Question about Cell stealing his time machine.

[Analytical Delusion]

Hm, I've sorta developed a theory that allows for exactly four timelines, though it does not allow for a Cell Games in the 4th timeline the way it is now. Blahhh. If I can figure a way to get the Games in, I'll post this theory (which operates under different laws and assumptions than the one I posted a couple of days ago).

[Shenron]

Desire Campbell, your theory is very similar to mine, except that I didn't think of the TL Trunks creates by returning to the future. That makes sense, and so my theory is incomplete.
Except if we consider that he comes back to HIS timeline, and then doesn't split anything. More simple, but less logical.

Anyway, I think my diagram looks better than yours
http://membres.lycos.fr/vanesshenron/Di ... elines.pdf

And I do have the same questions about Cell in Trunks' TL. What happened to him ? Well, maybe his egg has been destroyed when the androids went on rampage, or when Freeza came to earth. Or the androids destroyed him . After all, when he hatches, he's about as strong as one android, and couldn't win against both of them.

Edit : hey, I thought about something : Trunks creates a new Timeline not only when he comes, but when he leaves too ; for example, when he leaves his mother the first time, Trunks creates a new Timeline, one with him, and one without him,doesn't he ?

[desirecampbell]

Edit : hey, I thought about something : Trunks creates a new Timeline not only when he comes, but when he leaves too ; for example, when he leaves his mother the first time, Trunks creates a new Timeline, one with him, and one without him,doesn't he ?

All we know about the creation of timelines is that they are created by time travel. That's it. For simplicity, I assume that when someone does something it always results in the same thing. If I assume anything else, I'm basically making shit up. I can understand why people would like to ignore new timelines created by going back to the future (it causes there to be fewer timelines to track and those new future timelines are pretty useless), but there's no reason to believe that's the case.

Creating a new timeline when you leave a timeline, and create a new one when you arrive as well, is interesting, but I fail to see where there's any evidence to suggest such a rule. Not that such a thing couldn't be explained, I just don't see where such idea comes from.

My whole theory rests on the fact that we know very little, and can only assume very few things about how time travel works:

We know that Trunks created a new timeline when going to the past, and that he could not change his future by it. Trunks, in a moment of uncharacteristic clarity, stated he was creating new timelines. From this, we can gather new timeilnes are created by time jumps and for consistency, we must assume that all timejumps create new timelines. To suggest that some jumps do, and some jumps don't, would be clearly inconsistent.

Secondly, we know that each timejump directs the machine to the last timeline it went to. And because it's obvious that Trunks had no idea he was going to other timelines so this must just be an inegeral part of time travel.

And lastly, we know that all the events we see in the series (the Andoriods ruining the world, Cell killing Trunks, Trunks killing the Androids, Trunks killing Cell, the Cell games) happen. So any explanation of the timeline must include all of that.



My theory assumes nothing beyond that, and includes every event that occurs in the series. My explanation does use a branching timeline structure (where each new timeline's past is literally shared with the timeline it's split from) but would still work if using a discrete timeline/dimension structure (where pasts are identicle, but are actually separate).

-edit-
And here's a web-link to Shenron's diagram for anyone who doesn't have Acrobat -/edit-

-edit2- Oh yeah, the 'lazy Cell' thing. Anything's possible. We just know that he didn't get noticed by Trunks or Gohan or Bulma. In the series, Cell shows up just after the Androids appear. Assuming he showed up at the same time in Trunks' timeline, he would emerge shortly after all the Z warriors were killed. Even after absorbing some humans, Cell was weaker than Piccolo who was on-par with #17, and we know that #16 is stronger than Cell even after absorbing many humans. So to assume that he was killed by one of the Androids isn't such a stretch.

Or we could just say that he stayed in the ground. I mean, Buu did it in that timeilne too, so why not Cell?

[Xyex]

and for consistency, we must assume that all timejumps create new timelines. To suggest that some jumps do, and some jumps don't, would be clearly inconsistent.

No, actually, we don't have to assume that. And there's nothing inconsistant about assuming otherwise. Your lack of grasping the concept does not make it wrong. In fact, based on the presented evidence, there is no logical reason to assume that there more than 4 timelines.

My theory assumes nothing beyond that, and includes every event that occurs in the series.

Uh, excuse me? Your theory assumes a lot of things. It assumes that every jump to the past creates a timeline, even when it's logical that it might not. And it assumes that even jumps back to your originating timeline create alternate timelines when that's patently illogical. I have never heard of alternate timelines relating to returning to your own time. Where as eveything I've mentioned I have seen or heard refrenced somewhere before.

Oh yeah, the 'lazy Cell' thing. Anything's possible.

You forgot to add the unless it doesn't mesh with my own theory part. It just screams hypocritical when you outright ignore someone elses theory because you don't like it and then say 'anything's possible' to work around a glaring hole in yours.

We just know that he didn't get noticed by Trunks or Gohan or Bulma. In the series, Cell shows up just after the Androids appear. Assuming he showed up at the same time in Trunks' timeline, he would emerge shortly after all the Z warriors were killed.

I would think that Gohan would notice his father's Ki suddenly appearing out of nowhere. Would have tracked it down. And would then have learned of Cell. And would have mentioned it to SOMEONE, if not directly to Trunks.

Or we could just say that he stayed in the ground. I mean, Buu did it in that timeilne too, so why not Cell?

Because Buu doesn't come up by himself. Buu needs energy. The Earth is pretty much out of life, and in turn, out of energy. That's kind of like saying the Spirit Bomb killed Kid Buu so why not Vegeta.

Anyway, I've killed enough catgirls for the month. That's it for me.

[Terra-jin]

Sorry to butt in, but I want to bring this up.

I say that New Trunks' timeline branches off at the point of Cell's appearance. Why? For the 'why', we must take a look at normal-style time travel; in this case, timelines are not newly created, just overwritten.
OK. First, we have the two timelines before Cell's jump (yes, even though we're looking at normal-style, but bear with me). Cell travels to the past and ultimately this causes both timelines to be affected (the main timeline occurs and Trunks kill Future Cell). Now, we still have one future and one past. Where does the split occur in this picture?
Indeed, history shifted at the time of Cell's arrival. This is why T4 is created at that particular event. Cell's arrival altered both timelines. Now, when we go back to Dragonball-style time travel, the two previous timelines (before they were altered by Cell) still exist.

In conclusion, Cell's arrival branched off timelines 3 and 4, even though timeline 4 shares an amount of history with timeline 1. This means that New Trunks appears from a future timeline which was created by Cell's jump.
Does this make sense? It's based on the assumption that Dragonball's time travel is an extension of normal-style time travel.

[desirecampbell]

Xyex, the definition of inconsistent is "the same cause not creating the same effect". Like, say, Trunks creating a new timeline, then not, then Cell creating one - without any discernable reason why.

The only thing I assume is that when something causes something else to happen once it happens everytime that same something happens. Like, Trunks created a new timeline when he time traveled, thus I assume that he always creates a new timeline when he time travels. I feel, and I think everyone else can back me up on this, that assuming that "cause = effect" is better than "effect occurs whenever Xyex wants it to, regardless of how the same action affected the timeline previously".

We don't have any idea why the timeline splits. Is it because Trunks had already been in that second timeline before and thus he won't change it enough for a new timeilne to split? Does Cell create a new timeline because it's his first time time traveling, even though the same time machine has done four jumps already? Is it because he's green? Shit, any of those explanations are possible. Fuck, it could be completely random. We don't know. All we do know is that Trunks traveled back in time and created a new timeline, and cannot change his own timeline - and so that's all I use to explain the timeline. "Time travel creates new timelines". Is it only the first time? What about traveling forward? We don't know, so we use only what we DO know.

And when I said that "anything's possible" I meant it. Your theory is indeed possible. I mean, it's flippin' time travel, you can basically say anything you want. The killer here, is that your theory runs into so many contradictions and crazy new ideas that it doesn't make any sense anymore. Could Cell have been killed by the Androids, or Freeza, or a bear, or could he even have even have just stayed in the ground? Yes! That's entirely possible. We can actually give reasons for why that could happen - unlike your theories, which have little or no connection to any established facts about time travel in the DBZ universe.

Do you want me to explain a completely plausible account of how Cell emerged from the ground in Future Trunks' timeline and was subsequently killed by the Androids without anyone knowing what happened? I can do it. It isn't even hard. In fact, it's so simple I can do it right now: Gohan didn't notice Cell's power? How could Gohan possibly miss that? I mean he was only just in a fight to the death with the Androids. He couldn't possibly be unconscious. No. That would be crazier than assuming time travel can cause two people to merge into each other. *headdesk*


Xyex, you do this for every discussion we have about timelines. You say "No, that's stupid" then we ask you questions about where your theories come from and why there are inconsistencies, and you reply "you're inconsistent. I hate you. This is stupid." You're a smart guy, and I'd love to discuss this more with you, but you've got to start actually listening to what I, and others, are saying. Discuss this with us, don't simply have a tantrum and storm off. I've asked everyone to look at my theory and point out any mistakes or inconsistencies. You have failed to do so (aside from the 'lazy Cell' complaints). I have posed similar questions to you, but have as of yet failed to receive any answers. Like, where do you get your ideas about time travelers merging from? Why does Cell's time jump create a new timeline, but not Trunks' second? Why do you hold to the idea that there can only be four timelines?

The point of this thread is to work together and try and figure out how this whole thing works, if at all.

Will you help us?

[Xyex]

Xyex, the definition of inconsistent is "the same cause not creating the same effect". Like, say, Trunks creating a new timeline, then not, then Cell creating one - without any discernable reason why.

Yes. The same cause. Such as, oh, I don't know, altering the past. Creating a paradox with the future when there is no future, that is inconsistent. Not creating a paradox with the future when there is no future is, well, not. If you STILL can not grasp this there's no reason to continue because it'll never get anwhere.

The only thing I assume is that when something causes something else to happen once it happens everytime that same something happens. Like, Trunks created a new timeline when he time traveled, thus I assume that he always creates a new timeline when he time travels. I feel, and I think everyone else can back me up on this, that assuming that "cause = effect" is better than "effect occurs whenever Xyex wants it to, regardless of how the same action affected the timeline previously".

Except I am using cause and effect. You are jus creating random timelines so that you can skirt around something you can't seem to grasp. And this isn't just me talking either. The others just don't feel like bashing their heads against the wall trying to explain this.

We can actually give reasons for why that could happen - unlike your theories, which have little or no connection to any established facts about time travel in the DBZ universe.

You mean unlike mine which matches to exactly what we see in the series without any random extra stuff thrown in?

Do you want me to explain a completely plausible account of how Cell emerged from the ground in Future Trunks' timeline and was subsequently killed by the Androids without anyone knowing what happened? I can do it. It isn't even hard. In fact, it's so simple I can do it right now: Gohan didn't notice Cell's power? How could Gohan possibly miss that? I mean he was only just in a fight to the death with the Androids. He couldn't possibly be unconscious.

Going by how long Piccolo had to wait on the lookout before Kami agreed to merge I'd say that more than enough time passed for Gohan to come around again, assuming he'd been knocked out. And beyond that even Roshi sensed Cell and, well, Roshi wouldn't be unconscious. Let's also not forget we don't know how long it took for all of the Z Fighters to be killed. Hell, Yamcha and Tien and Krillin could still be out there too. There goes your plausability.

Anyway, I'll break my entire theory down to the basics. Leave out all of the extra stuff that's not really needed and just gets in the way. When Cell goes into the past what happens? Well, simple, he enters the past and makes a new timeline. But, what's the past? *GASP* It's Trunks warning Goku about the Androids! This is made quite obvious by the presentation of the series. By going into the past Cell 'entered' the past created by Trunks. While the Lazy Cell is an... amusing point... this here is your biggest hole. Your theory flies in the face of the series.

[desirecampbell]

In your theory, you create a new timeline when you would create a paradox right? From your explanation I gather that Trunks created a new timeline because he tried to go back to his own timeline - he has to create a new timeline because other wise it would alter his own timeilne, thus creating a paradox.

I'm fine with that. That's NOT what I was saying.

Cell then goes back into that new timeline and creates a new timeline?. Why? He's not creating a paradox with his own timeilne, he's going into another timeline. There's the inconsistency. Trunk's second jump to the past and Cell's jump are both jumps to the second timeline, why does one cause a new timeline, while another doesn't? Did I miss something?

[Thanos6]

Because Cell went back further, trying to insert himself into a timeline that he wasn't part of originally.

[desirecampbell]

Because Cell went back further, trying to insert himself into a timeline that he wasn't part of originally.

Huh? 'Further'? Further than what? Why does that make a difference? How is Cell's attempt to "insert himself into a timeline that he wasn't part of originally" different than Trunks' second trip? He's not creating a paradox in his own timeline, he's at worst creating a paradox in T2, just like Trunks did on his second jump.

And I thought that the whole point of creating a new timeline was to avoid a paradox, which would mean "insert[ing] himself into a timeline that he wasn't part of originally."

[Xyex]

In your theory, you create a new timeline when you would create a paradox right? From your explanation I gather that Trunks created a new timeline because he tried to go back to his own timeline - he has to create a new timeline because other wise it would alter his own timeilne, thus creating a paradox.

There is no paradox when there is nothing to contradict. -_-

Huh? 'Further'? Further than what? Why does that make a difference? How is Cell's attempt to "insert himself into a timeline that he wasn't part of originally" different than Trunks' second trip? He's not creating a paradox in his own timeline, he's at worst creating a paradox in T2, just like Trunks did on his second jump.

.......

Okay, see, if you're not playing stupid right now.... that's scary.

Cell appears BEFORE Trunks did but after he left and returned, yes? Therefor, Trunks has already experienced TL2 without Cell being there. Thus, Cell being in the timeline = paradox. Trunks appearing at a point where the future has yet to happen = not a paradox.

[Olivier Hague]

Okay, see, if you're not playing stupid right now.... that's scary.

Yeah, we're all dumb. That must be it.

[desirecampbell]

Trunks' second jump was to a "point where the future has yet to happen"? Wait, I thought that traveling to the past created a new timeline that included everything up until the time you left. Like when Cell goes back in time he recreates a whole new timeline that includes everything that happens after his arrival time. So wouldn't Trunk's first jump do the same thing? Trunks went back to 764 creating a new timeline up until 784, then went home, then went back to 767 which, by your explanation of timeline creation, already exists.


Of course this all assumes that timelines don't immediately have a future and are somehow "slowly progressing". Which, though still possible in a fictional universe, is never mentioned in the series at all. Once again you're making shit up.

[Olivier Hague]

Wait, I thought that traveling to the past created a new timeline that included everything up until the time you left.

And beyond, I'd think.

[desirecampbell]

Wait, I thought that traveling to the past created a new timeline that included everything up until the time you left.

And beyond, I'd think.

I was trying to look for Xyex's exact explanation, but failed. As afr as I remember, a timejump creates a new timeline when it would otherwise create a paradox, and this new timeline contains an exact copy of everything that happens up until the point where you left. This is why Cell's new timeline includes Trunks' two arrivals, because it doesn't just split off from 763, it contains everything up until 788.

I still that that whole explanation is stupid (because it's making all kinds of crazy shit up) but for the sake of argument, I'm simply pointing out inconsistencies and logic errors.

[Thanos6]

We don't have any specific info one way or the other on what does and does not cause a new timeline branch, nor what form that new branch will take, and it all comes down to one's own logic and sense of what "feels right." So I'd appreciate it if certain people quit slinging around insults that make my side look bad. *glances at Xyex*

[desirecampbell]

We don't have any specific info one way or the other on what does and does not cause a new timeline branch, nor what form that new branch will take, and it all comes down to one's own logic and sense of what "feels right." So I'd appreciate it if certain people quit slinging around insults that make my side look bad. *glances at Xyex*

I agree, we should all try and stay above the belt. And if I've said anything insulting, I'd like to take this time to apologise for it. I meant everything I said, but it's nothing personal - Xyex's whole theory is garbage, but I still think Xyex is a great guy.

The issue I have with Xyex's theory (other than it blatantly contradicts itself) is that he's making shit up. You're right, Thanos6, we don't know why new timelines are created. That's exactly why we shouldn't try and explain it. All we know is that timelines are created. So the only logical assumption is that because a new timeline was created by a timejump at least once, that all timejumps create new timelines.

Xyex's ideas about creating new timelines that include the future of that timeline up until you left, merging time travelers, sometimes creating new timelines/sometimes not - has no basis in the series at all. That's why I don't like it. Because he's just making shit up.

I'm hoping that by showing Xyex that his theory has flaws, he'll come around to actually discussing it, instead of simply saying "dur, you're dumb! lol"

[Xyex]

... I was going to make a long reply. A detailed and exacting exlanation of everything. I had already started it. I had about three paragraphs done. And then... I just didn't care anymore. I'm tired of arguing this and getting nowhere with it. It'd be different if I was seeing any kind of progress instead of feeling like I'm smashing my head against a brick wall. I mean, even my theory has changed since I first started debating timelines on this board, and I'd thought I had it all ironed out satisfactorily a while ago.

But all I've gotten is "No, that's impossible, this is the only way it could be" in return. And so, I'm done, at least for now. I'm going to step back and just let it go for now. I'll wait until TripleRach finishes her essay on the matter. No reason for me to try and go into a long winded and detailed explanation of my theory when hers will likely make me re-think or discard parts of mine anyway.

[Olivier Hague]

I was trying to look for Xyex's exact explanation, but failed.

Sorry, I didn't realize you were still talking about Xyex's theory. Last time around, his newly created timelines had no future at all. 'Guess they're slowly getting better, then.

[desirecampbell]

But all I've gotten is "No, that's impossible, this is the only way it could be" in return.

What? You mean like when I said, "that's possible, but why does Cell do the same thing an do something different?" Yeah, that's totally exactly the same thing.

I'm just trying to understand why Cell creates a new timeline when Trunks' doesn't on his second trip. As far as I've seen, they're doing exactly the same thing: traveling to timeline two from timeilne one, to points where a history already exists on T2. Yet Trunks doesn't create a new timeline while Cell does.

Is that a flaw, or did I miss something?