R = L = N = E = K = N = ...... = U

[Lychon]

Dear Sir Bahamut and any other individual interested in knowing the ideas behind the R=U theory: not only have you proven to be inept at the underlying sociological circumstances of Final Fantasy VIII, but you are now showing that you know virtually nothing about the logic behind time travel or time manipulation. Your misinterpret the entire plot of the game, and you confuse yourself even further by advocating false notions of ‘static’ and ‘dynamic’ time as fact. Let’s go over your response carefully so I can show you exactly what I mean and how there is more than enough evidence from the game to support the possibility and plausibility of Rinoa being Ultimecia.

Lychon:

Your last posts only reveal your lack of understanding of the nature of static time. I have demonstrated in the Time/Ultimecia Plot FAQ at Gamefaqs how a Static Time theory can work, and how no logical flaws arise from it. Your so-called 'proofs' against static time are either based on a bad understanding of static time, or an inability to picture an FF8 where the past cannot be changed. Either way, your 'proofs' are not proofs at all.

Your FAQ is plagued with false logic, and I have disproved it previously in my posts. The ‘Static Time theory,’ which you have invented from your imagination, does not work at all within the plot of Final Fantasy VIII. The only theory that does work in the game is theory of non-linear time, or ‘dynamic’ time if you will. You once again confuse the our universe with the Final Fantasy VIII universe, and therefore you cannot understand the fact that the past was changed in Final Fantasy VIII. Anything you have listed as ‘proof’ has been discarded because it is composed mostly of logical flaws which have no bearing on what really happened or what could happen in the game.

As such, I'm going to have to refer you to the aforementioned FAQ (why explain it again here, when I have it already written out much clearer there, eh?). If you still think static time doesn't work, I'm going to have to refer you to chapter 15 of Brian Greene's "The Fabric of the Cosmos". Unlike yourself, I have actually read this book, so unlike what you seem to think, Brian Greene DOES discuss an entirely similar approach to time-travel, when considering the exact same paradox you mention. He says, and I quote:

As I have already disproved your ideas in the FAQ you are referring to, I do not know why you continue to cite from it. False logic is not a good way to prove your ideas. You have no idea what books I have read regarding time or the cosmos, so your assumption that I have not read that book is unfounded. As I have stated previously, I am well aware of what Mr. Brian Greene has presented in his work, and I appreciate you posting an excerpt of his here. Now, the quote you cited from Brain Greene (although I do not recall this quote from his book from I will take your word for it) was the following:

"Take the paradoxical example of your having gone back in time and having prevented your parents from meeting. Intuitively, we all know what that's supposed to mean. Before you time-traveled to the past, your parents had met - say, at the stroke of midnight, December 31. 1965, at a New Year's Party - and, in due course, your mother gave birth to you. Then, many years later, you decided to travel to the past - back to December 31, 1965 - and once there, you changed things; in particular, you kept your parents apart, preventing your own conception and birth. But now let's counter this intuitive description with the more fully reasoned spacetime-loaf depiction of time.


At its core, the intuitive description fails to make sense because it assumes moments can change. The intuitive picture envisions the stroke of midnight, December 31, 1965 (using standard earthling time-slicing) as "initially" being the moment of your parents meeting, but envisions further that your interference "subsequently" changes things so that at the stroke of midnight, December 31, 1965, your parents are miles, if not continents, apart. The problem with this recounting of events, though, is that moments don't change; as we've seen, they just are. The spacetime loaf exists, fixed and unchanging. There is no meaning to a moment's "initially" being one way and "subsequently" being another way.

If you time-travelled back to December 31, 1965, then you were there, you were always there, you will always be there, you were never not there.



This realisation leads us to some quirky conclusions, but it avoids paradox".

The above quote only serves to bolster my own arguments and weaken your own. I have no idea why you would cite such a quote which has absolutely no bearing on the core of your arguments. Mr. Greene has shown (quite nicely I might add) that even though time travel in the past may avoid a paradox, it still changes the past. The time-traveling son proves this by going back in time and altering the way that his parents met, but this does necessarily mean that his parents will meet differently in an alternate universe or even in an alternate dimension. Ultimecia in effect compresses the ‘space-time loaf,’ so it does not remain unfixed and unchanging. You are once again assuming incorrectly that our universe has the same physical properties as the Final Fantasy VIII universe.

If you do travel back in the past to a certain point before you were born, then it is irrelevant if ‘you were there’ or if ‘you will always be there’ or if ‘you will never not be there.’ You exist in a time period before you were conceived, which would never have happened if you did not attempt to go back in time. In one universe, nothing may change moment to moment, but a change has nevertheless taken place. It does not have to be a change which is based on ‘initial’ or ‘subsequent’ actions: as Mr. Greene shows, the change has always been there, it will always be there, it never will not be there. But it is, nevertheless, a change.

Sound familiar? If it doesn't, it is your own knowledge of the static time theory that needs to be freshened up. The whole thing is in Chapter 15, as mentioned, so if you think Greene has made a logical fallacy, you can always take it up with him.

Now, don't get me wrong here, like you did in your last post:

Of course the above quote sounds familiar because my argument was one which was very similar to Mr. Greene’s. The figment of your imagination which has thought up ‘static time theory’ needs to be introduced to plausible and implausible reality, lol . Now, this is going to take me a long time to introduce you to the relations between quantum mechanics and general relativity and how they operate in regards to time travel, so I’ll assume that you at least have a firm grasp on both those concepts. As I have shown, however, Mr. Greene’s logic appears to be plausible and possible, but it only goes in support of my own concept. You also once again make the false assumption that Ultimecia time travels: she does not time travel per se, she achieves time compression. And whether or not she ‘truly achieves’ it or not is irrelevant because her time period was already merged with Squall and Rinoa’s time period. Therefore, this ‘changing’ of two time periods by their merging may in fact always have been and always will be true, and Rinoa now may not even become Ultimecia in her own universe, although alternate universes and alternate dimensions may prove capable of bypassing a paradox and maintain Mr. Greene’s idea of a fixed and unchanging space-time loaf. However, as I have stated previously, the concepts of Mr. Greene’s ideas have no valid bearing on universe of Final Fantasy VIII, because such a universe operates on different physical laws and different understandings than our own universe.

I am not saying that FF8 works exactly like the real world!

I never said that, so don't put it into my mouth. The fact that Brian Greene's ideas here perfectly correspond to static time (something I was not aware of until after static time was developed) only prove that static time is a logical theory with no holes in it (as said, if you disagree, you can take it up with Greene, not me). His idea is brought up when considering the notion of tampering in the past, so your statement that time-travelling and such in FF8 disproves static time is incorrect. Obviously static time takes into consideration time-travelling (what would the point be if it didn't?), and as shown by Greene here, it is perfectly logical. It does not prove static time as being the 'correct' idea of time in FF8 though.

You did not need to have said, but you consistently imply it in your posts. You continue to imply it by citing a physicist who is describing our own universe and attempting to use his logic to describe the universe of Final Fantasy VIII. You also incorrectly state that Brian Greene’s ideas correspond to a static universe. Mr. Brian Greene has continually supported the idea of the uncertainty principles when it comes to quantum mechanics, the building blocks of space-time motion and operation. Therefore, to state that time is static not only contradicts cosmological initiations, but it also assumes way to much of our own universe which remains unproven. Remember that I never set out to prove Rinoa=Ultimecia. I only set out to prove that the idea was plausible and possible, which I have done repeatedly.

That being said, I am taking up the idea of static time with you, because I have no problems with Mr. Greene’s logic. Your own concepts are the ones which lack logic and validity when applied to the Final Fantasy VIII universe. In our own universe, it does not appear that any concept of ‘time compression’ is feasible, but it is feasible in the Final Fantasy VIII universe. In that universe, time compression does indeed change Mr. Greene’s ‘fixed and unchanging’ space-time loaf, therefore the relations you make between our own universe and the Final Fantasy VIII universe are false.

Also, it is most likely true that moments do not change, but this does not mean that moments cannot be added. When Ultimecia (you know, the villain in the Final Fantasy VIII universe) merges her time period and life progression with the time periods and life progressions of Squall, Rinoa, and company, she is adding moments to space-time continuum. Other moments which may have resulted in Rinoa becoming Ultimecia are still true and in existence, but other moments have now been added due to Ultimecia achieving time compression. These moments state the opposite: that Rinoa may not become Ultimecia, if she was even going to become Ultimecia in the first place. Now we have the concepts of alternate universes, parallel universes, or alternate/parallel dimensions come into existence. Hope you can understand this.

The reason it doesn't prove it, is because it is impossible to tell whether or not the past actually can change in FF8. The initiation of TC does not prove this, because if time is assumed to be static, TC can merely be seen as another immutable event on the line of time (or 'spacetime loaf' as Greene says). TC is only an unavoidable problem if it is fully completed (because then Ultimecia could rearrange time as seen fit), but since that never happens, it can be assigned a fixed part on the line of time without any paradoxes arising (as Greene said, the conclusions are quirky, but they avoid paradoxes). This is also explained in the FAQ. On the other hand though, nothing can prove that the past CANNOT be changed. Your statement that "Time is not set in stone, and if you assume this then you missed the entire plot of Final Fantasy VIII" is purely your opinion. What exactly stops me from staying "Time IS set in stone, and if you assume the opposite the whole plot of FF8 is meaningless"? You do not seem to understand that this is merely a difference in opinion. It is not that I 'refuse to grasp the logic' of your time-travelling son scenario; on the contrary, I have repeatedly now stated that a dynamic time is perfectly possible. It is merely that our base assumptions (can the past change?) differ, due to differences in opinion.

First you state that the past cannot be changed in Final Fantasy VIII, and now you state that it is impossible for that past to change in FFVIII? Lol, well which one is? Are you on the fence, or do you support the idea that the past in Final Fantasy VIII cannot be changed? Or, are you on the fence logically, but personally you support the idea that the past in Final Fantasy VIII cannot be changed? Whichever one it is, I have shown above that the past most definitely can be changed, but perhaps not in the same way as most people think when they talk about the ‘past being changed.’ Time compression may just as well be an inevitable part of the ‘space-time loaf,’ just like a changing of the past may also be an inevitable part of the ‘space-time loaf.’ Time compression contradicts the idea of a ‘fixed and unchanging’ space-time loaf because it changes the very structure of time, of all-time actually, all time in the future and all time in the past and all time in the moment-to-moment present. My statement of time not being set in stone is not my opinion: it is a well-supported theory which takes Mr. Greene’s premises into account and is even supported by them.

You cannot state that ‘Time is set in stone’ because in Final Fantasy VIII the possibility for complete time compression contradicts such a notion. You just stated above that Ultimecia could have re-arranged time as she saw fit, therefore making the idea of ‘time being set in stone’ utterly false in the Final Fantasy VIII universe. Therefore, it is much more plausible to assume that time is not set in stone in the Final Fantasy universe, and it is even supported by the logic of Mr. Greene and my own logic. (Although it is not necessary that the universe of Final Fantasy VIII operate in the same manner as our own universe).

Our base assumptions may differ, but I am not trying to prove the R=U theory is incorrect, and I am not trying to prove that the past can be changed. I have established the plausibility and possibility of both scenarios, so therefore I have succeeded in my argument. As far as our own universe is concerned however, we have much more research and observation and comparison to do before any kind of theory about the universe’s cosmology (asides from Big Bang) or of time-travel take definite support.

I have nothing more to say though, until you either thoroughly (re?)read the static time theory described in the FAQ referred to, or read chapter 15 of "The Fabric of the Cosmos" (or both!), because all your arguments against static time are, as mentioned, based on a flawed understanding of static time. And again, if you feel that the theory of static time itself is inherently flawed, please try and convince Greene of that first, because I'm afraid that if you two disagree on what is logically possible, I'm going to put a wee bit more faith in his word. Consider this my last post in the discussion until then.

Sir B.

I do not know why you keep bringing up your FAQ. I will not give you the satisfaction of bringing it up here, so if you would like me to address a portion of it, then by all means go ahead and post it here. You ideas of ‘static time’ are not only incompatible with the logic behind the events of Final Fantasy VIII, but they are also figments of your imagination which you have attempted to bolster by citing Mr. Brian Greene’s work here. If you are re-thinking your ideas based on his work, then I congratulate you on a valiant effort- perhaps now you will understand my own logic and support for the R=U theory.

PS: Last time I checked, the question of R=U and the debate of static vs. dynamic time are not the same debate. My only comment to R=U I made in my first response to you. My continued participation here has been due to the static time vs dynamic time bit, nothing else.

As I have already shown (and you yourself) admitted, the concept of dynamic time is what prevails in Final Fantasy VIII, as opposed to our own universe where static time or dynamic time or even a different concept of time may prevail. The mere possibility that Ultimecia could have achieved true time compression and controlled all time, past and future, proves that the Final Fantasy VIII universe operates on mechanisms which include the concept of dynamic time.

PPS: You say that "Once again you have proven yourself as hypocritical by stating something unknown as fact", yet throughout the entire debate, I have explicitly stated over and over again that static time is not a fact, and that it is merely opinion. The very bit you quoted before stating this even has me saying "it is impossible to prove which one is correct" and "Both static time and 'non-linear' time work". If you reread my other posts you'll find similar remarks everywhere. How you drew the conclusion that I consider static time as a 'fact' from that, I do not know, but please read my posts a bit more carefully in the future anyway.

I would ask of you to do the same, seeing how in the past it was you who admitted to passing over my posts. You may state now that ‘static time is not a fact,’ but in your previous posts you specifically implied that the concept was fact. Not only this, but you constantly fail to specify which universe you are referring to, which leaves the reader with the logical conclusion that you believe the Final Fantasy VIII universe to possess the same physical characteristics as our own universe.

Thank you for replying, and I look forward to your response.

-LYCHON