Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




SuperMechagodzilla posted:

If catching an “inverted” bullet in a “normal” gun causes the gun (and everything causally related to it) to also invert, then - taking things to a logical conclusion - anyone with an awareness of inversion can invert just about anything they want by merely “thinking backwardsly”.

Sure. This is how the protagonist ends up as the head of the time cops. "I realized I wasn't working for you. We've both been working for me."


"How can it move before I touch it?"

It is both true that the bullet leaps into his hand because he wills it to, and that it was always going to leap into his hand because the future is as predetermined as the past. The Tenet heroes will a victory into existence by submitting themselves entirely to the inevitable force of history. "What's happened, happened. It's an expression of faith in the mechanics of the world. It's not an excuse for doing nothing."

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

You can take the inverted gold from the future and turnstile it, now you have regular gold that you can do whatever the gently caress you want with.

You'd have to invert yourself, unbury the case with the inverted gold in it (effectively burying the case with the gold in it according to the normal flow of time), then go through the turnstile with the gold, thereby producing gold with two futures and no past, like the dude in the hallway fight. It works once Sator has a turnstile, but it seems hard to bootstrap up to that.

Perhaps the simplest assumption is that the turnstiles constructed themselves the same way the bullet holes do, intruding into the fabric of reality just in time for when they're needed. And the idea that the world can be rewritten like that—rather than having to, say, manually build a machine—seems consistent with the fact that the doomsday device is described as an algorithm.

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




For the director of a movie that looks like an ad for an expensive watch, you'd think Nolan would understand aspiration better.

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




SMEGMA_MAIL posted:

Niel definitely knows he’s going to die, he’s recruited by TP/Tenet in the future because that was essentially his “test” to enter the organization even though from Neils perspective that was the end of his timeline. The whole thing is that all the core members of Tenet must have done something that indicated they were willing to die for their tenets. Even if future TP didn’t hint at this, Neil would have known that his last event was a one way trip because of the whole way turnstiles work- if you don’t see yourself inverted/reverted you know you’re taking a one way trip.

If you don't see yourself through the proofing window, it means you won't emerge from the turnstile at all. It doesn't mean you're going to die after going through it at some later/earlier point. There wouldn't have been an instance where Neil didn't see himself through the window, even with his inevitable death.

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




Protagonist: "Dead drops. He buries his time capsule, transmits the location, and digs it up to collect the inverted materials they sent."

Neil: "Seemingly instantaneous. Where's he bury it?"

Protagonist: "Some place that won't be discovered for centuries."

If this actually happening, we know how the gold gets into the time capsule: from its perspective, it's put there by the people who believe themselves to be recovering it. The issue is that, as it keeps travelling through time after—from its inverted perspective—being buried in the capsule, it should still be in it when the capsule is unburied (the capsule's initial burying, from the perspective of those moving forward in time). So it's less a question of where the gold comes from than where it goes as it moves backwards in time.

But of course, that's just the Protagonist's theory. The flashback we see from Sator's perspective works fine. He sees himself unbury a crate and take some gold and a note out. The inverted gold and note would therefore see him put them in the crate and then bury it. No paradoxes.

Protagonist may just be wrong about how it works.

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




Boris Galerkin posted:

Do you have the same issue with the premise of the inverted characters sitting in a non-inverted shipping container for 7 days to go back in time? They take themselves out of the box after 7 days and invert again and their history doesn’t get erased. That 7 days inverted in a shipping container is part of their history. The fact that they removed themselves from the container after 7 days doesn’t create a paradox like you keep insisting taking the gold out of the box would. How is it any different?

Because when they walk out of the shipping container, they're walking out of the shipping container from the perspective of someone moving into the past, because they're inverted. If you were to watch them in regular time, they would walk backwards into the shipping container and then sit there for a week, doing everything in reverse. So there's nothing paradoxical about believing they travelled into the past using the shipping container: you can literally watch them do it.

In contrast, think about forward-moving Sator removing an inverted gold bar from the box. He's moving forward in time, so when he carries the gold bar out of the box, he's moving it away from the box in his future, moving forward in time. But his future is the bar's past, because it's inverted. Therefore, the bar's past must have been to be with Sator, not to be in the box.

I went ahead and made a diagram:



Note the path of the gold bar, and think of it from the perspective of each of the two parties that interact with it.

For Sator to pick up the gold bar and drive away with it while he is personally uninverted, the inverted gold bar must leave into his future with him, meanings its personal past must have been with him. But the claim is that the future people put the inverted bar in the box in the future and it got to the pick-up point from the future in the time capsule: so, its personal past must also have been in the time capsule.

So, as described, the bar has two pasts from its own perspective, which doesn't work.

This doesn't happen with the people in the shipping container. At every point, they have one personal past and one personal future. A pair of people might spring out of a turnstile seemingly as if from nothing, but it always makes sense from their perspective:



The basic problem is that, in the Protagonist's incorrect theory, the gold bar has to do a turnaround without a turnstile.

So, Protagonist is wrong about where the gold bars come from. But, we don't see his theory play out on-screen, so it's not the movie being wrong, just one character who is still trying to get his head around time travel making a mistake.

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




Zaphod42 posted:

Exactly. Also why I keep saying that if you are inverted when you collect the gold bar, it works fine, because then you go into a turnstile with the bar and everything is consistent.

Yes, that works:



Note that this basically matches Protagonist's description:

Protagonist: "Dead drops. He buries his time capsule, transmits the location, and digs it up to collect the inverted materials they sent."

Neil: "Seemingly instantaneous. Where's he bury it?"

Protagonist: "Some place that won't be discovered for centuries."

He just leaves out an inversion step. So it's not even so much wrong as incomplete. Of course, this assumes he has a turnstile, which he wouldn't early on (presumably).

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




Right. Remember all the various creeds that members of the organization spout. They have established precepts for handling these various issues that they put their faith in.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson speaks about making sure that your time-reversed counterpart appears in the proving window. The implication is that the machine can eat people. But specifically, the machine eats people who are willing to gently caress with the past, because the attempt to walk into the machine without a counterpart is itself an attempt to gently caress with the past.

Protagonist and his allies make themselves people who can support these long time loops with the dogma that they live by. The machine can generate a pair of Protagonists that will live for weeks or months by doctrines that keep them from changing the past even when given the opportunity to do so. I don't know that they pop out of the turnstile if they don't have something keeping their actions within tolerable limits.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007




If Neil was 100% sure about the immutability of time, they wouldn't need to do all this, since obviously the world hasn't been destroyed. Protagonist points this out to him. So it's instead that Neil very much wants time to be immutable (because that means the world can't be destroyed and they win), so he acts as if it is. He's so dedicated to this principle that he's willing to die for it.

This might also explain why Sator does seemingly impossible things with the gold. He is, in contrast to them, part of a scheme predicated on the mutability of time.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply