Alpert and Locke

[lostinva]

Ok, confused again by the current storyline. I was watching the episode The Brig the other day and it had the part where Alpert was talking to Locke about Ben not leading the others the way he should and how he could get Sawyer to kill Lockes dad and all. Ok, this takes place sometime in 2004. I believe that is when the show started. Ok, if the current storyline is true, then Locke sees Alpert in 1954, tells him to go see him when he is born. This starts the whole cycle of Locke and Alpert meeting. Ok, how come when Alpert goes up on the hillside and talks to Locke that he doesn't mention to Locke about their previous meetings in 1954 and all? Is Alpert really just playing Locke as part of the overall plan? I mean if the time line was changed by them going back and all, wouldn't Alpert had known Locke before and all. We know in a later episodoe that he does go back and meet Locke when he was born and all. Wouldn't you think he would have mentioned it then in 2004?

[Talontbo]

hey Lost,

Though it would seem as you describe. Richard surely should have some prior knowledge of Locke, this not really the case.

Try and look at it this way.

At the moment you read this post it is NOW.

1 day from NOW I go into your PAST and effect something about the post.

See, you read the post in the NOW before it was effect by time travel to your PAST from a FUTURE TRAVEL (1 day).

There has been talk about a Paradox or LOOPS...

Problem with that is, if everything we are seeing is actually the first event, then a LOOP would not have to be occurring. Though in all situations, a Paradox is highly likely. Even the simplest of changes in the past will almost positively have huge effects on the future.

Personally I was very disappointed that the show opted to use time travel. Its messy and confusing, especially when it is not thought out very well. As with LOST. It seems very obvious that the writers have been winging it as they go along their path to a series end. Its introduction has in fact diminished the show, and the show viewers. Only the most ardent of fans are holding out to the end.

But next week, I visited next season and saw the ending, but I am writing this now, so I don't have the memories yet, so even if I wanted to spoil everything for everyone, i couldn't. Not yet anyway......

[g8rfan]

Tal, you've really Lost it if you think the writers are winging it at this stage in the story. It's always been Lost's tactic to not explain everything up front. They want us to think about it because they respect our intelligence.

I think that with time travel, they want us to think outside of the box or, in this case, off the line. Perhaps time doesn't have to be occurring linearly. If time and space are infinite, then when did it start? If there is no start, then time may not as fixed and as linear as we perceive it. There may be loops or folds in time that don't have a start point. They are always there.

What have they suggested so far?

What ever happened, happened.
You can change time with free will.
The universe is self correcting.

These things may seem to contradict, but may turn out to all be true. It was very ambitious and risky for Lost to take on time travel, but I'm glad they did. In a way, the show has always been about time with flashbacks and flash forwards.

lostinva, I think Richard knew about Locke when he approached him on the hill. He was just being careful not to reveal too much to him. It was like when he treated his wound at the drug plane. He told Locke what he needed to do, but he didn't explain why or tell him who sent him.

[lostinva]

This whole time loop theory to me really blows. I will be real disappointed if it all turns up to be one big time loop that the Losties are trying to right.