one Okabe back in the future. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
katsucats said: certifiedbinger said: There's no inherent incorrectness in following any combination of any model or some new mode altogether. These theories are not cold facts drawn into stone. What matters is that the narrative constructs the mechanic cohesively, and not whether they follow some convention created by another author.Static, Dynamic and Multiversal models all somehow find their way into the story, even though it would be fundamentally incorrect to follow more than one model. In Steins;Gate, there are major key events that tend to persist in worlds that are considered to be close, as far as the future Okabe, the inventor of the whole world line system is concerned. This does not confer a static model, since Okabe does manage to change the results, causing him to jump into different world lines. The entire point of the show is that future Okabe is trying to instruct past Okabe on how to achieve a certain result. If Okabe is satisfied with radically changing the future to some unknown world line, then he could violate the grandfather paradox and who knows what would've happened. But that's not what he was trying to do. The Reading Steiner ability essentially marries the multiverse and dynamic models. We could reconcile with it by imagining parallel worlds, but with all of them deactivated except for the one where Okabe currently exists. And when Okabe jumps to another world, that one is activated and the original is deactivated or ceases to exist. There's absolutely no contradiction here. I believe the canon states this, but you could as well think parallel Okabe's exist in a multiverse and it would change nothing from the perspective of the protagonist Okabe. But that's the thing. What I implied with my original quote was that following all three models and creating no clear basis which one's truly at play would be fundamentally incorrect. Everything instead is about one Static Model, that contains a merger of Multiversal and Dynamic models within, as sub-parts, as I said in my second reply. |
LostSpectre said: Consider first that an original Okabe lived to some time in the future and came up with the idea to send a message to his past self. This failed the first time, and the 2nd Okabe that failed the first time goes on into the future, and this time sends the message to his past self knowing that he'd fail on the first time.@katsucats - Predetermined means that the events happen in the past/future simultaneously with seemingly no origin point. The machine exists in the past because it will be built in the future and be sent back through time, etc. This is the kind of logic that is being implied by the idea of Okabe needing to maintain a loop to ensure that he becomes his future self, with all of his accumulated knowledge. Except, we know this is demonstrably false, the loop already happened, and these events being predetermined poses way more problems than if there's multiple loops we never see happen. From the perspective of the protagonist Okabe, the events could be predetermined. From the perspective of the original Okabe, maybe not. And we could just as well imagine an infinite series of Okabes who have both succeeded and failed, in which protagonist Okabe just happens to inhabit the version of events that we see. LostSpectre said: Sending a d-mail doesn't necessarily activate Reading Steiner unless the sender's memories are encoded in the message. It also doesn't necessarily cause a world line shift if the recipient doesn't make the right actions. When future Okabe sends the d-mail at the end of season 1, he doesn't send his memories back to supplant the past Okabe. Hence, there was no immediate world line shift.There's no reason that Okabe would have to orchestrate these events again, because his past self sending a d-mail is no longer necessary, if anything it could easily cause problems. I'm not sure what your point is about past Okabe not sharing a consciousness with future Okabe, but if past Okabe sends a d-mail, then I don't see why this wouldn't shift the worldline back to beginning, since seemingly anyone can rewrite the world through time travel, but only Okabe would remember it if it doesn't involve a time machine. LostSpectre said: The goal is to change the world line in a controlled manner in order to get to Steins;Gate. The goal was not to change the world line to just anything by causing an unpredictable result.You say that the goal of tricking his past self was in order to not change the worldline, causing divergence, but the opposite seems to be true. LostSpectre said: It might change past Okabe's course of events if he sees a clone of himself, leading to an unpredictable result. If he is allowed to continue the "loop" so to speak, then his accidental d-mail will alert SERN and should in fact shift the worldline. Technically, future Okabe would get back in the machine first, and then time travel into the future, but I don't see how that stops past Okabe from continuing his loop. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
I'm not really sure what it is you're saying, would I be right in reading it as "Having plot elements be consistent with the goal of the story is more important than everything lining up with the way the series' rules and lore?" If so, I agree, but if I'm mistaken in what I rephrased, do correct me. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
LostSpectre said: I forgot what happened to Suzuha, so I looked it up and found this. It's not the only interpretation, but it made sense when I skimmed it.@katsucats - Oh, and there's the whole deal with the machine/suzuha disappearing and somehow there's only one Okabe back in the future. https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/31484/why-does-suzuha-disappear-when-travelling-back-to-the-present Also, at the moment that Okabe travels back in time, there exists at least one world where no Okabe exists (in present time). Then why would it be so hard to believe that there exists at least some worlds where Okabe doesn't exist, hence there would only be one Okabe when he comes back? |
katsucatsMar 24, 2022 3:23 AM
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
O_T_T said: Yes, that's correct. My other nitpick is just in regards to people who know every detail of the lore, but who refuse to compromise on the fact that there's clear contradictions in the logic, for the sake of the story to be more impactful. I'm not really sure what it is you're saying, would I be right in reading it as "Having plot elements be consistent with the goal of the story is more important than everything lining up with the way the series' rules and lore?" If so, I agree, but if I'm mistaken in what I rephrased, do correct me. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| @katsucats - I checked out the VN in specific parts that I was curious about, such as the video-mail. The 3rd Okabe (2025) straight up tries to imply that if his past self doesn't follow his actions, that he wouldn't become the person he is today (2025) and that this would create a paradox. That sets up a great narrative, but it's total bullshit, we know for a fact that Okabe has used a d-mail to completely change his future, in a way that he would never send that d-mail, and it's not a paradox, because the person who sent the d-mail is from another worldline, and the people in the new worldline don't share a history with that worldline, like how the lab members all have memories of Luka being a girl. What possible explanation can there be for trying to imply causality at this stage, when Okabe has jumped through hundreds of worldlines up to this point, and exhausted hundreds of physical bodies that are not his own. The idea that somehow if Okabe changes the past in a way that he doesn't send the first d-mail, that his reading-steiner would never activate and lead him to his place in the future (2025) is just ridiculous. Honestly, I don't know how it fooled me the first time, like it should have been well established up to that point that Okabe can change the worldline, and that he doesn't need to share causality with his past self in order to make the change in the first place. I thought Titor even mentioned that the grandfather paradox wouldn't apply to time travel as he knows it, and then they flat out say "paradox" in that video-mail. That's certainly some ambitious story telling. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
LostSpectre said: I haven't read the VN, but this is easily explained by that link I just posted.@katsucats - I checked out the VN in specific parts that I was curious about, such as the video-mail. The 3rd Okabe (2025) straight up tries to imply that if his past self doesn't follow his actions, that he wouldn't become the person he is today (2025) and that this would create a paradox. LostSpectre said: The future Okabe that sends the d-mail is from the same world line that doesn't change until Okabe saves Makisu.That sets up a great narrative, but it's total bullshit, we know for a fact that Okabe has used a d-mail to completely change his future, in a way that he would never send that d-mail, and it's not a paradox, because the person who sent the d-mail is from another worldline, and the people in the new worldline don't share a history with that worldline, like how the lab members all have memories of Luka being a girl. LostSpectre said: As in the case when Okabe accidentally sends the d-mail in the beginning, sending a d-mail does not in itself cause the consciousness of Okabe to be sent to the world line of the recipient. That only happens when he sends his memories through d-mail. See https://steins-gate.fandom.com/wiki/D-MailWhat possible explanation can there be for trying to imply causality at this stage, when Okabe has jumped through hundreds of worldlines up to this point, and exhausted hundreds of physical bodies that are not his own. The idea that somehow if Okabe changes the past in a way that he doesn't send the first d-mail, that his reading-steiner would never activate and lead him to his place in the future (2025) is just ridiculous. LostSpectre said: So in the end your huge plot hole amounts to something future Okabe says to convey the important of avoiding an outcome contradicting what Suzuha said in the alpha world line, where the time machine was only able to travel back in time? lol. Let's suppose that John Titor was correct. Past Okabe doesn't see Makisu's pool of blood and doesn't send that d-mail. Then everyone would be transported into a new world line of unknown consequence, likely not Steins;Gate. Mayuri would probably still die at some point. Current Okabe is still in the past. There's no paradox.Honestly, I don't know how it fooled me the first time, like it should have been well established up to that point that Okabe can change the worldline, and that he doesn't need to share causality with his past self in order to make the change in the first place. I thought Titor even mentioned that the grandfather paradox wouldn't apply to time travel as he knows it, and then they flat out say "paradox" in that video-mail. That's certainly some ambitious story telling. Now let's say Okabe travels back to the present with the time machine. Since there's no more common past, what reason would there be for Suzuha or future Okabe to necessarily exist in this new world line? Again, there's no paradox, no contradiction. It's just the fact that they're in a new world line. Suppose Okabe travels back in time and actually kills his grandfather, then gets transported to a new world line. Again, he wouldn't disappear because there's no paradox. But if he were to travel to the future from that point, the version of him that would have existed in that world line would not. But that's not at all what the "paradox" specifies. You could call the d-mail's usage of the word "paradox" a plot hole, but I think you'd be grasping at straws. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| @katsucats - The future Okabe is a major issue in itself. The only way that's even plausible is if this Okabe believes they need to recreate the time machine in order for it to exist in 2010, but the truth is that an Okabe before him would have had to already build a machine when there was no machine in 2010 to save Kurisu. The idea that future Okabe was somehow predestined to create the machine before it exists is ridiculous, but that's likely what the story is going for, because they really tack on all this stuff at the end. As for the d-mails you are literally confusing d-mail with the time leap machine, which is about sending your memories back into the past instead of sending your past self a message. The d-mail on the other hand will change the current future if the message causes the recipient to create a divergence where you will never become your present self, this shifts us to an alternate worldline, with an alternate Okabe, but reading-steiner ensures that he retains all of his previous lived memories. Now, I really don't understand how you can attempt to minimize the idea of causality existing for Okabe's d-mail leaps, when everything up until this point would contradict it. There's no logical basis whatsoever for Okabe not being able to stop his past self from sending the d-mail, his memories literally can't be tied to causality, he exists across multiple worldlines. Now, if it is saying that Kurisu will die every time like Mayuri if he changes what his past self saw, that's different, and it also seems to be implied. The terminology of a paradox should be easily understood. A paradox is a time travel event that should not be able to exist, and altering events in a way that could cause a pradox might be impossible or it might lead to some sort of catastrophic event. The point remains the same, that future Okabe was literally implying that if himself in 2010 changes his past self in a way that changes what he experienced, that he couldn't become 2025 Okabe, and that none of them could exist. THIS IS BULLSHIT. You dismissed what I said earlier, but Okabe is in fact a "god", the power of time travel is nothing compared to his ability to exist across all of time, to not be bound by the causality of past/future, because his soul, spirit, memories, etc. will live on past his body, and past his own timeline, to a completely different worldline. Everyone might have a fraction of this power, but he has complete mastery of it. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Steins;Gate Episode 4 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )saxophone15 - Apr 26, 2011 |
245 |
by topfloorboss45
»»
Nov 11, 5:39 PM |
|
Poll: » Steins;Gate Episode 18 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Yumekichi11 - Aug 2, 2011 |
390 |
by Fintoto
»»
Nov 11, 8:14 AM |
|
Poll: » Steins;Gate Episode 15 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Rezurrekt - Jul 13, 2011 |
273 |
by ssafin
»»
Nov 10, 10:43 AM |
|
Poll: » Steins;Gate Episode 3 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Oosran - Apr 19, 2011 |
276 |
by topfloorboss45
»»
Nov 10, 3:48 AM |
|
Poll: » Steins;Gate Episode 1 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Samu-tan - Apr 3, 2011 |
569 |
by topfloorboss45
»»
Nov 9, 3:36 AM |