The space/time continuum: Back to the Future vs. Timeline Nov19 '07

I often get nostalgic and decide to pop in the Back to the Future trilogy from the late 80's, kick back, and watch Marty and "Doc" unfold the intricacies of time travel, right in front of my own eyes. Spielberg did such a marvelous job on these movies, it's no wonder their luster has yet to wear off.

(Did I just "age" myself? ;)

Although it's just fictional, every time I watch the series, I find myself asking the same questions. Just to be redundantly picky, I have to analyze everything. It's just my nature. I could just enjoy the movies and not ask questions, but what fun would that be?

My questions revolve around the disruption of what the characters in Back to the Future call "the space/time continuum." This, I presume, simply means the "natural order of the universe." In other words, history. Don't mess with it, because you could alter future events.

My problem is that I get very confused watching these movies. On the surface, it somewhat makes sense. As Marty and "Doc" travel back and forth in time, they see the events that have already happened, either with their involvement, or without.

I think the disconnect comes due to the fact that Back to the Future treats time as if it moves backwards and forwards. Therefore, the movies exhibit a past, present, and future based on the clock. Setting your time to one minute ahead results in your moving through time.

I don't believe this makes any sense. I don't believe time moves at all. It's really just a trick of our subconscience that fools us into thinking that it moves. Time just is. It doesn't move. It's the same. Therefore, there is no past and future, as we perceive it.

I prefer to support the (also fictional) theory from the book Timeline, by Michael Crichton. Timeline suggests that time, in fact, does not move, and that the past and future are really just different "universes," all occurring parallel to each other. So, 2007 is the universe we know and see, but 1987 is also existing in another universe. And... 1457, for that matter.

Without getting into too many details, the main point is that time stands still. It doesn't move, it just is. Once you consider that concept, you lose any notion of traveling back and forth in time, as Back to the Future illustrates.

Still, I marvel at the ingenious efforts put forth by Speilberg and his crew in the Back to the Future trilogy.

"The 'flux capacitor' is what makes time travel possible!"

Does anyone even know what that means? Probably not, but that was the intention - to provide some technical details so viewers don't think it's completely arcane. But not enough details to overwhelm or confuse viewers.

Or, perhaps not enough details because there were no more details! It's all fiction!

Categories: Movies , Offbeat , Science

Add Feedback (view all)

Leave feedback

Feedback

Input format: The editor controls below will assist with Markdown syntax.

Status

Sub-status

Your info

Hey! This is not about Apple! Regarding the non-existence of past/future, however, I concur. ... Read more.

Back to the Future is an awesome trilogy, one of my favourites, I just watched it last week :) Terminator and Aliens are great too. ... Read more.

Let's assume for a moment that time travel were possible, at least in the way expounded in the trilogy. Here's an old essay of mine worth ... Read more.

Great essay, Matt. Unfortunately, that's just the start of the confusion. The paradoxes are everywhere. In Back to the Future 3, which begins the s ... Read more.

matthom is published and produced by Matt Thommes - an independent publishing enthusiast, mobile blogger, content creator, informative writer, web developer from Chicago. Never one to conform, Matt intends to promote the effect the web has on our lives, in an effort to intensify, instruct, and clarify all that is happening around us.

Contact Matt

Similar Entries

Stats

54 unique visits since August 2008

Syndicate

Advertisements