Is dimensional travel a prerequisite to reach the DBT?

[BROJ]

That said, I would say that the bucket containing a time egg is not as circumstantial as one would think. It does display the abilities of a time egg, and unless it contains Schala's Pendent, Occam's Razor applies.

Occam's Razor doesn't mean that the simplest answer is usually the correct one, it means that the simplest answer that fits with all known evidence is usually the correct one. In the case of the Time Egg inside the Bucket at the End of Time, there is no evidence whatsoever that there is any Time Egg inside of it or that it is any more special than a normal Gate (to 1999 AD). The addition of the gate to the DBT may be as simple as that the DBT can only be accessed from 1999 AD.

No, you're right "Occam's Razor doesn't mean that the simplest answer is usually the correct one". However it does mean that the explanation with the least number of entities(in this case time manipulational objects) required to explain any given situation is most likely. Edit: it appears I cannot even give you that semblance:

Occam's razor

Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"):

which translates to:

This is often paraphrased as "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one," or alternately, "we should not assert that for which we do not have some proof." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood.

I think you're supposing I'm deducing here. Quite wrong, my friend -- I'm inducing.

There are plenty of equally valid alternative explanations for the Bucket gates. For example, we were speculating in another thread that Gates to the DBT appear whenever a massive change to the timeline occurs in the exact point in space where that change occurred. In Chrono Cross, the Gate is on Opassa Beach - the site of a massive change to the timeline. It would make sense that the Gate to the DBT would be in 1999 AD if this is so.

Really? Wouldn't there, by that logic, be a gate left by Lavos in 12000BC -- post-Zeal? That seems like a major event to me, considering Lavos exhibits extra temporal anomalies making him essentially a time-traveler, and by that logic, his actions are a massive change to the timeline.

[chrono eric]

No, you're right "Occam's Razor doesn't mean that the simplest answer is usually the correct one". However it does mean that the explanation with the least number of entities(in this case time manipulational objects) required to explain any given situation is most likely. I think you're supposing I'm deducing here. Quite wrong, my friend -- I'm inducing.

My explanation requires no time manipulational objects at all, which makes it perhaps even simpler. But the fact remains, I will admit, that Schala's pendant is present in all instances of travel to the DBT.

Really? Wouldn't there, by that logic, be a gate left by Lavos in 12000BC -- post-Zeal? That seems like a major event to me, considering Lavos exhibits extra temporal anomalies making him essentially a time-traveler, and by that logic, his actions are a massive change to the timeline.

Maybe, but maybe not. I would say that both relegating an entire destroyed future to the DBT and replacing it with a "sunny" one, and splitting off an entirely new dimension with that "sunny" future once again reinstated, count as far more severe alterations to the timeline than Lavos screwing around in 12,000 BC.

And you highlighted the least important part so I'll change it for you free of charge:

This is often paraphrased as "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one," or alternately, "we should not assert that for which we do not have some proof." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood

Which is exactly what I said -

Occam's Razor doesn't mean that the simplest answer is usually the correct one, it means that the simplest answer that fits with all known evidence is usually the correct one.

The commonly used paraphrase of "the simplest explanation is the right one" is a wrong interpretation. The right meaning is immediately after that as you can see, which is the same as what I said although I said it a little differently. Nice try though.

[BROJ]

My explanation requires no time manipulational objects at all, which makes it perhaps even simpler. But the fact remains, I will admit, that Schala's pendant is present in all instances of travel to the DBT.

But it does require a time manipulational subject, which is intrinsically more complex than a time manipulation object.

Maybe, but maybe not. I would say that both relegating an entire destroyed future to the DBT and replacing it with a "sunny" one, and splitting off an entirely new dimension with that "sunny" future once again reinstated, count as far more severe alterations to the timeline than Lavos screwing around in 12,000 BC.

And the fact of Zeal no longer being able to immortally control the future does not change the future vastly?

[Eske]

All Lavos does in 12000BC is send 4 people to different timelines.    He does so again in 600AD when the party fights Magus.  The party does something similar everytime they enter a gate or use the Epoch - so 12000BC Lavos isn't anything special at all.

Don't forget that Zeal's downfall was present in the original timeline.  It isn't some massive change, just an ordinary chronological event. 

The dimensional split and Lavos's defeat did not occur in the original timeline - they are huge changes to the timeline.

Lavos's actions in 12000BC aren't even in the same league.

[chrono eric]

Was Zeal ever truly able to immortally control the future? Remember, Zeal existed ultimately because of Lavos, and in the original timeline (ie: the first pass through events) Zeal could easily have been destroyed by Lavos just like in all subsequent timelines. There may never have been a timeline where Zeal survived for all we know.

I don't think a time manipulational subject is "intrinsically more complex" than an object, but I will give you that since Schala's pendant was present during all instances of travel to the DBT, Occam's Razor suggests that Schala's pendant (and thus Dreamstone) is important for travelling to the DBT.

There is one problem though, and that is that Crono and co. and Serge and team had Schala's pendant all along but couldn't access the DBT. So Occam's Razor also suggests that there is some other necessary ingredient since Schala's pendant alone does not fit with all observable evidence.

What other ingredient is that? Well dimensional travel certainly fits with observable evidence, that's for sure.

EDIT: Dammit Eske you beat me to it!

[BROJ]

I don't think a time manipulational subject is "intrinsically more complex" than an object,

A subject is, by definition, something that acts. An object is, by definition, something that is acted upon. The latter requires no action from it, thus it is simpler.

But, I will agree Zeal was a poor example. touche.

[chrono eric]

Right, but we are talking about a fan-derived theory based upon observation of the game that may or may not be true.

So what should be considered "simpler" is not whether Crono is "simpler" than Schala's pendant, but what actions/artifacts are present in all or most instances of travel to the DBT.

For example, Schala's pendant is present in all instances of travel to the DBT. Dimensional travel occuring before travel to the DBT is present in all but one instance. And since the party cannot go to the DBT until after traversing the dimensions in those instances, it must be included in line with our ever present Razor. The Time Egg is present in only one instance (and that is just to activate the Gate).

So what would be considered "simpler" here is that both Schala's pendant and dimensional travel are prerequisites to travelling to the DBT. Assuming that there is a Time Egg in the bucket at the End of Time when it is unnecessary is not.

[BROJ]

Alright, I'll admit, I was mostly playing devil's advocate earlier as I only agreed with most of your theory. But, hey; you're closer to a solid theory then before, no? (Though you seem to be easily agitated when reproached. Chill, man... I mean no harm. ) I have a couple questions, though.

First, is the gate at Lavos' arrival one of these 'special' gates that you speak of? Second, is not a gate that travels to a relative era different from a gate that leads to a specific space-time(e.g. Lucca gate or Day of Lavos Gate)?

[chrono eric]

Naw I wasn't agitated. Sorry if it came off that way because I definitely didn't intend it. I just love a good debate is all  .

And yes, you pointing out the Schala pendant thing definitely helped. I completely overlooked that. So we are left with the observation that both Schala's pendant and dimensional travel appear to be important to reach the DBT except in the case of Schala's own travel to the DBT, which is unusual enough by nature that we can perhaps consider it an exception to the rule.

And what do you mean by "special" gates? Do you mean a point at which the future is significantly altered such that by our reasoning a gate to the DBT should be created? The Gate at Lavos' arrival was likely created by the Entity for the purpose of Crono and co.'s use and probably didn't exist in the original timeline.

But if you mean "isn't Lavos' arrival a case where the timeline was sufficiently altered to create a gate to the DBT?" then I would say yes, Lavos' arrival would certainly qualify (as the future that Lavos obliterated was most likely that of the Reptite dimensions future). The fact that the party cannot access the DBT there is perhaps evidence against the hypothesis that Gates to the DBT appear only at sites of major timeline alteration - I would agree with that.

Which raises an interesting question - by our theory, where would a gate to the DBT actually appear? In Chrono Cross the site of the altered timeline was Opassa Beach, unambiguously. In Trigger the site of the altered timeline was the location in 1999 AD where Lavos was defeated, unambiguously. But what about Lavos' actual arrival and the extinction of the Reptite future? Would the gate appear at the location of Lavos' impact? Or out in space where some event caused Lavos to head towards earth? Or perhaps on the previous planet that Lavos was born on where some group of young alien time travellers failed to defeat his momma Lavos?  It isn't clear.

[BROJ]

Naw I wasn't agitated. Sorry if it came off that way because I definitely didn't intend it. I just love a good debate is all  .

Wasn't sure... You did seem agitated when I nitpicked about Occam's Razor. I will say this, though; all three provided phrases of Occam's Razor say essentially the same thing with no difference changing the ultimate meaning.

And yes, you pointing out the Schala pendant thing definitely helped. I completely overlooked that. So we are left with the observation that both Schala's pendant and dimensional travel appear to be important to reach the DBT except in the case of Schala's own travel to the DBT, which is unusual enough by nature that we can perhaps consider it an exception to the rule.

It should be noted that the MM is made of dreamstone like Schala's pendant and connects to a Lavos continuum.

And what do you mean by "special" gates? Do you mean a point at which the future is significantly altered such that by our reasoning a gate to the DBT should be created? The Gate at Lavos' arrival was likely created by the Entity for the purpose of Crono and co.'s use and probably didn't exist in the original timeline.

But if you mean "isn't Lavos' arrival a case where the timeline was sufficiently altered to create a gate to the DBT?" then I would say yes, Lavos' arrival would certainly qualify (as the future that Lavos obliterated was most likely that of the Reptite dimensions future). The fact that the party cannot access the DBT there is perhaps evidence against the hypothesis that Gates to the DBT appear only at sites of major timeline alteration - I would agree with that.

The latter. Not that I'm still playing devil's advocate, I was just unsure, as you mentioned, the gate was probably created by the Entity.

Which raises an interesting question - by our theory, where would a gate to the DBT actually appear? In Chrono Cross the site of the altered timeline was Opassa Beach, unambiguously. In Trigger the site of the altered timeline was the location in 1999 AD where Lavos was defeated, unambiguously. But what about Lavos' actual arrival and the extinction of the Reptite future? Would the gate appear at the location of Lavos' impact? Or out in space where some event caused Lavos to head towards earth? Or perhaps on the previous planet that Lavos was born on where some group of young alien time travellers failed to defeat his momma Lavos?  It isn't clear.

Was there a gate at the site where Lavos was destroyed?.. Regarding the Lavos Gate, it might not exist in conventional space-time, as Lavos left the normal time continuum when he arrived. This is evidenced by Lavos' very quick disappearance after it's arrival and completion of its 'perfect being'(via absorption of the DNA of all of the planet's life) whether one fights Lavos in 12000BC or in 1999AD.

Ah! I just had an epiphany. When one goes to fight the Dream Devourer, one ends up in a 'room'(as in game area) with the standard Lavos Zone parallax used only for Lavos and those in his 'space'. However, as one proceeds further, one sees Magus[2] in front of a gate that leads directly to the DD. I move to say that said gate is the missing Reptite DBT gate. As per our theory, the gate needs an explanation.

Also, at the risk of being redundant, you missed my second question:
"Second, is not a gate that travels to a relative era different from a gate that leads to a specific space-time(e.g. Lucca gate or Day of Lavos Gate)?"

[chrono eric]

Ah! I just had an epiphany. When one goes to fight the Dream Devourer, one ends up in a 'room'(as in game area) with the standard Lavos Zone parallax used only for Lavos and those in his 'space'. However, as one proceeds further, one sees Magus[2] in front of a gate that leads directly to the DD. I move to say that said gate is the missing Reptite DBT gate. As per our theory, the gate needs an explanation.

Actually, that makes a lot of sense. That's right, you have to enter an additional gate to reach the DBT and the Dream Devourer and there is no explanation for it. I forget, is the 'room' also referred to as Time's Eclipse (DBT) by the script? If so, then that would perhaps invalidate this. But if not, then you have a gate to the DBT with no explanation of how it got there, within a space that is clearly associated with Lavos (and also with the Mammon Machine while fighting it I might add).

Also, at the risk of being redundant, you missed my second question:
"Second, is not a gate that travels to a relative era different from a gate that leads to a specific space-time(e.g. Lucca gate or Day of Lavos Gate)?"

Whoops, my mistake. I got caught up in the first question which I thought was very interesting and forgot about this one. I would go ahead and say that yes, they are different. This is at the very least exhibited by Lucca's gate being a different color from the others, which the series seems to use to show the different nature of gates. But from an analytical standpoint, the fact that these Gates go to a specific point in space-time rather than a relative era (relative to all other gates) suggests that they are different.

But I would say that they are the same in principle as 'normal gates' in that they go from Point A to Point B in a timeline. Normal gates exhibit an additive effect in that if you enter at Point A+10 minutes you will arrive at Point B+10 minutes whereas these gates do not. But I would say that through and through they are time gates as opposed to the very different dimensional gates, just a different type of time gate.

EDIT: Also, it's great to see someone else besides me and Eske frequenting these discussions  . Maybe if you have some time you could browse through some of the other recent discussions we have had and offer a third party and unbiased opinion?

[Eske]

Okay okay wait.   Significant events do not create gates to the DBT, only significant changes to the timeline.

When Lavos fell, that event happened in the original timeline.  The Reptite dimension would otherwise have been sent to the DBT - it wasn't - it is an alternate dimension.  It's a completely different situation.


And yes, the menu screen says "Time's Eclipse" in that Lavos-like area where you see Eclipse Magus.
Also if you use the Treasure atlas feature, both that area and the DD's area are listed under "Time's Eclipse".

And why does Schala's pendant matter again?  It's just dreamstone with some Lavos energy.  The Masamune would have the same properties.

[chrono eric]

Okay okay wait.   Significant events do not create gates to the DBT, only significant changes to the timeline.

When Lavos fell, that event happened in the original timeline.  The Reptite dimension would otherwise have been sent to the DBT - it wasn't - it is an alternate dimension.  It's a completely different situation.

Indeed, but presumably there could have been a timeline before this one in which Lavos did not fall, which was altered due to some event outside of the party's control. That is not out of the question. But, since it is never mentioned within the game, I would agree that the Lavos falling incident is irrelevant.

And yes, the menu screen says "Time's Eclipse" in that Lavos-like area where you see Eclipse Magus.
Also if you use the Treasure atlas feature, both that area and the DD's area are listed under "Time's Eclipse".

Too bad. Back to the drawing board I guess.

And why does Schala's pendant matter again?  It's just dreamstone with some Lavos energy.  The Masamune would have the same properties.

This is a good point, but we can't ignore the fact that Schala's pendant is present in all instances of travel to the DBT. Perhaps it is "special", perhaps it is not. We'll never know for sure.

EDIT: Wait, perhaps it isn't present in all instances. Is Magus' amulet the same as Schala's pendant? If not, then DBT Magus could have arrived at the DBT without the pendant, which would invalidate it as a necessity for travel to the DBT.

[Eske]

Aha!  The amulet Magus wears IS NOT the same as the Pendant.   Remember that she gives him the amulet in his room - and then opens the sealed door with her own pendant in front of the party.

Schala's Amulet and Schala's Pendant are two different objects. One is a key item and the other is an accessory that prevents status ailments.  There is no evidence in the game whatsoever to suggest that Magus "found" the pendant on his own - espeically now that we know Schala was pulled into the DBT and the new pendant is with Kid.

Schala's pendant is not a necessity.

[BROJ]

Aha!  The amulet Magus wears IS NOT the same as the Pendant.   Remember that she gives him the amulet in his room - and then opens the sealed door with her own pendant in front of the party.

Schala's Amulet and Schala's Pendant are two different objects. One is a key item and the other is an accessory that prevents status ailments.  There is no evidence in the game whatsoever to suggest that Magus "found" the pendant on his own - espeically now that we know Schala was pulled into the DBT and the new pendant is with Kid.

Schala's pendant is not a necessity.

If I'm following where you're going with this; wasn't the Magus in the DBT a different instance than the one in the CT party? If so, then whether Amulet and Pendent are the same is somewhat irrelevant -- Magus[2] was already in the DBT to begin with. Not to mention, Magus[2] mentioned that Crono and co. may not be from the same dimension as them, so, in that case, the two Maguses may not share the same experiences. Which includes whether Magus[2] had Schala's pendent or not.