Yay a Desmond ep! --lewisg 02:33, 30 January 2007 (PST)

With Penny and Charles Widmore - sounds awesome --Nickb123 (Talk) 04:48, 30 January 2007 (PST)
  • The promo photos for this episode confirm it as a Desmond flashback episode. Can we change the article? ShadowUltra 13:31, 2 February 2007 (PST)
  • I agree and with penelope and charles widemore in it it would be hard for it not to be. :-) --Princess Dharma (banned) 06:07, 4 February 2007 (PST)

Did this episode really take place in London? Notice that the Royal Scots recruitment poster spelt "Honour" incorrectly for the locale. Is this just an oversight? Or does it hint at something more going on with people manipulating Desmond? --Nullzilla 21:54, 14 February 2007 (PST)

  • Think it's a slip due to the myriad details required to pass Hawaii off as London. They did a decent job on the street scene overall, but the pub is riddled with giveaways (too big, too clean, not smoky enough, and what were they drinking? Too opaque to be bitters). Tinman 06:56, 15 February 2007 (PST)
  • Some of the english accents were a little off. :-S And some people seem to not have realised Desmond threw the ring into the river Thames! 22:02, 19 February 2007


Hm.. Room 23.. Flashes Before Your Eyes.. Anyone see a connection there? :D --lewisg 15:33, 8 February 2007 (PST)

  • No, not really. I see it as flashes forward as well as flashbacks, I think this is gonna be a trippy episode. However, room 23, best part of Not In Portland.


I think it's the right time now.  ODK Talk   Sandbox 20:11, 14 February 2007 (PST)

Note to self or others that have DVRs

  • Gave away my DVR recently, so I'm going to have to wait until I see it online, but if another good editor gets to it first, would be nice too. I'd like to put some of Ms. Hawking's direct quotes into the Fate vs free will article... there were some gems in there definitely worth noting along that theme. --PandoraX 22:10, 14 February 2007 (PST)
  • Although Mr.s Hawking seems to indicate that fate is inevitable, I liked that Desmond's friend counters that with "your thesis is a bit neat - the wild card, partridge, is unpredictability. Run the same test ten times, you'll get ten different outcomes. That's what makes life so wonderfully -". But some quotes from her: (Desmond: I'll take it) "No, you won't." - "And f you don't do those things, David Desmond Hume, every single one of us is dead." - (Desmond: "Why didn't you do anything?") "Because it wouldn't matter." - "The universe, unfortunately, has a way of - course correcting. That man was supposed to die. That was his path. Just as it's your path to go to the island. You don't do it because you choose to, Desmond, you do it because you're supposed to." - (Desmond: "I can choose whatever I want.") "You may not like your path, Desmond, but pushing that button is the only truly great thing that you will ever do." --Jackdavinci 23:02, 14 February 2007 (PST)
  • Great references, Jack. If you are sure that they are word-for-word, please add them to Fate vs. free will. If not, we can wait for the transcripts to come in next week. --PandoraX 17:57, 15 February 2007 (PST)
  • I'm pretty sure she said Desmond David Hume. Because otherwise his name would be David, not Desmond... why would someone go by Desmond if that was their middle name, and they have something perfectly normal like David as their actual name?  :) --Andfound815
My actual name is John Bradley Peele, however I've gone by Brad for as long as I remember. So its possible, you really just need to watch it.--Kilgore Trout
I know a lot of people who go by their middle names (one of whom only has an initial as a frist name!) but you are correct - she says "Desmond David Hume".

first half,

can someone please discribe what happened in the first half of the episdoe and have information on what the flashback/deja vu included? --Kilgore Trout

David Hume was one of the great British philosophers, known most for his Utilitarian theories of human motivation. Might be a clue towards insight into Desmond's M.O.

Graybridge game?

Is Graybridge a real football team? If so the uniqueness of the game in question could be used to pinpoint the exact dates of Desmond's flashbacks. --Jackdavinci 00:22, 15 February 2007 (PST)

No, they don't exist. Plus, even if they did it would still be hard to determine which game that was - the events described weren't that unique.

They were unique - Desmond calls them 'miraculous'! :-) But it's sad to hear that they don't exist.

He also said that they came back from two goals down to win. That isn't what I'd call miraculous, something which happens quite a few times in a season.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pavedats (talkcontribs) .

The point is moot since it's a fictional game. But I'll perpetuate mootfulness anyway. ;-) It seems implied that they came back from two goals to win with a score in the last minute of the game. It's special enough that Desmond calls it "miraculous" and it stick out in his mind enough to remember it after many years. And if it was a real team, the footage (player numbers, etc) probably would have made it easy to identify for anyone who follows football in the UK. And probably if it was a real game, it would have had to have been fairly remarkable for the writers of the show to know about it. I'm curious though if anyone can identify what were the real teams that were playing in the original stock footage from the uniforms. --Jackdavinci


I was thinking that the inititial flashes when Desmond turns the key would be informative but on slow-mo I didn't notice anything special. Did I miss something? --Jackdavinci 02:03, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Charlie in Desmond's FB

So given Desmond's time scale, when he meets Charlie this must be before his time in Driveshaft? Otherwise, people might have recognized him on the street. So far into the future can Desmond see? Bellemichelle 05:13, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Penny's Picture

How does Penny have a copy of the photo she took with Desmond as we see during the last scene of Season 2 finale? Desmond took the photo and has it on the island. How could she have a copy? Could that scene from the finale not be parrellel to when Desmond turned the key, but rather in the future, a 'flash' of what is to happen sometime much later after Desmond, (or just the picture) make it off the island?

She actually tucked that photo into his copy of "Our Mutual Friend". He didn't even know he had it until he was about to commit suicide. She may have made a copy before putting it in there. -BearDog 09:47, 15 February 2007 (PST)
But if Desmond really has travelled through time, he keeps the picture after breaking up with Penny, and presumably doesn't see her again until the scene in the stadium. We see the the picture in Penny's room after Desmond has triggered the failsafe (and thus after he has ostensibly changed history). Of course, if he has changed history, there may be any number of differences between his "new" history and the one we see in Live Together, Die Alone; he could have made a copy and sent it to Penny, etc. --Rowsdower 13:35, 16 March 2007 (PDT)

Flashback VS. Lucid Dream VS. Deja Vu VS. Combination

Wow ... what an interesting episode.

I dont think its actually real like hurleys dave episode. When you think about it Desmond doesnt want to have to be responsible for letting Charlie die. Likewise in his trip he imagines that he didnt have to do what he did with penny and the island etc. Maby its right that its his subconciese?. WARWICK THE BLACKHOLE

I'm not sure if calling the "flashback" sequence "Deja Vu" is nessecarily correct ... since, while he EXPERIENCES Deja Vu at times during his "flashback" (which is more likely a lucid / waking dream state while he's in some type of comatose state) he's not experiencing "Deja Vu" in the dictionary definition sense of the word.

While what he experiences isn't an "actual" historical flashback as we're used to seeing them on the show ... like a dream, it may or may not contain facts or elements that happened in real life ... and others that are clearly distorted / intergrated with things that Desmond experienced AFTER he left London / became stranded on the island.

I think it's clearly a combination of several things ... but "Deja Vu" while present in some forms, isn't the best choice for a section heading.

-Frankie Viturello

It's best in the sense that it's better than flashback or lucid dream and those are the choices we started with. Some other ideas: "flashing", "quantum leap", "lucid flashback", "flashes before his eyes", "mutable flashback", or perhaps the related term "déjà visité". --Jackdavinci 07:11, 15 February 2007 (PST)
Personally, I like "Lucid Flashback", or "Flashback (Lucid)" -Frankie Viturello
Yeah, "Lucid Flashback" is the simplest and most accurate descriptor of what happened.--Ex-Pope Cardinal Richard Corey 09:43, 15 February 2007 (PST)
I kind of like "Desmond's flashes" or maybe "Desmond's lucid flashes" since that is how they are referred to in the title but "Desmond's lucid flashbacks" works for me too --Jackdavinci
I like "Lucid flashback". This follows the convention of the other article episodes which use "Flashback" rather than "Locke's flashback". It seems the simplest, and I prefer having the word "flashback" in there. -- Dagg talk contribs4 8 09:54, 15 February 2007 (PST)

I would like to suggest that instead of calling the extended "flashback sequence" deja vu, we simply call it a flashback (or extended flashback, if you like). It isn't an flashback to when Desmond broke up with Penny exactly, but to what happened when Desmond turned the Failsafe key. In doing this, he somehow triggered, for lack of a better term, a fugue state involving a reliving of his breakup with Penny. Also, his life flashed before his eyes and stopped here at this memory, the one thing above all else he would change about his previous life. This is similar to Mr. Eko's first encounter with the Monster, in which the Monster seemed to access all of Eko's memories. Therefore, we should consider that this flashback was one of the most intense encounters with the Monster to date -- and that all of the flashbacks are subtly or overtly the work of the Monster. How this fits into the Discharge mythologically, I'm not sure.--Boloboffin 02:24, 15 February 2007 (PST)

I moved this down here, because it's talking about the same thing. This is a flashback - not to Desmond's break with Penny, but to what happened to him after activating the Failsafe, and what happened was this lucid dream/fugue state/whatever.--Boloboffin 12:40, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Any other suggestions instead of "Deja Vu"?

From the discussion above, it looks like nobody likes "Deja Vu". Lots of other suggestions above. I tried changing it to generic "Flashback", but it was immediately reverted. What should we call it? In the rest of the site, we are calling it a flashback: Flashback characters, Flashback tally, etc. We should probably be consistent. -- Dagg talk contribs4 8 20:19, 15 February 2007 (PST)

  • I kind of like Deja Vu (when I first saw it, I said "Wow", someone thought of the perfect subheading)... it is how Desmond describes it (yes, it's more than your typical deja vu, which is just perception alone, but the French word describes it pretty well... "Seen it before"). I think it's pretty accurate for how he experiences it. I would argue against flashback regardless, because I think it's better to differentiate it from the other episodes, since this one is pretty distinct in how it emphasizes a nonlinear time element in the plot--he appears to be actually reliving the events, not just thinking about them. But let's take a straw poll on it. I'll put some popular suggestions down, feel free to add other suggestions as well. --PandoraX 20:34, 15 February 2007 (PST)
  • PS: Lucid flashback isn't too bad either... but is there any term that invokes the fractured timeline now introduced into the plot?
  • PPS: Just saw this.... it's a more esoteric term, but probably describes what happened in this story better; changing my vote down one. Deja vecu
  • For consistency's sake, I prefer Flashback, with a footnote or italicized and indented note explaining the difference. I agree with Dagg that this applies to how we treat the other information on the site (tallies, flashback characters, etc.), as well as the fact that it does follow the general pattern of lost episodes since 1x03: information about a character's past provides about half the content of each episode, and that phenomenon is what we are referring to. Any further hairsplitting belongs in the information content of the article, rather than changing conventions of LP article structure. Regardless of if it "really" happened, or "mostly really happened but he was/wasn't really there", it is structurally what we refer to as a "flashback". In other words Eko's flashes of his past when he encountered the smoke monster are clearly not flashback sequences, and clearly a different phenomenon than Desmond's narrative sequences in this episode that describe events before the island. IMHO. -- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯  Talk  20:38, 15 February 2007 (PST)
  • I hear you, though I did add disclaimers in our other flashback articles which clearly state the difference. Santa, vote below... are you going with Flashback (plain) or Lucid flashback? --PandoraX 20:46, 15 February 2007 (PST)
  • Oh, and here's another suggestion. Does it really have to be an either/or type of solution? Couldn't we have a slashed word, such as Flashback/Deja vu? That way, the consistency is invoked, yet the section is clearly marked as being different and unique from other flashback sequences (which again, I'd argue it is; Eko does not relive his past in one continuous segment, and then come back to try to change events). --PandoraX 20:58, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Straw poll

  • Déjà vu
  • Déjà vécu
    • --PandoraX 20:34, 15 February 2007 (PST)
  • Flashback
  • Lucid flashback
    • I like this one that someone else above suggested. "Lucid" = like lucid dreaming; "Flashback" = the word used on the rest of the site.-- Dagg talk contribs4 8 20:42, 15 February 2007 (PST)
    • I'm for this one, Deja Vecu is very neat, but this is more concise. --Frankie Viturello
    • Here's another. --Kilgore Trout
    • Me too--Tricksterson 08:35, 16 February 2007 (PST)
  • Flash
  • Déjà vécu after reading its WP description, IMHO this is indeed the valid label.-- 21:37, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Problematic episode

  • I changed it to "Lucid flashback", per some of the comments above. In doing so, I found something interesting... there is a "true" flashback, because the entire sequence is nested within the other flashback of the failsafe event (the first and last paragraph), which aren't really "lucid". Wasn't really sure how to resolve this, so I just left the entire thing under "Lucid flashback", since I think most people know what is meant. It was definitely an interesting episode. --PandoraX 08:37, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Lucid Dreaming

At the end of the episode Desmond describes what has happened to him. When he turned the failsafe key, his life flashed before his eyes, and it's still happening. It's not that he's in a temporal loop. He is re-experiencing his life inside his own mind. It's why he saw Charlie when he did when he didn't recognize him before, and Charlie doesn't recognize him now. Desmond throwing his tie in the gutter, and his prospective father-in-law dissing him, those events happened. Perhaps there was a singer on the corner that Desmond disregarded his first time around. Didn't look at his face, and re-experiencing his memories in a lucid dreaming state, his brain's filling in the gaps by saying it's Charlie. Now, if his life flashed before his eyes, it's plausible that his entire life flashed before his eyes, including whatever life he's got left. While he isn't re-experiencing all this in real time, it's kinda been 'downloaded' into his brain in one lump patch, and it's taking awhile for his brain to process it all, hence the perpetual de ja vu feeling. He can no longer tell what he's already experienced and what hasn't happened yet cuz it's all a big blob in his head. -- ZachsMind 13:58, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Time Slip

Damon Lindelof has confirmed that Desmond actually does go back in time in this episode. This is a lot like Billy Pilgrim becoming "unstuck in time" in Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five, and so I propose that this flackback be called a "Time Slip". Desmond is actually in the past and could have changed history. Boloboffin 16:52, 5 February 2008 (PST)

  • This has the benefit of explaining why Desmond gets premonitions. He is still unstuck in time a bit. Boloboffin 16:52, 5 February 2008 (PST)
  • I will wait about a week before being bold. Boloboffin 16:52, 5 February 2008 (PST)
  • Hang on. This is an actual flashback as Desmond tells Charlie and Hurley about what happened during the discharge. However, it is a flashback ABOUT the time slip. I'm going to make some corrections to the article but leave the "lucid flashback" as is for now. Boloboffin 16:57, 5 February 2008 (PST)

Red Shoes

I paused and zoomed the Red Shoe Man's death, and the circular logo on his shoes says something like "PF FLYERS" and in the center of the circle it reads: "PF" --Frenkmelk 07:59, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Yes, from what I can gather, they're a real brand of shoes. The shoes featured in that episode have a similar design style to Converse "Chuck Taylors" here's a link to the PF Flyers website. --Frankie Viturello

The Red Shoes are another great Wizard of Oz Reference as well.

Unanswered Questions

I left this for now...

"Desmond's power to see into the future is still unexplained. Even if he did actually travel back in time, he would only have knowledge of events that occured before the hatch imploded, not after like Locke's speech and the lightning strike."

We don't know to what point in his life Desmond lived. We only know that the hatch explosion 'unlodged' him from linear time, and that the fall in the flat is where he returns. It brings to mind "Slaugherhouse 5" and the final episode of Star Trek:TNG.

Only fools are enslaved by time and space!

Pharmakon 09:55, 15 February 2007 (PST)

If his knowledge all comes from "re-living" periods of life, or coming "unstuck in time" (Slaughthouse-5 style), he must have run through his "current" time on the island *a couple of times already* though - if Charlie was electrocuted the first time around (for arguments' sake, lets say that was the first 'death'), he would never have drowned trying to save Claire. So to know at least two things to do to save Charlie, the would have to be **at least** Desmond's third time through this time period. So just saying that his "flashback life" played out once (but it played out all the way through the island experiences) might explain the lightening, but it doesn't explain saving Claire.

I think Desmond really did "return" to the island right when he got hit with the bat, but his time "in the past" does not really directly explain his ability to save Charlie. Perhaps he travels in time more than that, multiple times, on other occasions? Or was that "London '97 thing" a one-off experience, with all other "predictions" coming in the form of sudden flashes or visions (as he suggested) - which would be a different kind of experience to his extended deja vu back in London.

On the subject of travelling multiple times through the same periods of your life... note that the Oracle-style lady says ambiguously "you're a first timer.... I can always tell!", i.e. first time reliving things, perhaps?

Also an unanswered question: why does the Oracle-style lady put so much effort into urging Desmond not to try and change things, yet say he won't succeed anyway? But at the same time say he'll "kill us all" if he doesn't go to the island? Which is it lady, he can change things (but then he might kill people), or he can't?

Hmm, long post, sorry! Indigo Vapour 10:31, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Ok, so it's more of a "Groundhog's Day" style re-occurance! Maybe the mid-season filler "Daybreak" was, in actuality, another clue!! (Ok, maybe not on that last one)
Good point about Hawking (no guess as to where THAT name came from!). She does present a paradox, but then again, so is time travel!
This also plays on the notion of the Buddhist notion of reincarnation. We have to live life again and again until we get it right, and then... nirvana. Maybe this time around, Desmond will get it right, since I'm fairly confident he told Penny where to find him and what to look for!
Pharmakon 10:51, 15 February 2007 (PST)

I was about to discuss the same thing as Indigo. Desmond's lucid-flashback/time-trip cannot be a one off event if it's to explain how he's seeing things that have happened after the hatch explosion, and in fact Indigo is not wrong when he says that it must've happened at least twice - since in one of those memories Charlie had already died by lightning, and in current 'present' he had died trying to save her Claire from drowning. Therefore - Desmond has travelled at LEAST 3 times. Once when he turned the fail-safe key, once after the lightning struck, and once again after Charlie had (would have had) drowned. It would take 3 such trips to explain what we've seen so far - since the events in the last two are mutually exclusive. A 4th trip to explain his knowledge of Locke's speech is not necessary since it doesn't coincide with any mutually exclusive event.

The real issue I had is with our new Oracle-Like old lady. The problem is this - IF she IS a figment of his subconscious - then the whole time-trip back sequence is a hallucination - induced by the monster or not - and therefore doesn't AT ALL explain how Desmond could be seeing future events. However, if she is NOT a hallucination - i.e. - if she is real - then what the hell is going on? This blows the whole conceptual stakes up quite a bit - and it starts looking either like a pocket reality or like a involving well, epic entities. So the problem is this; accept the woman as hallucination and you still don't know how Desmond knows the future, accept Desmond's trip isn't a hallucination and realize that the story is much, much, more...well, cosmic than anything we'd bargained on so far...

Best episode in quite a while :) Good - cause I didn't like Not in Portland so much.

KarmaMole 10:58, 15 February 2007 (PST)

  • You guys should definitely join our forum and have a good chat in there... it's hard to have an ongoing theoretical discussion in the talk pages here, but I liked the points made (I too noted the Matrix/Slaughterhouse 5 similarities. If you listen to the podcasts, also, it's clear that D & C were pretty fascinated by the Daybreak series this winter (they keep joking they should do a podcast for that show as well), despite the early cancellation. That should have been the first cue that they would try this Groundhog Day/parallel universe storyline on us! --PandoraX 17:56, 15 February 2007 (PST)

For more on this please see the movies "Donnie Darko" and "Primer"Jdray 09:00, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Time Loop

I have thought from previously seeing "The Cost of Living", that in the end, when you see Eko and Yemi as children walking back into the sunset, we are seeing the recycle of time on the island. It seems intended that the last shot seen is the same as the first shot seen, and the recent episode "Flashes Before Your Eyes" seems to back this up now. Any other thoughts? --Kilgore Trout 12:17, 15 February 2007 (PST)

For more on this please see the movies "Donnie Darko" and "Primer"Jdray 09:01, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Drinking songs?

Can anyone identify for the cultural references section the songs (and jokes?) Desmond and Charile were singing/telling while they were drinking? I don't recall everything but I remember something about a 'girl with one leg and a heart of gold'. --Jackdavinci

Interesting Connection

Desmond consummated his fate by throwing the ring into the Thames River. His beloved novel of Charles Dickens, Our Mutual Friend, opens with a few miscreants searching the Thames for valuables.

Dream Type Flashbacks

I was, at the start, mainly focusing of flashbacks of the four people in the Hatch when the Fail Safe Key was turned. However I believe that we should compile a list here of dreams or flashbacks or instances that connect with the idea that things are being shown or elluded to before they actually take place, or in Visions of the deceased coming back to life. I think there is also a connection with some of the visions seen, and the bodies that are buried or resting on the island. Please note instances where these charecters take form via visions. I would like if a few others could help. Anyone feel free to edit, add ideas, or challenge ideas stated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kilgore Trout (talkcontribs) .

Wouldn't this be better suited to the premonitions article? --Jackdavinci
I'm working on some information and the setup as now, I'll explain some of my ideas but they are all geared toward this article, and this episode as the anchor of the theory. Check back tomorrow and if you still feel the same way I'll consider moving it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kilgore Trout (talkcontribs) .
I think it might be best served as notes added to either premonitions or dreams and visions also. --PandoraX 21:02, 15 February 2007 (PST) PS: Please sign talk notes.
I haven't gotten my theory figured out all the way yet, but what I do have fits here, I haven't had much time tonight to do it. Move it if you will but I am just researching a theory before I post it, so it's actually based on facts. My theory relates to time travel, and issue cleared and defined by many key points on this island and relate mainly to Desmond in this episode. --Kilgore Trout
Moved for now to premonitions. --Kilgore Trout

--Kilgore Trout 18:49, 15 February 2007 (PST)

That is interesting, but Charlie's happened before The Discharge. Then again, now that we're confirmed to be working with non-linear time, that doesn't mean much... Did Eko have any in Season 3 himself?--Ex-Pope Cardinal Richard Corey 14:54, 15 February 2007 (PST)

For more on this please see the movies "Donnie Darko" and "Primer"Jdray 09:02, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Possible cultural reference

I've heard about the movie The I inside which is said to have a plot very similar to this episode. Has anybody seen that movie and can confirm that rumour? --Perpetka 16:19, 15 February 2007 (PST)

  • The reference to The Matrix Reloaded seems very obvious to me: I even remember many fans referring to Mrs. Hawking as to The Oracle right after first airing of the episode. And the scene with the bench reminds us about similiar scene in The Matrix Reloaded in far too many ways to be just coincidence. So, I just added it to the list of references. Malachi 11:11, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Full/middle names

  • It seems strange that both Desmond and Charlie's full names - including middle names, are explicitly mentioned in this episode, but I can't think of what it would signify. Any ideas? --Jackdavinci

  • Charlie Hieronymus Pace - Hieronymus Bosch

Hieronymus Bosch, (latinized; also Jeroen Bosch or his real name Jeroen van Aken) (c. 1450 – August, 1516) was a prolific Dutch painter of the 15th and 16th centuries. Many of his works depict sin and human moral failings. Bosch used images of demons, half-human animals and machines to evoke fear and confusion to portray the evil of man. The works contain complex, highly original, imaginative, and dense use of symbolic figures and iconography, some of which was obscure even in his own time. He is said to have been an inspiration for the surrealist movement in the 20th century.

"half-human animals and machines to evoke fear and confusion to portray the evil of man." possible reference to "the monster/security system"

"Many of his works depict sin and human moral failings." reference to Charlie's drug use and immoral behavior (during and after the bands breakup)

"Among his most famous is The Garden of Earthly Delights. This triptych depicts paradise with Adam and Eve and many wondrous animals on the left panel, the earthly delights with numerous nude figures and tremendous fruit and birds on the middle panel, and hell with depictions of fantastic punishments of the various types of sinners on the right panel. When the exterior panels are closed the viewer can see, painted in grisaille, God creating the earth." Another reference to Adam and Eve from "House of the Rising Sun" --tigerparty

Magical Fate Fairies

  • Altho the 'fate' aspect of the time travel is portrayed in a mysterious supernatural seeming way for dramatic effect, there's no reason there can't be a more scientific (or science fiction) reason that doesn't rely on "magical fate fairies: restoring the time line. Stephen Hawking himself, the king of theoretical physics, has pretty much endorsed the physics version of magical fate fairies, proposing that because our current understand of physics does allow for time travel, that there needs to be some explanation for the grandfather paradox - his idea being that it is somehow prevented. One physicist showed that if you used a wormhole to time travel, and tried to send a billiard ball through with a trajectory that would knock itself out of its original path through the wormhole, it would end up self-correcting. My own pet theory is that the probability waves that propogate to and from the future and usually only collapse at the present moment are involved. Basically, if you change the past, the most probable new future will be the one closest to the original one. Rather than complicated 'magical fate fairies' you are just travelling along the 'path of least resistance'. --Jackdavinci
It all depends on non-linear time; in linear time, what is done at point A leads to what happens at point B, leads to C, then to D, and finally to E. But in non-linear time, events at B, C, D, and E, lead to A, which leads to all other points; Points A C D and E lead to occurences at point B. What gets me about all this is where i learned it from: Robert Anton Wilson. I think we have another connection!--Ex-Pope Cardinal Richard Corey 11:21, 16 February 2007 (PST)

KRONOS doesn't mean Time

I am from Greece. The greek word for Time is KHRONOS (Greek: Χρόνος) or chronos. I think the connection of KRONOS and Time is wrong and has to be removed.

Kronos is Greek is Cronus, father of Zeus. -- Magioladitis 18:34, 15 February 2007 (PST)

  • I wrote this in the first time, but looks like someone changed it incorrectly, I'll change it back to the name of the titan. --PandoraX 05:46, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Another Clock work Referance

i know im probably way late for this but i just started to reread A Clockwork Orange for the second time and i noticed the main character says "brother" about every 3 sentances and I thought it might be another conection to the book since the Room 23 and his flash backs —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brothah22 (talkcontribs) .

Other Hatch Survivors?

Something struck me as interesting watching "Flashes...". In London (when with Charlie I think) Desmond accurately predicts that it is about to rain. That reminded me of Locke back in Season One (01x11 - "All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues") - I think - where he and Boone were searching for Claire. Locke accuractley predicted - "It's going to start raining in a minute" - and it did. This has been an unanswered question for a while - how did Locke know it was going to rain? Has Locke been round this loop before? He also is well known for using phrases such as "I'm supposed to do this!" Maybe Locke is paralyzed in the future, which would imply he gets on Flight 815 in the future?

What about Charlie? Not quite as strong a link, but when he first came out of the hatch after it exploded, he was dazed and when asked where the others (from the hatch) were he responded, "What? They're not back yet?" Has he also had a bit of a time trip and thinks he's been away longer than he has?

As for Eko - well... he died. Locke has been marked out as "You're next" (by Eko). Charlie has been warned that no matter what happens he is going to die (by Desmond).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lost monster (talkcontribs) .

  • Locke is a man of faith, it is not difficult to predict when it will rain. People who study it enough can realize the cloud types above, their altitude and notice the humidity change when it drops start falling. This would likely give Locke about a minute before they hit the ground. I'm not an expert on it but thats generally how it works. He is a man of faith, he is not saying supposed because he has done it before. And I'm pretty sure Charlie was half joking when he said that, not really wanting to explain the whole thing to those who asked. -Mr.Leaf 04:56, 16 February 2007 (PST)
  • For the most part, I agree with Leaf, though I do think the writers try to leave things ambiguous at times and confusing, so that it leaves the question in the viewer's mind. So, the Locke/rain thing--probably not strong enough for inclusion into page premonitions, but still "interesting", like many of the things Locke says (you could argue the same for a few of his moments, such as the one where he talks about white and dark sides in backgammon). Predicting rain reminds me of Magnolia (as do many of the story elements, but nothing direct, so leaving it off the main article). --PandoraX 05:50, 16 February 2007 (PST)
  • However, we have had serious input of the battle of fate vs. free will, and at this point I think it's a matter of how these two very different people, and what they see these flashes as. It fits with Locke's personality to easily trust what he hears, as in via the oracle in Desmonds flash, I think there would have been a major contrast as to how Locke would have reacted given similar circumstances. I think that the creators have also hinted that Desmound is further along in his quest. (I will try to find some quotes and back up information soon.) However this could imply further in the series of time loop, further in his understanding of whats going on, or perhaps even just simply refering to the fact that he's had longer to uncover information...--Kilgore Trout 12:50, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Football Match

I know it's been discussed above, but I'm wondering whether any significance can be read into the writers' decision to use a fictitious football team/match in order, possibly, to emphasise that Desmond's experiences/memories are unreliable and unreal (whereas footage of a real-life baseball game proved exactly the opposite to Jack in an earlier episode.)

For those who are interested, I'm 90% certain the stadium shown is Camp Nou, and that its owners, FC Barcelona, are the team scoring in the second clip. Judging from the kits, stadium and quality of footage I'd hazard a guess that the game featured was Barcelona vs. Real Madrid at Camp Nou circa 1995 (or sometime between 1993-1998 at the latest.) The number 7 who crosses the ball for the goal bears some resemblance to Marc Overmars, but his presence would date the footage to sometime between 2000 and 2004, and it's not that recent.

Note that, although the commentator seems to exclaim the same fictional name (Patrice?) in both clips, they're plainly derived from different games (another hint?) The first match looks like a German Bundesliga game from the same early-mid-nineties period; the kits and surroundings are evocative of that era and location, and the lower corner of a German flag is briefly visible at the end of the clip, draped beyond the (characteristically German) running track which surrounds the field.

The footage was probably chosen for no other reason than that it was conducive to the superimposition of the requisite advertisements on the hoardings, but I thought I'd throw the info out there for what it's worth. DublinDilettante 16:24, 16 February 2007 (PST)

It may also be something mundane, like they didn't want to pay full royalties to the league and both teams, or they used footage already paid for in something else (like a network ad). I'm not saying there definitely isn't a clue to be found there, but it's possible there isn't. -BearDog 16:35, 16 February 2007 (PST)
I think you're probably right (particularly about the royalties; presumably sponsors wouldn't be too thrilled about seeing advertising boards for which they paid astronomical figures concealed on one of the world's most popular TV series.) However, there seems to have been a deliberate, premeditated effort to differentiate explicitly between the games featured in the respective clips (the first depicts a team dressed in white attacking from left to right, the second a team in blue and red attacking from right to left.) Maybe Desmond wasn't paying close enough attention the first time to realise it was the wrong game...DublinDilettante 16:52, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Cultural References

Why was my reference to "You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown" deleted? For any actor, for any playwright, for anybody who has ever been involved in theater, that was an obviously intentional reference and joke. -tuttlemsm

Actually, I've been working in theatre for about ten years now, am familiar with the musical, and still don't think that's what Desmond was talking about. Sorry. -BearDog 13:48, 19 February 2007 (PST)

Why was my addition of the Girls of Fiji Pictorial deleted....but now has been added back in? I didn't see the number 15 the first time, but that could have been added instead of deleting what I put in altogether... Nannabot

Island telling Desmond you cannot change the future.

After the discharge, Locke and Eko both had some kind of confrontation with the island; so, since none of the other theories give a complete explanantion, I've made up my mind that Desmond's 'trip' wasn't real, it was the Island trying to tell him something. The appearances of The Numbers, the microwave beep, Charlie and the painting are meant to tell Desmond he isn't actually reliving the past, he's still on the island and 'dreaming'.

I think the message is that you cannot change the future, any more than you can change the past.There's no need to fret over free-will and fate, you just have to suppose that the course of events has a momentum that dominates their future trajectory. The Island is a good place to emphasise this, since the Valenzetti Equation was being investigated there. Like a mirror image, the Future always reflects the Past.

You can't knock a plane out of the sky with a fly swat; but if you had to, and knew in advance that you had to, you could have prevented the flight by phoning a bomb scare to the airport. Desmond's premonitions are going to be like that: enough to cause minor variations in the future, but never enough to control it.

Also, I bet Desmond ends up killing Charlie, or being killed BY Charlie! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burt Gummer (talkcontribs) .

I'm pretty sure the numbers, microwave beep, etc were just the things that reminded him of the future and helped trigger his memory. --Jackdavinci 06:59, 19 February 2007 (PST)
Absolutely, they fit in with almost any theory. But would a microwave timer actually sound like the computer in the Swan? And what about the painting in Widmore's office that turns up in Thomas' studio (that is, Widmore has it before Thomas has painted it)?--User:Burt Gummer

I think there are several purposeful mistakes incorporated into this flashback (such as the microwave beeping and Thomas's picture) and for this reason: This is all inside Desmond's head and Mrs Hawking is an enitity similar to Dave in that she is a part of Desmonds brain the part which was activated by turning the failsafe key. Eintein himself has said that we do not use the full potential of our brains and Mrs Hawking represents a part of this. Furthermore Desmond's mind must be going like crazy mixing fact with fiction, pre-island with actual island which is why all these things appear. Thomas' picture and Charlie however are real crossovers.--Princess Dharma (banned) 14:11, 19 February 2007 (PST)

Yeah, I think Mrs Hawking is also like Yemi in Eko's dreams and visions ("you speak to me as if I were your brother"), and Boone in Locke's dreams and visions. She represents the significant moment in Desmond's life, when he decided not to buy the engagement ring and propose to Penelope.--User:Burt Gummer

The Arrow of Time

It appears that the writers have been reading about the "Arrow of Time" concept, as discussed on this webpage:

Specifically, the following passages: "Consider John, a hypothetical time traveler who keeps a perfect wristwatch on his person at all times to keep close track of his personal time... However, both John and his watch are physiochemical constructs with definite physical properties. It is theoretically possible... to reconfigure John and his watch to some previous personal state accurately enough that John cannot realize by memory or reference to his watch that any intervening time has passed. That is, we can in fact reverse John's personal time by reversing the thermodynamic processes that have occurred in his vicinity.

...It is logically and physically possible that without our knowledge, just as we did to John, some godlike force could rearrange all the matter and energy in our observed universe into some previous state as referenced to this force's personal time. Our memories and observed records would all agree that yesterday it was yesterday, that 5 seconds ago it was 5 seconds ago, and so on, even though it may turn out that 5 seconds ago (as referenced by the external force's personal time) was seven million years in our future, and that yesterday (again, as referenced by the external force) it was in fact our year three billion B.C.E. Our personal time could even be externally forced to flow continuously backward, and our memories, records, and observations would still inform us of the standard forward passage of time, since we may only directly view the present.

...It seems compelling to conclude that there is not in fact any predefined logical direction to the flow of time, and so the past and the future become logically indistinguishable."

Replace "John" with "Desmond," "Jack," etc., and you have a viable theory as to what's going on on the Island. The only question is, is this thermodynamic reversal actually happening, or is it just going on in the Losties' heads? (via hypnosis/VR/drugs/etc) And, why is Desmond remembering the thermodynamic past and future when the others are not? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zephyr40k (talkcontribs) .

All of this is negated by the 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy), the tendency of the energy in a system to average out. mentions it, then ignores it!
Put an ice cube into a glass of warm water and it melts - the ice has got warmer and the water colder. You are left with a glass of lukewarm water. But for a glass of lukewarm water to suddenly produce an ice cube, some of the water has to get cold enough to turn to ice, while the rest of it gets warmer. While this is not ruled out by the laws of physics (you just have to run them backwards in time), you never see it happen. In fact it would require an overall input of energy. In practical terms, while it feels as though the air-conditioning makes the room cooler and the fridge keeps the beer cold, this is only achieved at the expense of making everything else hotter. Another good example is knocking a ceramic mug off a table so it shatters into a million pieces when it hits the floor. Conceptually, you could run time backwards and watch the mug reform. But physically this would require additional energy input, and there is no known force that would drive it.
Basically, while a 'Godlike force' might conceivably arrange for an (arbitrarily small) object to return to a previous state, this is always at the expense of everything else. Even to go back a few seconds in time, the Earth has to reverse it's spin, and it's orbit (along with the Moon), and the Sun and Galaxy reverse their course through the heavens. So a trip back in time always requires more energy than the universe contains - where does it come from, and where does it go afterwards? The 'Arrow Of Time' always points forward.--User:Burt Gummer

Am I the first to notice this...

When Desmond awakens in the forest, he see's a Bicycle, a book, a dart board, a piece of metal with a CD on it, a record and the photo of him and Penelope. Is it just me, or do most of those things appear in the bar that he is in in the Deja Vu sequence? Anomymage 19:03, 21 February 2007 (PST)

  • All of those things have been seen in the Hatch. --Marik7772003 09:46, 25 February 2007 (PST)

TV with 2 strange men and a green machine

Who put that theory under 'Miscellaneous'? I can't see the thing you're talking about anywhere. Got a pic? Burt Gummer

Change of location

In the scene where Desmond meets Charlie, exactly when the camera shows the sign "Donation", the location changes totally! There are two locations, the first begins when Desmond is going out the building and finishes at the moment he listens the sound of guitar; the second begins when it shows the sign "Donation". the main differences are:

  • the green newsagents shop: previously is closed after is open
  • the text on the green newsagents shop: the text and the font are different.
  • the position of the green shop: the position respect at sidewalk is different.
  • the wheather: in the first, it's quite cloudy and there are no shadows; in the second it's sunny. The shadows are clearly visible.
  • The lamppost: after has 2 banners on both sides
  • the Widmore building: after not seems the same. Behind Desmond and the other people, there is a grey wall with horizontal lines.

these are not a coincidences... (sorry for my english!)

Darma painting in Widmore's office

Shouldn't there be some reference here about the Darma painting in Widmore's office with the reverse Namaste across the top? It's obviously a painting that represents the island with a polar bear, mountains etc.

It seems to me that the reverse Namaste could be a huge plot clue. The upside down buddha could have meaning as well that should be considered.--Boris42 06:44, 26 June 2007 (PDT)

Mistaken Bloopers

I have removed the blooper which stated: "Charlie mentions England is an island, a common American misconception (it borders Scotland and Wales)." In the episode, Desmond says "...we were on an island..." and Charlie replies, "We ARE on an island, Mate--this is England." This is factual and correct. If one is in England, one is on an island.Namastizzay 07:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

  • I removed a blooper too. "Whilst watching Charlie sing, Desmond recalls meeting him briefly by the bookcase and says "You're Charlie." He has no way of knowing Charlie's name at this point." Yes, he did. When Charlie came near the blast door before they detonated the dynamite he shouted: "John, it's Charlie. Let's work this thing out, John. John! Eko is very upset..." etc. So Desmond knew, from before Charlie came down there, that they had locked out a priest and that there was another guy named Charlie there with him afterwards.

Why was my question deleted?

I put the question:

"Do the events seen in 1996 in this episode happened that way originally, or did Desmond change the past somehow?"

in the questions section, since until today we don't know what happened originally. Desmond may have travelled back in time and changed small things as we did in the episode (as JJ Abbrams says in the DVD - Desmond may have not recognized Charlie the first time he lived that. So that makes us ask, "Did Desmond actually change something?"). I'm putting it back in. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 00:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

From what has been said in the show, plus the podcast, it seems like time travel works, on Lost, such that you can't change the past. If you go back in time, it won't affect the future because whatever happened happened (season 5). If you do try to change things, the universe will course correct and it won't matter (season 3). However, if you make a big enough difference (such as, say, detonating an H-bomb next to a pocket of electromagnetic energy) then you might have a chance at changing the timeline (podcast). Thus, Desmond must not have changed the timeline, given the fact that there would have been only slight changes, that the universe would have course corrected for.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  01:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree but the article states that the first time that Desmond lived those things they happened that way. However, that may be false. The first time around Desmond may not have recognized Charlie and (as he says) the barman was the one who got hit, not him. So, I know he couldn't change big things, but small changes like this may mean that things didn't happen that way originally. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 03:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I think the article refers to the general course of events and not the inconsequential specificities of situations. If you think the language should be more precise then feel free to fix it. At any rate, valid UQs are ones which we can expect answers for and it seems highly unlikely that, with only 16 episodes left to the series, that the events from this episode will be revisited just to clear up something this vague.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  03:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you mentioned a potcast. I just saw a transcription of one podcats, and they said this:
  1. Desmond's original timeline did not include him getting hit with the bat.
  2. Desmond's original timeline may have involved getting the photograph of him and Penelope taken at a different time with two photos instead of one.
So, my question is valid. Desmond did change the past, at least in minor things. So I'll put the question back, and perhaps re-write the article or Desmond's one about these events.
I know! I DO believe that the universe course-corrects itself. But the fact is that, for example, in the original timeline, Desmond wasn't hit by the bat. In the new one, he was. Minor change? Yes. But in the end, a change is a change. That's what I'm talking about: Desmond did some small changes.--Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 01:26, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
No. Desmond did some changes. Do these changes remain in the timeline? Because in his altered timeline there's was only one picture. Desmond was sent back to 2004 when he was hit. But in 2004 there are three pictures (his, Penny's, Naomi's). So what happened here? The changes he made doesn't remain? --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 15:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
  • This is just nitpicking at details. The UQ sections are for (among other criteria) questions that we can expect an answer to. It doesn't seem at all likely that this will be revisited in later episodes, since we've already been told that any changes he may have made are insignificant and the universe will course correct for them. Thus, they won't be revisited since they don't affect the plot in any way. The question of changing the timeline is being dealt with by the end of "The Incident, Part 1", with a major change, rather than with any little bits of tinkering Desmond may have done.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  01:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm only saying.... Do the changes Desmond did remain? Just that! Here we have a proof that they don't remain:
  • Penny has a picture for herself and Desmond one for himself. When Desmond changed the timeline they one had one picture. That means, that the timeline he created doesn't exist, because his changes are not in the present. So his altered timeline was only temporal.
Ok, but in the other hand...
  • When Desmond sees Eloise Hawking with the Oceanic 6, he says that she said to him that it was his purpose to go to the island. She says "yes" with her head. This would mean that any changes (as her speech in the jewelry store) DO remain in the present... otherwise she wouldn't remember it.
Ok, that's my question. Here we have two arguments that contradict each other. I just want to know... if the changes he did remain or not... If he could have slightly changed the timeline... That's it... --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 14:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
  • What's the issue with the photo? So there's two copies? That's easily explained by the existence of photocopiers. But that's all besides the point. If there is a minor change in the timeline (which is what you're wondering about), then it doesn't affect the present/future in any way because the universe course corrects. So even if there is a change, it doesn't matter. Since it doesn't matter, there's no reason for the producers to devote what little time Lost has left explaining something which is, literally, inconsequential. Thus, if there's no reasonable expectation that the show will address it, it doesn't belong in the Unanswered Questions section, because that section is for (among other criteria) questions we can expect answers to. I get that you're curious about it, but that isn't sufficient. Personally I'm curious about a lot of things the show will probably never deal with. But the fact remains that if he slightly altered the timeline, then it doesn't impact anything so it doesn't matter.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  20:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Everytime you answer, you say the same thing. I'm trying to explain myself but I see I can't make it. I ask the same thing over and over, and you keep answering about other thing that has nothing to do with my question. The producers said that in the ORIGINAL UNCHANGED TIMELINE Desmond and Penny had TWO PHOTOS TAKEN. When Desmond CHANGED THE TIMELINE they only had one. But in the future (2004) there are still TWO PHOTOS. That means that any changes Desmond did WERE REVERTED when his mind returned to 2004. BUT, then why does Eloise Hawking REMEMBERS ABOUT MEETING DESMOND IN THE ALTERED TIMELINE, if ANY CHANGES MADE BY HIM WERE REVERTED WHEN HE RETURNED. If the changes were reverted, then SHE WOULDN'T REMEMBER MEETING DESMOND SINCE SHE DID NOT IN THE ORIGINAL TIMELINE. That's what I'm saying. It seems a little paradoxical here. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 05:02, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, I'm saying the same thing because you're not getting it: The unanswered questions section is for questions we can expect an answer to. The timeline change is, by definiton, inconsequential. Thus, we can't expect an answer to it. Thus, it doesn't belong in the unanswered questions section, which is why it was originally deleted. I get what you're asking, but at best, what you're talking about belongs on a theory page, but not in the unanswered questions section.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  05:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually I DO expect and answer of those questions I'm making. Obviously! It's the most important thing about Desmond! If they don't answer those questions, this episode actually will never have sense! --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 23:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
  • How so? This serves to answer what happened when the Hatch imploded, explain the rules of time travel and changing the timeline (which came in handy in Season 5) and sets up the "Charlie is gonna die" storyline. To me, all that makes sense. I'm not sure I understand what won't make sense about this episode if they don't explain the timeline "changes" since, as has been established, they didn't matter (ie: course correction).  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  01:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Again the same thing. I just would like to to know in which timeline they're now, in the original or in the new. I would also like that another user would read this discussion - to see what he thinks. Maybe he does understand what I'm saying. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 01:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
If we can do that, it would be great. I may draw the two timelines to show you what I'm talking about. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 05:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
  • (Moving to a new indent, 'cuz that one's getting out of hand :P). I'll grab a SysOp then. As for drawing them to explain more clearly: let me try and save you the trouble, since I think I understand what you're asking. When Desmond went back in time, he caused minor disruptions to the timeline to create things that weren't there before (the photos (which I'm still not clear on, so if you could clarify that I'd be grateful), and meeting Ms. Hawking). Despite the fact that the universe will course correct for any minor changes Desmond made, the changes themselves still took place. You're wondering whether, in the present, the Losties exist in the timeline that happened as Desmond would've remembered it before travelling back (say, how he would've remembered events before the Swan imploded), or whether they exist in the timeline that has incorporated the minor changes caused by Desmond. Is this correct? If so, then where my argument specifically falls is that, because of the course correction, it doesn't matter and if it doesn't matter then the writers won't address it (which isn't to say there isn't an answer, just that we probably won't get one). Then, if they won't address it, it doesn't belong in the UQ section. If I'm misunderstanding your argument, please let me know. Otherwise, I guess a SysOp can help us. On a personal note, thanks for being so patient discussing this: usually when an argument runs this long people start getting snippy (myself included on occasion)... It's nice to see someone who can remain civil this long. :)  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  07:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
EXACTLY! That's what my question is! Now, you didn't get the last piece of it. In which timeline they are, in the new one, or in the original one? If they're in the new one (the one with only 1 PHOTO TAKEN), then why are there TWO PHOTOS? (Desmond's and Penny's) If they broke up after taking the photo that leaves us with only 1 photo. BUT, if they're in the original one, then the TWO PHOTOS in the present would make sense, since in the original timeline they had two photos taken (offical podcast). But, if they're in the original, then why does Eloise Hawking agrees with having met Desmond in 1996, in "316"? She obviously didn't meet him in the original timeline and she obviously didn't talk with him about the course-correction in the original timeline. In any of the 2 timelines we're supposed to be, we have contradictions about the timeline we are itself. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 16:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
  • In that case, I think what you have here is more of a blooper than an unanswered question, since there's a contradiction either way. But as for the photo, I don't understand why there being a copy of the photo is a problem. I can think of a number of ways that there would've been a copy. The first one which comes to mind is: Desmond was planning on sailing around the world, didn't want to loose the photo which was so important to him, made a copy, left it at his flat, when he went missing, Penny searched his flat for clues, found the photo and kept it. Some less likely theories include: they temporarily got back together off-screen and she made a copy; when he went missing, she tracked down the photographer to get his original negative. I don't really see why there only being one copy of the photo originally is a problem.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  19:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
No, it's not a blooper. They obviously have an answer. What I've been thinking is, that when Desmond turned the key and went back to 1996, Eloise may also had come back to 1996. So that explains her knowledge of the future and how in "316" she knows what Desmond is talking about (if we are in the original timeline). You're saying that there is only one timeline. But the creators said that there was an original timeline that was different. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 20:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Would this be an acceptable compromise as a UQ: "How does Eloise know about Desmond's future?" I think it settles your question (albeit indirectly) but doesn't deal with the messiness of timelines and the photo blooper (which, for the life of me, sorry, but I still don't understand).  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  21:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
There is NO blooper. And I'm asking, "In which timeline are we now?". Eloise's knowledge is something else. But you see now why I'm asking that - we may be in any timeline now, but we have proofs that tell us that we are in another one.--Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 01:53, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Sorry, maybe it's me, but I'm still not understanding the photo thing. Ignoring the rest of your question about timelines and Eloise, etc, can you explain why it's a problem (for lack of a better word) that there is more than one copy of the photo? Maybe this is what I'm not getting.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  07:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

SysOp weigh-in

Guys, this is a tough one. You both seem to have points here. UQ sections are intended for major mysteries that we can expect the show to answer. We know that in the "space-time-rules" of Lost small changes in the timeline are possible but the universe is also course-correcting. We also know that Desmond is (according to Faraday) "miraculously special" in some regard. Ultimately, the question that makes a UQ valid is, when you watch the show, do you see something and ask, "But how could that be?" If you're just putting in a UQ to spawn a theory, then it's a wrongheaded UQ. But if you really believe that you're asking it in the proper spirit, I think we should err on the side of inclusion when there is a dispute and one party is acting in good faith. Cheers,  Robert K S   tell me  08:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

  • ORIGINAL TIMELINE: Desmond and Penny took 2 photos, Desmond didn't meet Eloise Hawking.
  • NEW ALTERED TIMELINE: Desmond and Penny took only 1 photo, Desmond met Eloise Hawking.
  • My question is, IN WHICH TIMELINE ARE WE NOW? The actual timeline has:
  • ACTUAL TIMELINE: There are 2 photos, and Eloise met Desmond (as noted by how she acted in "316".
So the ACTUAL TIMELINE doesn't match with either of the ORIGINAL or ALTERED. It has elements of both of them. Now, is that clear? --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 20:52, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the weigh-in, Robert. I'll accept the decision to keep the question, then. If you don't mind though, Dr. James, I'd still like your opinion on the following: it's bordering slightly on fanwakny, but due to the presence of elements from both timelines, wouldn't the answer then be that they're in an amalgamation of the two timelines? Otherwise there would be a continuity error with there being the wrong number of photos (if they're in the altered timeline) or with Eloise remembering Desmond (if they're in the original timeline)?  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  00:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
That's exactly my point. Exactly. But they have to be in only one timeline... either the first or the second one - the timelines couldn't have "mixed". There has to be an answer for this... --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 06:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Why couldn't the timelines have mixed? To me that seems like the simplest explanation, to have a third timeline with both sets of events, and the only way of avoiding a continuity error.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  00:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
No. I've been thinking - they're probably in the original timeline because of the presence of two photos. And, when Desmond turned the key and was sent 8 years to the past, Ms. Hawking probably was sent too. That's how she knows about the future back in 1996. And when Desmond returned to the present so she did. So that's why she remembers him, and in "316" agrees about Desmond's fate thingy. But still in the original timeline. A theory, yes. But that's the only explanation I can find for now. I don't believe that the timelines mixed. It wouldn't have any sense, because the origin of the problems (two photographs, Eloise's knowledge) happened the same day, and couldn't have mixed with a paralel timeline since everything happened almost at the same time. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 01:04, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I think we should just agree to disagree here, then. I think the simplest explanation is the amalgamated timeline and you think Hawking traveled back in time, but both of those are just theories, and are more suitable for discussion elsewhere. Since the UQ issue is resolved, I'm happy to leave this discussion as is. Cheers. :)  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  01:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Cultural Reference

Desmond takes a trolley to the jewelry store... Buys a twenty carat golden ring... Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da referance?--Linkzcap 05:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Hahaha! I had not seen this! Perhaps. I did remember that in "Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da" there's a Desmond, but I didn't remember the ring thingy. --Dr. James (4 8 15 16 23 42) 19:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely... It should be added. --Snake78 13:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Flannigan's credit

I changed it to "and Fionnula Flanagan" because I think that's how it was credited on screen, and we list "and" credits when they're done on other episodes (Julie Bowen's flashback appearances). --Golden Monkey 07:39, March 29, 2010 (UTC)

Flash sideways?

I doubt this will be a popular idea, but I don't think this episode contains a flashback - seems more like a flash sideways. The structure is nearly identical to Happily Ever After, as is what Desmond is going through. Only makes sense to me. Gefred7112 08:23, April 7, 2010 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting oppose The structure may be the same, but the flash takes us to an earlier time in the original timeline, rather than a similar time in the alternate one. Hence, flashback and not flashsideways.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  15:48, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting oppose Um, yes it does contain a flashback-people always forget this, but the flashback actually starts when he turns the key and ends when he appears in the jungle. Whatever timeline he went to, he's flashing back to said travel in the wake of turning the key. --Golden Monkey 18:44, April 7, 2010 (UTC)

Eloise knowing the future is not a blooper

I think this "blooper" should be removed, because it's a plot mystery, not necessarily a blooper: "Eloise was clearly aware of The Swan and the significance of the protocol in her meeting with Desmond, yet the Others appear unaware of the station's existence in 2004." --Celebok 22:10, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting support Eloise had time to look over Daniel's journal. It's obvious that that's how she would have learned about Desmond. Furthermore, it's clear that the Others don't share every piece of information with eachother so I don't see a blooper here.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  18:54, July 5, 2010 (UTC)

"Unstuck in time"

Did we take that phrase from a press release? Otherwise, we should remove it. Desmond's mind travels through time in this episode, but it does not become unstuck. That's something different. --- Balk Of Fametalk 02:32, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Help me Brotha

I want to place this photo in a certain spot, how do I go about doing it Brotha Glassonion0 (talk) 04:59, December 1, 2012 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC BY-NC-ND unless otherwise noted.