Trunks Timeline Question

[Terra-jin]

Desirecampbell, you say that Trunks always travels to the timeline he was just in. But after the Cell games, Trunks doesn't travel to the future of that timeline (the main timeline), does he? If this were the case, Mirai no Trunks would end up in GT

It's really simple. If you enter the *END* of a time-line you don't split it. Thus, we have Trunks going back and spliting the time-line into two. Then trunks RETURNING to that same time-line, at the end, and not splitting it. We have Cell splitting a time-line. We have Trunks now returning to a future but not going to the end (because the Trunk in the no-Cell past already did that) and creating a 4th time-line. Boom, that's it.

Trust me, I've worked on this long enough to have it all ironed out and functional.

This is exactly what I've come up with, except it's a bit better formulated
Xyex, do you agree that there is a past in which Cell never appears and in which Trunks finds the means to destroy the androids in his time? It is the timeline that the Trunks that was killed by Cell had traveled to.

However, as desirecampbell pointed out, this theory still doesn't explain why Trunks returns to the already changed past in of a fresh past, or why Trunks returns to the original future instead of the future of the changed timeline.

[Xyex]

This is exactly what I've come up with, except it's a bit better formulated

That was only a quick summary. XP

Xyex, do you agree that there is a past in which Cell never appears and in which Trunks finds the means to destroy the androids in his time? It is the timeline that the Trunks that was killed by Cell had traveled to.

Yes. The Trunks that Cell killed had already traveled back in time to the past and created an alternate time-line without Cell's time-traveling presence. Either they found an off swtich, a device to detonate the bombs in the twins, or Trunks trained to be just strong enough to take them out, and then returned to the original time-line.

However, as desirecampbell pointed out, this theory still doesn't explain why Trunks returns to the already changed past in of a fresh past, or why Trunks returns to the original future instead of the future of the changed timeline.

No, that's simple. *sigh* I'd hoped to avoid being dragged into this again but.... oh well. Here goes.

Trunks 1 travels into the past from TL1, splits it, and creates TL2, gives Goku medicine, and returns to the end of his time-line. Then, he goes back again to the end of TL2, finds a way to stop the twins, and returns to the end of TL1. TL1 goes forward, Cell emerges, Cell goes back in time and splits TL2 creating TL3 while Trunks is already in the past. Thus, when Trunks attempts to return to TL1 he enters it *before* the end of the timeline, at the point he knows of as the end but no longer is since Cell is from further along. Thus, TL1 splits into TL4 now and this Trunks becomes Trunks 2, the one that will eventually kill Cell in his time-line.

[Terra-jin]

That's not what I mean.

When Trunks returns to the future, he goes to TL1. Why doesn't he instead travel to the future in TL2?
Back in TL1, Trunks travels back to the year 767. But why does he end up in TL2, instead of splitting TL1 from the year 767? This would hypothetically create a TL3 in which Trunks arrives in 767 but not in 764.

By the end of a timeline, do you mean the period of time after the latest time-jump? Please explain this concept.

[desirecampbell]

Trunks 1 travels into the past from TL1, splits it, and creates TL2, gives Goku medicine, and returns to the end of his time-line. Then, he goes back again to the end of TL2, finds a way to stop the twins, and returns to the end of TL1. TL1 goes forward, Cell emerges, Cell goes back in time and splits TL2 creating TL3 while Trunks is already in the past. Thus, when Trunks attempts to return to TL1 he enters it *before* the end of the timeline, at the point he knows of as the end but no longer is since Cell is from further along. Thus, TL1 splits into TL4 now and this Trunks becomes Trunks 2, the one that will eventually kill Cell in his time-line.

Huh? That bold part's where I have a problem. Trunks isn't in the past at that point. He's dead. He has to be dead, Cell takes his timemachine - how would Cell even get to the past if Trunks is there with the timemachine?

Besides, Cell goes back to a point in time before there are any timeline splits, so he wouldn't split off a timeline where Trunks wasn't around? If Cell timejumped to a point where Trunks actually was, he would certainly cause the creating of a new Trunks in the new timeline, but Cell doesn't do that, and (thinking about it) it would be very difficult to have such a sequence of events occur.

Furthermore, how Does Trunks get to 767 in timeline 2? If time creeps along at the same rate on every timeline, then timeline 2's "end" should be 765. Trunks simply can't get there.

And, one final point, why must there be only four timelines?


I might have misunderstood something -could we get a visual reference?

[Great Saiyaman]

Wait but guys, I want to point out....Trunks already knew that his timeline would not be effected.

[desirecampbell]

Wait but guys, I want to point out....Trunks already knew that his timeline would not be effected.

Are you sure? From what has been quoted from the anime and the manga it seems he knew it was a possibility but thought that he was changing his own timeline.

[Swift]

Wait but guys, I want to point out....Trunks already knew that his timeline would not be effected.

Are you sure? From what has been quoted from the anime and the manga it seems he knew it was a possibility but thought that he was changing his own timeline.

After checking the DVD, I now have proof! Trunks says does not literally say "I just realized" after Gohan questions Trunks's idea. He says "S- Sou ka! Wasurete 'ta!", which means (and is subtitled as) " Th- that's right! I'd forgotten!" So, it looks like he had just gotten ahead of himself with his theory, without thinking through how he knew time travel worked, and Gohan just made him come to his senses. I don't know where the previous script posted came from, as Daimaô's differs from it (still the same general idea, but different phrasings).

[Terra-jin]

Huh? That bold part's where I have a problem. Trunks isn't in the past at that point. He's dead. He has to be dead, Cell takes his timemachine - how would Cell even get to the past if Trunks is there with the timemachine?

Besides, Cell goes back to a point in time before there are any timeline splits, so he wouldn't split off a timeline where Trunks wasn't around? If Cell timejumped to a point where Trunks actually was, he would certainly cause the creating of a new Trunks in the new timeline, but Cell doesn't do that, and (thinking about it) it would be very difficult to have such a sequence of events occur.

Furthermore, how Does Trunks get to 767 in timeline 2? If time creeps along at the same rate on every timeline, then timeline 2's "end" should be 765. Trunks simply can't get there.

And, one final point, why must there be only four timelines?


I might have misunderstood something -could we get a visual reference?

1. Because Cell travels to before the end of timeline 2, thereby changing Trunks' history and creating the third timeline. This is why there are now two time-machines.

2. Cell changes TL2. In TL2, Trunks appears, so he also appears in TL3, which is based on TL2.

3. Isn't is probable that Trunks can choose the time he would arrive? So just sets the time-machine to three years after his previous jump even though he waited under a year to make the second jump.

4. Because we think that new timelines are only created when you infract previous jumps, or as Xyex puts it, when you travel to before the "end" of a timeline. It is based on these two observations:

1. Trunks travels to TL2 in the second jump, instead of creating a TL3 from an unchanged past (TL1).
2. Trunks returns to his future, instead of the future of the altered timeline.

This behaviour isn't explained in the series, nor do I have an explanation for it. It's Dragonball-style time-travel

[desirecampbell]

After checking the DVD, I now have proof! Trunks says does not literally say "I just realized" after Gohan questions Trunks's idea. He says "S- Sou ka! Wasurete 'ta!", which means (and is subtitled as) " Th- that's right! I'd forgotten!" So, it looks like he had just gotten ahead of himself with his theory, without thinking through how he knew time travel worked, and Gohan just made him come to his senses. I don't know where the previous script posted came from, as Daimaô's differs from it (still the same general idea, but different phrasings).

Does that mean "I'd forgotten [that I can only create new timelines]", as if he knew all along, or "I'd forgotten [that I could be creating new timelines, not changing my own]", as if he as under he assumption he would be changing his own timeline, but he'd forgotten about that other possibility?

Both would show he was expecting to be jumping not to separate timelines but to different points in the same one (his). But the former would suggest that all the planning about the timemachine had been built around jumping to different timelines (and could mean that whatever timeline Trunks jumped to was chosen by the timemachine's computer), while the latter would more suggest that Trunks and Bulma were under the assumption that he'd not be creating new timelines, just changing the one he came from, but held out that creating new timelines would be a possibility too. That would suggest that such 'automatic destination control' would not be built-in to the timemachine.

1. Because Cell travels to before the end of timeline 2, thereby changing Trunks' history and creating the third timeline. This is why there are now two time-machines.

Your sentence is a little garbled, do you mean 'Cell travels to 763 in the second timeline while Trunks is still in it, thus creating another timeline splitting off of it, with another Trunks and timemachine'?

If so, no, he can't. For Cell to do that there has to be two timemachines already. And the only way he can get one is by killing Trunks and taking it. So, of he has to kill Trunks to get the timemachine how can he then jump to a point in history with Trunks in it already?

2. Cell changes TL2. In TL2, Trunks appears, so he also appears in TL3, which is based on TL2.

I have no idea what that means

3. Isn't is probable that Trunks can choose the time he would arrive? So just sets the time-machine to three years after his previous jump even though he waited under a year to make the second jump.

Maybe, we don't know. I assume he could, but from what we see it appears that he didn't know (or had forgotten) that he was creating new timelines - so he almost certainly wasn't choosing what timeline he was going to.

Secondly, if you're talking about the theory that all timelines start extending their "end" a the same rate then he can't go to that timeline to that year - it doesn't exist. He'd have to wait, in the future or some weird limbo dimension, for more than two more years before that point in time existed in that timeline.

4. Because we think that new timelines are only created when you infract previous jumps, or as Xyex puts it, when you travel to before the "end" of a timeline. It is based on these two observations:

1. Trunks travels to TL2 in the second jump, instead of creating a TL3 from an unchanged past (TL1).
2. Trunks returns to his future, instead of the future of the altered timeline.

This behaviour isn't explained in the series, nor do I have an explanation for it. It's Dragonball-style time-travel

The reason one wouldn't create a new timeline off of the 'end' of a timeline is because there's nothing to 'split' from. You really are creating a new timeline, there's just not anything to create it off of. And even that explanation is pretty lame.
And there's no evidence, or anything stated, to suggest that Trunks isn't creating new timelines every time he jumps.
In response to (1), we don't know that happened like that. We know he went back to see Goku and the gang, we have no evidence to show he didn't create a new timelne again. In response to (2), that only shows that his machine can jump to different timelines. Either as something Bulma has designed, or simply as part of how timetravel works (like creating new timelines).

[Xyex]

When Trunks returns to the future, he goes to TL1. Why doesn't he instead travel to the future in TL2?

You can't go to someplace that doesn't exist. He has to return to TL1 because TL2 doesn't exist in the future yet.

Huh? That bold part's where I have a problem. Trunks isn't in the past at that point. He's dead. He has to be dead, Cell takes his timemachine - how would Cell even get to the past if Trunks is there with the timemachine?

..............................

Uhhhh..... *headdesk* *ehem* See, this is why I wanted to avoid getting involved. The lack of common sense in these threads constantly threatens my sanity. Ok, let me explain something basic here that is fundemental to the entire concept of timetravel. You see, timetravel lets you go into the past where things that have already ocurred are still happening. Thus, Trunks can return to the future, die, have his timemachine stolen, and still be in the past for Cell to encounter when he goes back in time. Trunks returning to the future does not make his self in the past suddenly vanish.

So, how could Cell go into the past if Trunks is there with the timemachine? Easy. He kills Trunks and steals the timemachine and goes back to when Trunks is still there with the timemachine!

Besides, Cell goes back to a point in time before there are any timeline splits, so he wouldn't split off a timeline where Trunks wasn't around? If Cell timejumped to a point where Trunks actually was, he would certainly cause the creating of a new Trunks in the new timeline, but Cell doesn't do that, and (thinking about it) it would be very difficult to have such a sequence of events occur.

I am not getting into this again. We've already determined that it wont go anywhere.

And, one final point, why must there be only four timelines?

Occam's razor.

[desirecampbell]

You see, timetravel lets you go into the past where things that have already ocurred are still happening. Thus, Trunks can return to the future, die, have his timemachine stolen, and still be in the past for Cell to encounter when he goes back in time. Trunks returning to the future does not make his self in the past suddenly vanish.

True, but Cell doesn't go to any point in time that has Trunks in it. He goes to 763, before Trunks had ever timejumped. He must create a brand new timeline. This timeline cannot have the Trunks he stole the timemachine from.

If Cell had killed Trunks and taken his timemachine to a point 767 or 764 where Trunks was in the past, then he would split off a new timeline and create a new Trunks (and thus a new timemachine). But Cell doesn't do that. He goes to a point in time without Trunks

So, how could Cell go into the past if Trunks is there with the timemachine? Easy. He kills Trunks and steals the timemachine and goes back to when Trunks is still there with the timemachine!

Yeah, that would work. Would. We know Cell doesn't do that.

I am not getting into this again. We've already determined that it wont go anywhere.

You've already determined that it won't go anywhere. You're also the only one that seems to think that Cell can create a newtimeline and split Trunks up into two people. You have not explained how Cell did this by jumping to 763. Can you explain? Or are you going to simply give up?

I would like to hear your theory, but you seem intent on being a dick about it. "My theory is great, and perfect, but I'm not going t explain it to anyone."

And, one final point, why must there be only four timelines?

Occam's razor.

Oh please, you're bringing up Occam's Razor? No, my theory is the simplest - you're theory is against the very nature of Occam's Razor.
The simplest theory is that every timejump creates a new timeline. Period.

[Steven Perry]

Ok, let me explain something basic here that is fundamental to the entire concept of timetravel. You see, timetravel lets you go into the past where things that have already occurred are still happening. Thus, Trunks can return to the future, die, have his timemachine stolen, and still be in the past for Cell to encounter when he goes back in time. Trunks returning to the future does not make his self in the past suddenly vanish.

Err... doesn't Cell travel back before Trunks' arrival? Or am I so retarded that I'm STILL not understanding you? Xyex, could you re-write your whole concept of time-travel in one post, so I don't have to piece together fragments from multiple posts? Could you also make some sort of chart, because I just loose what you're saying sometimes. The only reason I understood Desire's in the first place was because he had something for me to look at- something to visualize. One of your posts made good sense, though.

Huh? Why would he end up in his own timeline at that point? How could he, if his timeline had extended so far into the future already?

Desire's old theory had the timelines extending at the same rate, but at different positions. However, when Trunks returns to the future, the one he just visited DIDN'T catch up. So, if he waits 8 months in his original timeline, 8 months pass from where he left in the newly created timeline. If he wants to travel into the past 3 YEARS from the point of Frieza's death (which was around his leaving point), there'd be nowhere to go- because that timeline has only progressed by 8 MONTHS. So, there'd be no other option but to split his original timeline. However, the new theory works (unlike this). [/retarded_explanation]

[Great Saiyaman]

Wait but guys, I want to point out....Trunks already knew that his timeline would not be effected.

Are you sure? From what has been quoted from the anime and the manga it seems he knew it was a possibility but thought that he was changing his own timeline.

The Manga's quote is:

"Oh that's right"...like he forgot. Then he goes on to say how it was his mother's plan to have a timeline in peace even though it wouldn't effect their & that she wanted Trunks to try & find a weakness by watching Goku fight. It seems to me like him & Bulma knew all along.

[Xyex]

True, but Cell doesn't go to any point in time that has Trunks in it. He goes to 763, before Trunks had ever timejumped. He must create a brand new timeline. This timeline cannot have the Trunks he stole the timemachine from.

If Cell had killed Trunks and taken his timemachine to a point 767 or 764 where Trunks was in the past, then he would split off a new timeline and create a new Trunks (and thus a new timemachine). But Cell doesn't do that. He goes to a point in time without Trunks

I've gone over this before.

Yeah, that would work. Would. We know Cell doesn't do that.

Obviously he does or Trunks wouldn't be there and Cell wouldn't have EXACTLY THE SAME TIMEMACHINE that Trunks has.

You've already determined that it won't go anywhere. You're also the only one that seems to think that Cell can create a newtimeline and split Trunks up into two people. You have not explained how Cell did this by jumping to 763. Can you explain? Or are you going to simply give up?

I would like to hear your theory, but you seem intent on being a dick about it. "My theory is great, and perfect, but I'm not going t explain it to anyone."

Seriously, have you ever read any of my posts? Ever? I explained this before, throughly. And you ignored it. That's not my problem.

Oh please, you're bringing up Occam's Razor? No, my theory is the simplest - you're theory is against the very nature of Occam's Razor.
The simplest theory is that every timejump creates a new timeline. Period.

Actually, no. Your theory introduces an exceedingly high number of assumptions which makes it eceedingly more error prone. The more time-lines you present the more assumptions you make and the higher the error rate present. Every time-line you forge for your 'theory' takes at least one assumption. Some take several assumptions that are just down right ridiculous, the "lazy Cell time-line" being a prime example.

[desirecampbell]

Xyex, could you please explain yourself more? The rest of us have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps if you said more than 'you guys are stupid' we'd understand it better.

Can you please explain to us peons why your theory is so much better and simpler?

[Mr.Piccolo]

*looks frantically for the "its just a show" card* Damn, I had it here somewhere...

[Xyex]

Xyex, could you please explain yourself more? The rest of us have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps if you said more than 'you guys are stupid' we'd understand it better.

Can you please explain to us peons why your theory is so much better and simpler?

I've explained it in detail already. The majority of people I've explained it to understand it perfectly by this point. I can't make it any simpiler than I have already. I've never said 'you guys are stupid', I just got tired of repeating it after the twentieth time.

[desirecampbell]

Xyex, could you please explain yourself more? The rest of us have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps if you said more than 'you guys are stupid' we'd understand it better.

Can you please explain to us peons why your theory is so much better and simpler?

I've explained it in detail already. The majority of people I've explained it to understand it perfectly by this point. I can't make it any simpiler than I have already. I've never said 'you guys are stupid', I just got tired of repeating it after the twentieth time.

Then could you point us in the direction of one of these posts where you've "explained it in detail"?