Question about Cell stealing his time machine.

[Anonymous Friend]

No.

Trunks goes back to his own time... normally. But the Trunks we saw in the series couldn't go back to his own time. Why? Because the Trunks that went to TL2 (the one that Cell killed to steal the Time Machine) had already been there. Thus he had to make a new future where he could kill Cell, instead of being killed by him.

The Trunks we see getting killed by at the Cell Games does go back to the timeline where Cell kills him and steals his time machine. It's just that instead of getting killed by him, he anticipates the attack and makes a new timeline branch where he survives.

Impossible. There would be two Trunks' around then. The one that Cell killed that didn't know about him, and the one that we killed Cell because he had known about him. Don't forget, that Trunks returned to his own time already, before Cell went back. Your way would make him simply stop existing and that doesn't work. The time-line had to branch as soon as the new Trunks, created by Cell's interference in the past, tried to return home.

Ok ... let's scroll back a moment. My head starting to hurt and I wanna make sure my facts are straights.

The first Trunks that we are refering to is the one who figures out how to get rid of the Androids but knows nothing of Cell. A Cell who awaks and has no Androids to consume and make himself perfect. He finds Trunks and kills him, takes his time machine to the past and becomes the Cell that we all know.

The second Trunks is the one we see finding the stolen time machine. He later learns of Cell and how a future version of himself was kill. He goes into the RoTaS and gets more powerful, but still gets spanked by a complete Cell. Ten days later he gets killed by this same Cell and brought back to life by the Dragon Balls. He then head back to his own time to defeat the Androids from his time and await his encounter with Cell (the same Cell who had just killed him and was in turn killed by a SS2 Gohan). This Trunks, after killing the Androids with ease, foils a sneak attack by Cell (which at this point should be the splitting point of the timeline) and surprises him with the knowledge opf his existance.

Now, if I mis-stepped here and missed anything please let me know.

Well, there's your answer, thread-starter: We're still debating it sorta.

There are so many facets in the machanics of the time traveling, the different branches that get created, and the effects of these. We could discuss these for years and years.

[Crazy_vegeta]

Ok ... let's scroll back a moment. My head starting to hurt and I wanna make sure my facts are straights.

The first Trunks that we are refering to is the one who figures out how to get rid of the Androids but knows nothing of Cell. A Cell who awaks and has no Androids to consume and make himself perfect. He finds Trunks and kills him, takes his time machine to the past and becomes the Cell that we all know.

The second Trunks is the one we see finding the stolen time machine. He later learns of Cell and how a future version of himself was kill. He goes into the RoTaS and gets more powerful, but still gets spanked by a complete Cell. Ten days later he gets killed by this same Cell and brought back to life by the Dragon Balls. He then head back to his own time to defeat the Androids from his time and await his encounter with Cell (the same Cell who had just killed him and was in turn killed by a SS2 Gohan). This Trunks, after killing the Androids with ease, foils a sneak attack by Cell (which at this point should be the splitting point of the timeline) and surprises him with the knowledge opf his existance.

Now, if I mis-stepped here and missed anything please let me know.

I agree with everything. Except the part which I highlighted in bold. How can he await his encounter with the same Cell, Gohan just killed?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lljzwN1dlD0

Desirecampbell, I saw your video. Good theory and explaination, however I don't undertand why the timeline splits again at point B and E. Why does the timeline split? Trunks goes back to the same past he went three years ago, so there is no need for a new split. Can you please clarify why the timeline splits again at point B and E.

Desirecampbell, I saw your video. Good theory and explanation, however I don't understand why the timeline splits again at point B and E. Why does the timeline split? Trunks goes back to the same past he went three years ago, so there is no need for a new split. Can you please explain why the timeline splits again at point B and E.

I can understand why the timeline splits at point A, because Trunks goes back to the past, thus creating a new future.

Another thing that I don't understand is why would Trunks at point F go all the way back to the Mecha Freeza period? Why won't he just go back to the anime timeline to tell the Z- Warriors that he has defeated the Androids of his timeline?

The last thing that I don't understand is how do you know that Trunks and the Z-warriors defeated the Androids?

[Anonymous Friend]

It was the same Cell in the sense that it was a younger version of the Cell that initiated the Cell Games. If Trunks hadn't defeated him, he would have still stolen the time machine and when back in time and started the whole cycle over again.

[Xyex]

The first Trunks that we are refering to is the one who figures out how to get rid of the Androids but knows nothing of Cell. A Cell who awaks and has no Androids to consume and make himself perfect. He finds Trunks and kills him, takes his time machine to the past and becomes the Cell that we all know.

Correct. Let's call him CellA and the Trunks he killed is TrunksA.

The second Trunks is the one we see finding the stolen time machine. He later learns of Cell and how a future version of himself was kill. He goes into the RoTaS and gets more powerful, but still gets spanked by a complete Cell. Ten days later he gets killed by this same Cell and brought back to life by the Dragon Balls.

This is good too. This is TrunksB, created via CellA's presence in the past, just as TrunksA's presence created CellB (unseen timeline). CellA also created CellC, the one Trunks and Krillin destroyed while it was still an embryo. Now, the next part is where you have problems.

He then head back to his own time to defeat the Androids from his time and await his encounter with Cell (the same Cell who had just killed him and was in turn killed by a SS2 Gohan). This Trunks, after killing the Androids with ease, foils a sneak attack by Cell (which at this point should be the splitting point of the timeline) and surprises him with the knowledge opf his existance.

Incorrect. TrunksB can not go back to that timeline. TrunksA already returned there and was killed by CellA. If TrunksB were to return to the original timeline he would meet TrunksA there as well because, as I said, TrunksA has already returned home from TL2. In order for TrunksB to go home but not encounter TrunksA upon his return he had to split the time-line upon his arrival.

Also, don't forget that Trunks killing Cell isn't the only difference of this new future. We've all come to the conclusion that TrunksA must have used the remote to destroy 17 and 18 since he was no match for Cell. The entire Android batttle is, therefor, different. TrunksB's power upon returning home is greater, his knowledge is different, etc. TrunksB is, effectively, a different person than TrunksA.

It was the same Cell in the sense that it was a younger version of the Cell that initiated the Cell Games. If Trunks hadn't defeated him, he would have still stolen the time machine and when back in time and started the whole cycle over again.

Actually, the Cell that TrunksB killed would have been CellD. CellA killed TrunksA and went back in time becoming complete. CellB we know nothing about. CellC was killed by Krillin and TrunksB in Gero's lab. CellD was the one that tried to jump TrunksB to steal the time machine.

[desirecampbell]

-Video boom-

and an accompanying boom:


Anyone see anything wrong?

[DNA]

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/2499 ... inery1.png

Here, if you can in anyway, prove me wrong.

[desirecampbell]

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/2499 ... inery1.png

Here, if you can in anyway, prove me wrong.

The fault here stems from the 'Future Trunks Line'. Based on the fact that all timejumps create new timelines, we assume that all timelines must be created somehow. But 'Future Trunks Line' seems to just exist beside 'Cell Line'. Though, you might have just accidentally put the line to 'Normal' instead of 'Future Trunks', if so, it's the same as mine.

Other than that, it just little things, like why does Trunk's timejumps foreward and his secondary jumps to 767 not create new timelines?

[DNA]

I didn't understand almost nothing that you just said. Anyway, how can you prove that Trunks creates a new timeline each time he timejumps? If you prefer we can discuss this on msn.

[Jerseymilk]

How do you "not understand almost nothing"?

[desirecampbell]

how can you prove that Trunks creates a new timeline each time he timejumps?

It's not something I can prove (that would imply we can do experiments) but I can point out inconsistencies, like Trunks not creating new timelines for every timejump. Why does Trunks only create timejumps when he goes back to 764? Why doesn't he create a new timeline when he goes back to 767 too? And what about going back to the Future? Why don't those timejumps create new timelines too?

[Olivier Hague]

what about going back to the Future? Why don't those timejumps create new timelines too?

I guess you could explain that away by saying the Time Machine goes back to where/when it came from in the first place, no matter what (which would also explain why Trunks goes back to his own timeline, rather than in the future of the timeline he just created). A bit as if the Time Machine was tied to its initial point of departure by some extra-dimensional rubber band (TM).

Thing is, he obviously doesn't appear back at the exact moment he left...
I guess you could chalk that up to the Time Machine being faulty and imprecise, but... yeah.
Or you could replace the rubber band analogy with that of, say, a tunnel, and that tunnel would be moving along with Trunks in the timeline he just created. Meaning that if Trunks spends three hours in the past, he'll be back three hours after he left in his timeline.

[DNA]

That... makes sense :| It's a really valuable theory. Like someone said before, it seems to be like the way Days of Future Past from the X-Men works.

[desirecampbell]

what about going back to the Future? Why don't those timejumps create new timelines too?

I guess you could explain that away by saying the Time Machine goes back to where/when it came from in the first place, no matter what (which would also explain why Trunks goes back to his own timeline, rather than in the future of the timeline he just created). A bit as if the Time Machine was tied to its initial point of departure by some extra-dimensional rubber band (TM).

Thing is, he obviously doesn't appear back at the exact moment he left...
I guess you could chalk that up to the Time Machine being faulty and imprecise, but... yeah.
Or you could replace the rubber band analogy with that of, say, a tunnel, and that tunnel would be moving along with Trunks in the timeline he just created. Meaning that if Trunks spends three hours in the past, he'll be back three hours after he left in his timeline.

That explains why he goes back to his timeline and then back to the new timeline and back again, but it doesn't explain why new timelines aren't created for those other timejumps. There are 10 timejumps in total (Trunks-A to 764, Trunks-A to 784, Trunks-A to 767, Trunks-A to 785, Cell to 763, Trunks-B to 764, Trunks-B to 784, Trunks-B to 767, Trunks-B to 785, Trunks-B to 763) but in DNA's timeline, only two create new timelines (Trunks-A to 764, and Cell to 763) - is that part of your theory, or are you simply ignoring the extra timelines because they're unimportant?

And the 'Future Trunks Line' is still just there. It should be created by a timejump (Cell's, timejump) but isn't. Is that part of your theory too, or just an oversight?


So, what I'm saying is, 'can you explain your theory? Just having the graph isn't enough to understand it.

[Olivier Hague]

That explains why he goes back to his timeline and then back to the new timeline and back again, but it doesn't explain why new timelines aren't created for those other timejumps.

The question you should ask, in my opinion, is "why are new timelines created in the first place?"
Do we agree that the "Dragon Ball" timelines are deterministic in nature?

[DNA]

I tried to make it the simplest possible and you are confusing even me. You are basicly saying that there is an extra Trunks that goes to and extra timeline and does the exact same thing has the other one, but it is in other timeline.

EDIT:

Ok, everyone bear in mind that the Cell Line is the first timeline by default, it is the original one wich no one alters. Everything goes "normal" and Trunks goes back in time, to the Alternate Line, kills Freeza and helps kill the Androids or something like that, creating a new timeline. Goes back to is own line because these two realities are intertwined (sp?), Cell surprises him in the back and rapes him to death, or not.

Cell realizes that there are no Androids anymore so he goes back even further, leaving those 2 conected timelines and creating a new one. But that reality is already paired with another one like the previous two ones, so this one that Cell visited, the Normal Line, is also visited by Trunks, from the Future Trunks line that we know and see.

Since they are both conected, Trunks goes back and forth between those 2 timelines. Those two run as we have seen in the series.

In my point of view, I don't understand we there should be a timeline created in each time jump. But even if you want to defend they are, then I just don't care enough for them to list them. I'm just ignoring those other timelines you are saying. No hard feelings.

[Olivier Hague]

-Video boom-

I'm watching your video right now, and you don't talk about what happened to time-travelling-Cell after he went back in time with Trunks' time machine. You just explain that Gokû dies of a heart attack (again), that the Androids appear (again), and that Trunks goes back in time (again). But shouldn't time-travelling Cell show up around the time the Androids appear (just like he did in the timeline we've witnessed in the manga)?

In the theory I came up with in another topic, I had to assume that Cell did show up but was killed off (presumably by the Androids) in such a manner that history wasn't disturbed in any way. It's kinda hard to swallow, but something has to be done with that time-travelling-Cell, right?

The problem I have with both our theories (which are pretty much the same anyway, except for the bit above) is that there's no explanation as to why the Time Machine goes back to the "new" timeline, after the first time jump.
When Trunks goes back in time for the second time, to help the others fight the Androids... why does he end up branching the timeline he recently created (where the others know him) rather than his own timeline (where Gokû died of a heart-attack)?
Does the Time Machine somehow "know" which timeline is the most "recent" one? You can't explain that away by saying the "previous" timelines are "obsolete" or something, as Trunks keeps coming back to his own...

[Xyex]

That explains why he goes back to his timeline and then back to the new timeline and back again, but it doesn't explain why new timelines aren't created for those other timejumps.

The question you should ask, in my opinion, is "why are new timelines created in the first place?"
Do we agree that the "Dragon Ball" timelines are deterministic in nature?

Just poping in here for a quick comment and then I'm gone. In a deterministic time-line you cannot alter anything in any way, shape, or form. Changing the past, even creating alternate time-lines, is flatly impossible. Why? Because time already passed with you being in the past. If the time-lines in DB were determisitic then Trunks would have ALWAYS defeated Freeza, ALWAYS given Goku the heart medicine, etc. There is only ever one time-line and one flow of events in a determinisitic time-line. That is their nature.

[Terra-jin]

Timeline discussions are very notorious because it is hard to understand time-travel mechanics, especially the intricate DB-style with surviving timelines and multiple jumps. You're basically trying to imagine one dimension too many.
However, it is nearly impossible to convey a clear conception of what you have in your mind and what makes sense to you. I have a large document dedicated to explaining this subject in an understandable way, so until I finish that, I'm not posting half-assed attempts at explanations anymore

In short, I believe timelines only split when somebody travels to a point which has not yet happened. This way, there are four timelines, including an unseen timeline where Trunks finds a way of defeating the androids but remaining unaware of Cell. In this timeline, the Z-warriors survive and Cell keeps growing in his basement. But enough of that.

Maybe some day, I'll be able to fully explain the whole thing. I do believe I have the one and only solution - but I'll shut up until I can back it up

[Olivier Hague]

In a deterministic time-line you cannot alter anything in any way, shape, or form. Changing the past, even creating alternate time-lines, is flatly impossible.

True, but you're looking at it the wrong way.
It's entirely possible to have several (or an infinity, really) of deterministic timelines and have some guy travelling from one to another.

Let's consider the original timeline. It being deterministic means that events would eventually and unavoidably lead to Trunks using the Time Machine.
By doing so, Trunks ends up in another (parallel) timeline in which he kills Freeza. That other timeline is deterministic as well, meaning that events would unavoidably lead to Trunks warning the others about the Androids, etc, and then using the Time Machine again to go back to his timeline.
Thus, even Trunks reappearing in his own timeline is unavoidable. It's "meant to be". It was "meant to be" from day one. No alternative. And the deterministic nature of the original timeline isn't violated.

So the idea is that Trunks doesn't really "change" anything. He's merely jumping from one deterministic timeline to another, and even these jumps are predetermined (since they're events contained in deterministic timelines themselves).
Et voilà.

[Xyex]

True, but you're looking at it the wrong way.
It's entirely possible to have several (or an infinity, really) of deterministic timelines and have some guy travelling from one to another.

Let's consider the original timeline. It being deterministic means that events would eventually and unavoidably lead to Trunks using the Time Machine.
By doing so, Trunks ends up in another (parallel) timeline in which he kills Freeza. That other timeline is deterministic as well, meaning that events would unavoidably lead to Trunks warning the others about the Androids, etc,

Why can I never resist getting into debates about this stuff? ;_;

Flaw: That's not time travel, that's dimension hopping. If the other time-lines pre-exist the traveling of an individual to create them the are, by definition, alternate universes, not alternate time-lines. Yes, history has flowed differently there, but you are not traveling into the past by entering one of them, but merely entering a seperate universe.