posted January 11, 2003 08:35 PM         

Okay so to understand this concept of time for me (sorry just can't grasp it quite yet) if we can alter our future with free will we can alter our past as well!
But if you have a dream of a future event you can change it by altering your actions at the specific moment the experience occurs, so if you dream that say you are going to get lost if you turn at the wrong roadsign on a trip when the time comes you will remember your dream and then when you see the roadsigns you will "choose" to take the right one. So you will not get lost...you have altered the future event you saw in your dream. But you cannot physically alter your past as you can the future. Only like you said, you can alter your "perception" of the past. So you can say...yeah well I got lost taking that trip because I followed wrong roadsign BUT if I did not get lost that day I would have missed that hunk of a guy I stopped to get the directions from ..sorry vivid imagination here. But you see what I am saying Ra?
So then it is not the same change we make with our past as it is with our future! Yes!

Stellitsa,
Kai ego sou apantisa sto UC ehthes kai tote sou apantisa kapou sto A foroum...then pirazi tha sou po pali, eimai tora ston Kanada, thelis na erthis...ehi pagonia tora, kai tha agaliastoume kai tha milisoume olo to vradi mexri to proi, kai etsi tha zestathoume kai tha vroume lisi stis proin zoes mas giati ke ego exo xilies erotisis!

Bernadette, do you see you are not alone with loooooong posts. I take too long to explain myself as well. I see many other knowflakes can post one liners and get their message across loud and clear...and I seem to have to write a thesis first, so that I know you understand every minute detail of what I am trying to say to you....oh like just now

Jakie "bam ba la bamba..."

posted January 13, 2003 02:03 PM         

What if I said ... it is the same change.
???

posted January 13, 2003 03:29 PM         

Richard Collier, played by Christopher Reeve, gets his big break. The play he produced in college may be going to Broadway. At this celebration, an elderly woman comes forward, gives him a watch, and says, "Come back to me." Then she leaves.

A decade passes, and we find Richard Collier now successful, working on a play and suffering from writer's block, deciding to take a break. He winds up at a very nice hotel just up the road from his alma mater, and plans to stay the night. During the night, he discovers the picture of a woman who immediately entrances him with her beauty, and so he stays to find out who she is.

His investigations lead him to discover that the beautiful young actress on the wall, a Miss Elise McKenna (Jane Seymour), is the same woman who gave him the watch. He learns that she died the night she gave him that watch; and that she was interested in time travel, and owned a book about it by one of his professors.

A visit to the professor reveals an story of a trip to the past--momentary, uncertain, but an experience that may have been time travel. The film suggests a type of time travel which would be entirely by force of will, that is, the traveler would will himself into the past by convincing himself that this is where he was. The danger is that any object whose origin had to be from the future would disrupt this and return you to your own time. Richard Collier determines to do this.

He purchases antique coins and an old suit, clears his hotel room of everything, and using a tape recorder under his bed and extreme exertion, he wills himself back to June 27th, 1912. Here he begins the rather difficult project of attempting to meet Miss McKenna, completely out of touch with the social realities of the day. But gradually he manages to win her heart.

They met and declare their love for each other, spend the night together, and start making plans for the future. She has his watch as he is showing what he likes about his suit. Suddenly he pulls from his pocket a penny, a coin from the future, and his stay in the past is instantly terminated. He is pulled from her into the future.

We have already learned that something happened to her at this hotel, and she never acted again. Now we know what. Richard Collier tries to get back to her, but dies in the hotel.

There is a happy ending of sorts. We see him in an out-of-body experience, following the light, where she, the younger she, is awaiting him.
_____________________________________________________________________________

Not only in this film, but also in " Back to the future ", " Lost in Space ", " Planet of the Apes " and many others films, not only the future is altered by the past, as well as the past was altered by the future.

In " Somewhere in Time", did she come to seek him because he went until her first or did he return to the past because he met her in the future ?
Did the effect come before the cause ?

In all these films, we have time travels, some with the intention of altering the past or the future, but what we can notice is that in the reality were these trips that caused that future that now, should be altered...

The only explanation that I find for this link (past/future,what came first?) it's an parallel time lines...

Any thoughts ?

Love
Jakie

posted January 13, 2003 07:38 PM         

I saw "Somewhere in Time" many years ago and of course balled my eyes out because it was sad in a way. You see I cannot seem to connect the timelines.
I think because I cannot grasp this concept in an analytical way, (this is how I process my understanding many times...I analyse too much maybe...and maybe this is one concept I should not process this way ), I can only side with Jakie and say parallel timelines are in effect here.
But then again we are Souls in human bodies and it is our bodies that impede our acceptance/understanding of what our Souls know. So what our Souls know is that we are capable of thinking/doing/being ALL and EVERYTHING that exists at any given moment?!

So where I am stuck and with what you said Ra, above in my example with only being able to change my PERCEPTION of getting lost on that trip, you are saying I could actually go to the past and change it so that I would not get lost, right
How, the same way that Christopher Reeve did in the movie? But there is high possibility I would change my future then as well if I did the slightest thing different, like in the movies "Back to the Future".
And if so, why don't we recall that we can move back and forth between timelines? Because then we would be too busy altering our lives in each timeline, going back and forth to make changes at will, that we would not truly appreciate our existence, right!
So that is why we cannot recall that we CAN change the past, easily travel back in time, undo something and come back...because only this way will we learn to live with the consequences of our past decisions/experiences and make better choices or not repeat mistakes, otherwise how else would we learn, compassion for example or why would we have to strive to achieve anything...

Well I have reached a short fuse here so I will be back for more analysis tomorrow

posted January 15, 2003 05:22 PM         

Any thoughts ?

Stella dear, I know you didn't forget me...I won't let you anyway !
Hope you're felling better !

posted January 16, 2003 01:21 PM         

It is not easy to make sense of this in the dimension we live, because we experience time, which is a necessary tool for the experience we are here to seek.

In circles we run!

posted January 17, 2003 08:29 PM         

Thanks Ra, you sure got me going in circles

Stellitsa, I hope you feel better soon. Sending you a big hug

Jakie

posted January 19, 2003 06:21 PM         

If we cannot change the events about the past, only our perception of it; how come we can change the future, and people still having premonitions about it? The thought of parallell universes would make sense, then. Actually; everything does. The whole existence of everything is a paradox. Thoughts have a life of their own, creating realities, at least as long as we give them our energy!

posted January 20, 2003 12:43 PM         

The truth is in the paradox, not in the conventional... I think like this.
And I don't intend to close my mind [anymore]to what I cannot explain... I cannot explain with a hundred percent warranty , but that exists !

And my dear friend Stella will do the same thing too...it's just a matter of time

Mystique...do you want the address of this lovely smilie ?
Love you