|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:37 am
Everyone dreams. Everyone has probably had every sort of dream, each dream holding a different meaning for everbody else.
Mine was a terrible dream. It was the sort of dream I did not wish to wake up from, the sort that almost broke me down and made me cry when I finally had to wake since I had to work. Luckily, I wrote most of it down.
I believe it started with a story--a biography, of someone. A woman, whose name was never mentioned in my dream, but a name my dreamself swore he knew to heart. The original biography spoke of this woman's hard times, and a nameless male character who appears briefly. It was at this point that I found my dreamself transported back in time, to a place both unfamiliar and familiar all at once.
I ended up living in what amounts to be the village she lives in. Overtime I made friends, and found possible loves. Eventually I was able to solve a dilemma, more political than epic, and more mundane than grand, but solved it I did. During a myriad of other events I regretfully have now forgotten, She and I became close and fell in love.
Time, however, would not stand still, and I was drawn back to the present. And yet, there was a calm in me; I knew she yet still lived, for she did in the original timeline. I visited the author of her biography, and other scholars who know her story well, and I realize the story was now different. The nameless character who appeared briefly in the original now had a name, and a much larger role; his name was mine, and the story now spoke of the love we shared and the all-too-short time we spent together as I disappeared into the timestream.
With some effort I found her again. She was, of course, now elderly, and yet she waited for me. she knew I would come back, and she never took another man to bed or marriage. Once we were reunited a magical thing took place; somehow, someway, the ravages of time turned back just for her. She became young again, the way I met her in the past. Soon afterwards we married. We attended many events together, and we gained fame for our story of love defeating time.
I found out that I have a daughter by her from our time in the past. My daughter now is much aged, now older than me and my wife both. She was content the way she was, though; she had her own fairy tale life.
As my wife and I continued to live in bliss and contentment, and through an unexplained means, a son of ours (possibly from another timeline, or from the future, or through other means) captured us both. He was lured by more devious desires.
The thought of spending two lifetimes without her, my wife, tore at me in such a way that I found new strenght to free myself from my bonds, to escape with her.
That is when I awoke, saddened. I wanted to sleep again, but I couldn't for I had duties in the real world.
True story, or at least, true in that I had this dream. Of course the events were clearer when I dreamed them, and disjointed when I awoke, but I have managed to piece most of it back together. Of course there were some parts I have now forgotten, or parts that made no sense that contributed nothing (so far as I can remember).
It was a horrible dream because I felt contentment and love on a level I have never experienced before. Being a young man, usually a dream would have either a completely meaningless and confusing experience, or perhaps a thing of lust and desire. But this...it was very vivid, the feeling of love. And in my dream I said things like, "I chose you" over returning to the present, or living alone. Heartwrenchingly cheesy stuff. In my dream I would have done anything for her to see her smile and to have her close to me. And, I still sort of feel that ache even now.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:06 pm
Aw that is a sweet dream Ethan. Rather a bit of an adventurous wish fulfillment dream, if I have the analysis of it right. It would make an interesting story...it is an interesting story! It reminds me of that movie Somewhere in Time, with Chris Reeves and...what's her name...?...oh yeah, Jane Seymour. He found her in the present in a picture and then sort of wished himself back in time to meet her and they fell in love of course. Anyhow, yours is actually more interesting than the movie.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:22 pm
haha, thanks, umar. I'm thinking of making it a story at some point...
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 7:06 pm
Good deal. You should.
Just...what about time travel paradoxes?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 10:10 pm
Well, there would be, yes. I don't know. Time is tricky. I hate time-travel story devices, honestly, lol. The only exceptions are cases like these when time travel IS the story.
My views on time really vary depending on the story and situation, but my immediate idea of it is linear. And, in all likelihood, set in stone.
Sure in my dream it had the 'original' book, and then 'revised' book wherein I am mentioned by name and have a larger role.
If I was to write it and would use my current view of time as a hard-restriction, the journey to the past would already have been recorded in history. I don't know, it's hard to explain...
Essentially, if I travel back to the past, it's because I was writing history as it was meant to be written, not undoing history. Because, anything I do in the past happened in the past so it has already been recorded and already is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_self-consistency_principle
Novikov's Self-Consistency Principle probably rightly represents what I'm getting at.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 10:49 am
That is a very cool dream, Ethan. If you do put it down in story form, I personally wouldn't see a problem with the time-travel thing. It's all in how you approach it. Have you ever read Terry Pratchett's Discworld series? In several of the novels (the one I'm thinking of here is "Jingo," it's a good book, I'd suggest it), he uses the "trousers of time" theory - in which two different worlds emerge from one pivotal choice. Each world exists right alongside the other. Using this theory, "you" could go back in time and make a key alteration to the timestream which sends it off into the other pantleg. "You" then go back to the time that coincides with your departure, but "you" are now down the other pantleg. Having lived in the, shall we say, "left leg," you retain residual memories for a short time once you arrive in the "right leg," but then your mind assimilates the history of the pantleg you now reside in and the others get pushed out, like dream fragments.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:47 am
I don't think time is always linear, that is just my gut feeling about it. I don't see any particular reason for it to be constrained to a complete linear progression. I guess I see it as something heavy, hard to push off course and tending to go back to its course once swayed off the path since it probably flows down the path of least resistance just like everything else does.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:43 pm
I tend to agree on a certain degree with you, umar. Time--even if it was possible to move backwards or forwards through it--would be very hard to affect. But this is why I say it's fairly linear. If someone were to go back into the past and affect something in history, it is because that someone was meant to go back and do what he/she does and that all of it has already been recorded in history. For all we know someone far in the future unknowingly travels back to the age of the dinosaurs and caused their extinction, thus letting history play out the way it already has. If someone travels to the future, takes something and brings it back, it will in all likelihood start the process towards that future, not change it. I'm not saying we do not have free will, nor that everything is absolutely written in stone, but I do believe in the idea that if we were to travel through time and affect things beyond simple observation, it would be because we had already done what we were about to do as recorded by time and history.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:49 pm
I will have to ruminate on all that. *starts ruminating*
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:48 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:13 am
"If someone were to go back into the past and affect something in history, it is because that someone was meant to go back and do what he/she does and that all of it has already been recorded in history."
See, I am not agreeing with this. The word "meant" implies fate or some kind of immutable progression of events. I think time is more fluid then that in the sense that it would be preferable to have a split in time than to have there be a concept called "fate" in existence. Fate to me means that everything has already happened and we are just going along for the ride to experience it. So in my schema one could go back in time and do something that affects the timeline. Instead of a paradox you get a time split. The original timeline is not affected or is only to the extent that someone disappears (to go back in time). That person might find it hard to get back to the original time line, however.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|