This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.
Talk:Timeline:Possible futures
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
I know the promo said 2012, but wouldn't five years ahead from November, 2006 be November, 2011? Really, Hiro could be in either 2011 or 2012.--Hardvice (talk) 01:29, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
.07%
Hey, anyone else see the dates on the door of Issacs apartment when Hiro and Ando enter (approx 40:57). Are these too insignificant to mention here?
3/3/07 6/2/07
3/5/8
4/7/08
--Incomitatus 20:08, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
- There's really no significance to it until the next episode airs and we find out more about it.--Bob 20:39, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
- IAWTC. But thanks for noting them here -- they'll be a great reference next week, I'm sure (or at least I hope). — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
- If I had to guess, I'd say that, since they're all crossed out, they're the dates of potential events Future Hiro considered might fix the timeline before settling on 10/4/06. Curious that they're all after the explosion ... maybe he tried to tackle the subsequent reaction first, rather than stopping the explosion itself.--Hardvice (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Or maybe it's another error by the Props Department. They have a tendency to goof up, especially in that set (remember Hiro and the Dinosaur painting in the background at the same time as Hiro taking it to Linderman?). --ZyberGoat 02:40, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
- Interesting that 3/x/07 and 6/x/07 are when Volume 2 and Volume 4 take place. - Josh (talk/contribs) 19:20, 7 September 2009 (EDT)
Plan for future of this article
If and/or when the events of Nov 8 take place in a different way than Future Hiro or Hiro who traveled to Nov 8 experienced, will we have to move the events detailed here about them to another article? What should that article be named? Suggestions: "Alternate Timeline", "Parallel Timeline". Should we put Claire's death in such an article already? Gregorus 11:53, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Since this page is titled "alternate futures", I think it allows for multiple timelines easily enough. The actual events of November 8th (the season finale) will, of course, just go on Timeline:November 2006. As of right now, we only have proof of one "alternate" November 8 (the one Future Hiro participated in and the one Hiro observed--we can't really tell if they're the same or not). Once Five Years Gone airs, we'll probably have a second (where Peter explodes instead of Sylar). I think we can deal with this easily enough with something like this:
November 8, 2006
- After using his power, Hiro teleports to Times Square, New York, NY. (Genesis)
- At a newsstand, he finds 9th Wonders!, Issue #14, with a prophetic drawing of himself on the cover. Using the address in the comic book, he travels to Isaac's studio, only to find Isaac dead on the floor, his head mutilated. He is questioned by Detective Furakowa about the murder, and Hiro is confused to learn that the date is November 8th. To prove the date to Hiro, the detective shows him a newspaper which reads "Petrelli Wins in Landslide". Together, they call Ando, who claims to not have seen Hiro in 5 weeks. There is a sonic boom, and looking out the window, Hiro witnesses the explosion. In a panic, he teleports back to the present to Tokyo. (Don't Look Back)
- In the streets of New York, a massive explosion occurs:
- First Timeline: Hiro stabs Sylar before he explodes, but Sylar immediately regenerates and explodes.
- Second Timeline: Because of Future Hiro's message to Peter Petrelli in October 2006, it is Peter, not Sylar, who explodes.
--Hardvice (talk) 12:35, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- But it's not called "Alternate Futures" it's called "Possible Futures" and your solution is very good and solves a definite problem (what happens when there are two "Possible Futures" that need to be taken into account), but what I'm talking about is what happens when the presumably final and definitive events of Nov 8 occur on the show. The events listed here, at that point, would be neither "possible" nor "future," but rather both "alternate" and "past." Gregorus 13:02, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- It is still a possible future, even when it's in the past. Because Hiro can still go back in time, it will still be a possibility. I know that's a cop-out, but the way time travel seems to work on the show is that you can still have the same future even after you change the past. Although the circumstances of the past have changed, the future remains the same. So, it's a different timeline, but it's the same future. So, when the finale happens, it will be reported on November, 2006, but the Possible Futures will still be preserved. Otherwise, we'd have to change 6 Months Ago, because originally Hiro was not in the past, but he changed that. We'd have to put that Sylar did steal Claire's ability, but Peter changed that because of Hiro. You post canon material, even if the future changes.--Bob 13:14, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Right. And within the chronology of the show, when we encounter it, it's a possible future.--Hardvice (talk) 13:27, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I think I get where you guys are coming from. So, you're also saying that we should not start doing the whole "First Timeline" and "Second Timeline" thing described above for what we already know? For example, we could add Claire's death to the Homecoming portion of the timeline, and Charlie's party where Hiro didn't show up to the Six Months Ago portion, using the format that Hardvice has laid out? But you think it should not be done? It seems like we have four choices for things like Claire's death: A) put them on this page B) put them on the timeline where they would have occurred using Hardvice's structure. C) create another "alternate timelines" page D) Don't put them on the timeline anywhere. I'd like to state that I think option D is wrong and that we should be putting Claire's death somewhere in the timeline section of the wiki. When I started this thread, I was arguing for option C, but you guys have convinced me that both option A or option B would be acceptable. So which is it? Or am I wrong and option D is most correct? Gregorus 16:25, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I think it's fine to add them, but oddly enough, they'd go on this article (even though Claire's death was in the "present" and Charlie's party in the "past"), because they are possible futures that didn't come to pass. I'd also be up for renaming this page to something less confusing, but I think it's a little early to say that they're alternate timelines. From what we're seeing, there's one timeline where time travelers (and non-time travelers) can affect the future, but time travelers can only change the past when doing so doesn't result in a causality paradox. I'm really just not sure what to call it. To me, "possible futures" works for them only because "future" can mean "outcome", but calling them "alternate outcomes" or "possible outcomes" seems too vague. Maybe once Five Years Gone airs we'll know enough to say if they're really "alternate timelines" (which implies that both exist in parallel, rather than one being replaced with the other) or not.--Hardvice (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Agreed that we should wait. Should there be a parallel timeline concept occurring, maybe the article should be renamed to Possible Timelines or something of the sort (which would be more appropriate). However, if it's clear that there's one timeline that changes with the time-traveler, then it should be noted in this article instead of say October 06 for homecoming. It could be like this:
- Agreed that we should wait. Should there be a parallel timeline concept occurring, maybe the article should be renamed to Possible Timelines or something of the sort (which would be more appropriate). However, if it's clear that there's one timeline that changes with the time-traveler, then it should be noted in this article instead of say October 06 for homecoming. It could be like this:
- I think it's fine to add them, but oddly enough, they'd go on this article (even though Claire's death was in the "present" and Charlie's party in the "past"), because they are possible futures that didn't come to pass. I'd also be up for renaming this page to something less confusing, but I think it's a little early to say that they're alternate timelines. From what we're seeing, there's one timeline where time travelers (and non-time travelers) can affect the future, but time travelers can only change the past when doing so doesn't result in a causality paradox. I'm really just not sure what to call it. To me, "possible futures" works for them only because "future" can mean "outcome", but calling them "alternate outcomes" or "possible outcomes" seems too vague. Maybe once Five Years Gone airs we'll know enough to say if they're really "alternate timelines" (which implies that both exist in parallel, rather than one being replaced with the other) or not.--Hardvice (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I think I get where you guys are coming from. So, you're also saying that we should not start doing the whole "First Timeline" and "Second Timeline" thing described above for what we already know? For example, we could add Claire's death to the Homecoming portion of the timeline, and Charlie's party where Hiro didn't show up to the Six Months Ago portion, using the format that Hardvice has laid out? But you think it should not be done? It seems like we have four choices for things like Claire's death: A) put them on this page B) put them on the timeline where they would have occurred using Hardvice's structure. C) create another "alternate timelines" page D) Don't put them on the timeline anywhere. I'd like to state that I think option D is wrong and that we should be putting Claire's death somewhere in the timeline section of the wiki. When I started this thread, I was arguing for option C, but you guys have convinced me that both option A or option B would be acceptable. So which is it? Or am I wrong and option D is most correct? Gregorus 16:25, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Right. And within the chronology of the show, when we encounter it, it's a possible future.--Hardvice (talk) 13:27, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- It is still a possible future, even when it's in the past. Because Hiro can still go back in time, it will still be a possibility. I know that's a cop-out, but the way time travel seems to work on the show is that you can still have the same future even after you change the past. Although the circumstances of the past have changed, the future remains the same. So, it's a different timeline, but it's the same future. So, when the finale happens, it will be reported on November, 2006, but the Possible Futures will still be preserved. Otherwise, we'd have to change 6 Months Ago, because originally Hiro was not in the past, but he changed that. We'd have to put that Sylar did steal Claire's ability, but Peter changed that because of Hiro. You post canon material, even if the future changes.--Bob 13:14, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- But it's not called "Alternate Futures" it's called "Possible Futures" and your solution is very good and solves a definite problem (what happens when there are two "Possible Futures" that need to be taken into account), but what I'm talking about is what happens when the presumably final and definitive events of Nov 8 occur on the show. The events listed here, at that point, would be neither "possible" nor "future," but rather both "alternate" and "past." Gregorus 13:02, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
November 8, 2006
- Hiro stabs Sylar, but he regenerates before exploding.
- Sylar gained regeneration from Claire during Homecoming on October 11, 2006.
- This event was changed due to Hiro's message to Peter on October 4, 2006.
- Sylar gained regeneration from Claire during Homecoming on October 11, 2006.
- Peter explodes.
- Peter absorbed the power of regeneration during homecoming after following Hiro's message.
- Peter absorbed the power of regeneration during homecoming after following Hiro's message.
- Something like that.--Bob 16:07, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I love that Future Hiro accidentally picked the one person to run his errand that could replace Sylar in the explosion on both fronts (absorbing Ted's power and Claire's power). Whoops. Still holding out for the answer to "How Do You Stop an Exploding Man?" to be "cut his head off before he explodes and/or regenerates".--Hardvice (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Well I don't actually think it's that drastic. Ted stopped radiating when given a sedative. Peter stopped going berserk when knocked out. Sylar stopped his ability with super-map-rolling powers of Mohinder knocked him out. So I think he just needs to be unconscious for him to stop exploding.--Bob 16:21, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Something like that.--Bob 16:07, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Sounds like a good plan to me. Pair these adjectives with these nouns for some name possibilities for the name change:
| "Undone" | "Changed" | "Parallel" | "Alternate" | "Revised" | "Possible" | "Other Possible" | "Unfulfilled" | "Affected" |
| "Futures" | "Events" | "Timelines" | "Versions" | "Timestreams" | "Rifts" |
I like the word timelines the best in theory but I don't think it works because that's the name of the portal. You're right that the terminology of Five Years Gone may give us some hints. Anyway, I'm going to add Claire's death to this page for now. Hopefully not too confusing. Gregorus 16:25, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Nevermind, I'm not bold enough yet to add it, but you should :P Gregorus 16:28, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I'm not sure how we will phrase it. When I made the article, it was with the assumption that we wouldn't find out about the past that Future Hiro experienced. I tried to make a graphical representation with the timelines and how they changed (see Image:Timeline.png). Blue is Hiro, red is Future Hiro. The changes in the timeline occur when you jump backwards. Since Hiro jumped backwards to save Charlie before Future Hiro could return to his present (5 years in the future), he actually jumped to a changed future, though Peter would still potentially be the bomb if Hiro didn't jump backwards. Needless to say, my graphic demonstration isn't suggesting parallel timelines, but an attempt to show the changes in the timeline when someone is existing out of the timeline while they time travel. Going forward doesn't change anything because you just don't exist until the time that you return. Going backwards is what changes everything. See the multiverse theory here. Needless to say, since there are different "pasts" that occur(red), the possible futures might need to be renamed if they reveal more about the events that occur on the second line in my drawing that prompts FHIro to jump back. I don't think the suggested words are necessary, just renaming this article to "Possible Timelines" would be sufficient.--Bob 16:58, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- I love your drawing. It really illustrates the fact that there were four (now five, Present Hiro jumped backwards at the end of FYG) different timelines that we have seen on the show. I wish it could be appropriate to somehow arbitrarily label these "Timeline A", "Timeline B" and so on, but I think it would be far too presumptuous for us to do. Speculating, if we did do this, we could end up with articles like "Sylar (Timeline C)" instead of "Sylar (Future)" Also, I think it's a little more subtle than saying that only jumping backwards changes things. Only jumping backwards *creates a new timeline*, but jumping forwards into a future changes that future from what it would have been had you not jumped in much the same way that taking action in the present changes that future, it just remains on the same timeline. I definitely support the idea of changing the name of this article to "Possible Timelines" and will probably make quite a few edits once that change has been made. Gregorus 09:22, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
Candace/Nathan identity theft
Sylar's quote is that he met a girl named Candace who helped him become President. This can mean two things: Sylar became Nathan before he was President, or he became Nathan after Nathan won the presidency. In addition, he never specifies when he got Candace's ability. So, I tried to tweak it a bit to make it less speculative. It will probably remain that way unless the future's revisited or Sylar kills Candace before the explosion.--Bob 20:16, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
- Future Hiro says that he brought Candace to Bennet ("I've only asked for the ones I've brought you - D.L., Candace, Molly Walker"). That would imply that she was still alive after the evolved humans were branded as threats. Either way, it really is frustratingly unclear when Sylar stepped into Nathan's shoes. --ZyberGoat 02:37, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
- My gut tells me that although Sylar is fairly intelligent, he's no politician. Nathan more than likely was elected, then stolen. It makes tracking him a hell of a lot easier when Sylar can phase and form illusions, plus he knows where he lives (White House).--Bob 03:20, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
Season 2 possible futures.
From The Line, it looks like we may have an entirely different possible future Timeline and plot. Should this Possible Future be separate from the Season One "Bomb" possible future? (if so, here's a subpage I created to consider for this new page and the events in it)--SacValleyDweller 01:19, 30 October 2007 (EDT)
- I put it on the regular page for now, but I'm up to at least keeping it on one page for consolidation (not that long). My problem with splitting them is that we don't know how many split timelines we have from Hiro going back and forth (where Sylar was the bomb, then Peter, now this), so to reduce confusion, perhaps we should differentiate by which time traveler visits the dark future (Hiro/Sylar, Peter/Caitlin).--Bob (talk) 02:04, 30 October 2007 (EDT)
- I think it could easily be split if it comes to it - with a Timeline:Bomb Future and Timeline:Virus Future to differentiate between the two. That's just my thinking. I hope to see Peter encounter someone like... Mohinder trying to fight back the virus, and then meet with Sylar, and team up with him or something. Sylar could easily use Peter, since Peter doesn't remember him. --DocM 08:51, 30 October 2007 (EDT)
- I'm going to split the two timelines, but keep them on one page. Let's see how it looks.--Bob (talk) 06:45, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
- I like it! in all probability, the bomb future has likely disappeared--SacValleyDweller 01:19, 1 November 2007 (EDT)
- I'm going to split the two timelines, but keep them on one page. Let's see how it looks.--Bob (talk) 06:45, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
- I think it could easily be split if it comes to it - with a Timeline:Bomb Future and Timeline:Virus Future to differentiate between the two. That's just my thinking. I hope to see Peter encounter someone like... Mohinder trying to fight back the virus, and then meet with Sylar, and team up with him or something. Sylar could easily use Peter, since Peter doesn't remember him. --DocM 08:51, 30 October 2007 (EDT)
Explosion timeline: Peter or Sylar?
In the article, it said that Sylar was the "original" cause of the NYC explosion. However, in Walls, Part 1, Peter used induced radioactivity to free Niki from metals. And we all know that The Company planned to bomb NYC, so who could have been? --Hollowmale 10:34, 11 December 2007 (EST)
- Here's a bigger question: are there two separate explosion timelines or one? Future Hiro goes back and tells Peter the message. When he returns, NY is still in ruins. So the question is: are the "String Theory" timeline, where Hiro allegedly stabs Sylar but he regenerates the same as the "Five Years Gone" timeline where Peter was the bomb? Hiro couldn't of known if Sylar was the bomb because he teleported away before the explosion... or maybe he didn't teleport away at all, that's an event that only happened in the "How to Stop an Exploding Man" timeline? My head hurts. -- LightSpectra 09:20, 12 January 2008 (EST)
- I like to think that the "First" explosion timeline was the one Hiro saw in Don't Look Back, where I think Sylar exploded. Then, the "Second" explosion timeline is the one in String Theory, where Hiro was present but only managed to stab Sylar, and he regenerated anyway. But then in the "Third" explosion, because Sylar never got to Claire, Peter ended up being the one who exploded by his own and Sylar's admission ("The bomb? It was me!" and "You and I know the real story, don't we, Pete?"). Everybody simply thought it was Sylar thanks to Nathan. So, basically, there are three explosion timelines, but with each change it made a new "definitive" future on the same timeline, which is why Future Hiro had no idea that he changed the future to make Peter the explosion. --DocM 09:24, 12 January 2008 (EST)
March 24?
Why is March 24 listed as the day Sylar attacked the Company, and Ando killing Hiro sometime after that day? Why are present day events listed here in the first place? Josh 16:40, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
- Well, I'm at a total loss of when is supposed to be when now. I'm not sure if that's intentional, but I just sent in a question to CBR's Behind the Eclipse to ask if it is, and when exactly is present day. Hopefully, we'll get an answer that will help us clear up some of these timeline issues.--MiamiVolts (talk) 16:54, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
Villains Timeline
Wait a minute... did I miss something? I thought the events described here were, you know... the present. Villains future seems to describe the future Hiro went to (though it's not clear that's a separate timeline), but _that_ isn't what's described in the list in this article. Random832 14:48, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
Exposed Timeline
Please someone check this out.
Someone put on the Exposed Timeline part, this:
Exposed Timeline
March 20, 2007
- Nathan Petrelli holds a press conference in Odessa, Texas. Initially, he reveals the existence of evolved humans to the world, but this event is altered by a future version of his brother, who prevents Nathan from doing so by shooting him in the chest.
That is not true, because that happened on the actual timeline. In fact, in the exposed timeline, Nathan is not shot, and reveals the existence of evolved humans. Then, years in the future, Peter come back in time and change the future, leaving this as a alternative timeline. --Ninovolador 19:39, 14 December 2008 (EST)