Theory talk:Hiro Nakamura

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

The 'catastrope' theory is written in a highly personal perspective, rather than a 'third-person perspective' as requested on the Help:Theories page. Would it be possible to have that edited? General Shane 04:36, 16 November 2007 (EST)

  • I have removed it. But you could of to, remember the whole point of a wiki is that anyone can edit. Seclusion 04:52, 16 November 2007 (EST)
    • Well, I wasn't sure if I was being too picky and technical. General Shane 02:55, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Arthur doesn't need physical contact to erase memories?

"Arthur grabbed Hiro's head. He doesn't need physical contact to erase memories."

When was this demonstrated? - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:40, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Arthur made Angela forget his assassination plans for Nathan by "telling" her brain to forget it, in Villains. Intuitive Empath 17:52, 16 November 2008 (EST)

  • Wasn't that just telepathy?--Yoshi n1 16:35, 11 November 2009 (EST)
    • Arthur using power on Angela was telepathy, Arthur using power on Hiro was René's ability. Damn, it's so weird to call him René. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 16:59, 11 November 2009 (EST)

Predestination versus Ontological Paradoxes

I'm assuming that I can speak on the talk page in a more casual tone. If not, someone please put this in the proper POV but keep the core ideas intact. I know there's a few other pages where this explanation might come in handy, feel free to copy it over there.

I'm going to forego trying to explain each paradox and instead provide (somewhat) classic examples of each.

Predestination: Let's say you decided one day to go back and prevent the assassination of Lincoln. So you hop in your time machine and go back to a few minutes before he was killed. You get there and find John Booth right behind Lincoln's box. You lunge for him to try to wrestle the gun from him, but while you're struggling the gun goes off and kills Lincoln. Booth, seizing the opportunity, jumps from the box, claims victory, and goes down in infamy. Your attempt resulted in Lincoln being shot, therefore ensuring that you would go back in time to try and prevent it.

Ontological: You, in an altruistic moment, grab your unabridged Shakespeare and head back in time. You arrive before he wrote his first play and hand him the book with every play he's ever written so he can spend his time getting down with those Ren Faire-looking chicks. He's down with the idea, and publishes each play as his own. The problem is, where did MacBeth (or any of the other plays come from). You had the book because Shakespeare wrote them, but Shakespeare only wrote them because you brought him the book. So the plays of Shakespeare never had a real origin.

Grandfather: After traveling back in time before your father's conception you, either on purpose or by an accident, wind up killing your grandfather. Because you killed him before he could give birth to your father, you were also never conceived. However, this means you never were able to go back in time to kill your grandfather in the first place, which allows your birth. which allows you to go back in time and kill your grandfather, once again preventing your birth. Each possibility seems to imply its own negation, creating an endless loop.

  • It's worth mentioning that some of these paradoxes also violate certain laws of physics (besides the obvious way, of course). For instance, in an example of an ontological paradox, where, in the year 2009, you go into the future to the year 2014 and grab the schematics for an invention you will create in the future. After you create the invention, you place the schematics on a shelf in your basement, where they lay undisturbed until you come to take them back to the past again. Based on the fact that the schematics you used in 2009 are the exact same as the ones you obtained in 2014, means that the schematics do not age in 5 years and therefore do not increase in entropy, a clear violation of the Second law of thermodynamics.