Time Travel discussion

The Book
Timeline
GoodReads Blurb:
In an Arizona desert, a man wanders in a daze, speaking words that make no sense. Within twenty-four hours he is dead, his body swiftly cremated by his only known associates. Halfway around the world, archaeologists make a shocking discovery at a medieval site. Suddenly they are swept off to the headquarters of a secretive multinational corporation that has developed an astounding technology. Now this group is about to get a chance not to study the past but to enter it. And with history opened up to the present, the dead awakened to the living, these men and women will soon find themselves fighting for their very survival -- six hundred years ago.

The Author
GoodReads Blurb:
Michael Crichton (1942–2008) was one of the most successful novelists of his generation, admired for his meticulous scientific research and fast-paced narrative. He graduated summa cum laude and earned his MD from Harvard Medical School in 1969. His first novel, Odds On (1966), was written under the pseudonym John Lange and was followed by seven more Lange novels. He also wrote as Michael Douglas and Jeffery Hudson. His novel A Case of Need won the Edgar Award in 1969. Popular throughout the world, he has sold more than 200 million books. His novels have been translated into thirty-eight languages, and thirteen have been made into films. Michael Crichton passed away from lymphoma in 2008. He was 66 years old.

Prices and Locations
*Free: your local library
*A penny plus shipping: paperback & hardbacks on amazon
*A couple of dollars: your local dying used bookstore
*$5.99: Kindle version

Reading Questions
1. Who's reading with us? Have you read this one before? Have you seen the movie?
2. As you read, notice if there's anything that would have been written any differently in 2015 than in 1999.
3. (23%, p. 88, Location 1746):
Of course, the reader knows that this is a time travel novel, so it's no great shock to the reader when the archaeologists find what they do in the catacombs of the monastery. However, assuming that you're an archaeologist who does not know that time travel is possible, how would you react to the find? Would you think that it's a hoax? If not, how would you go about (view spoiler)[responding to the professor's plea for help? (hide spoiler)]
4. Marek seems to live in his own time learning jousting and archery and does not wear a beard as it does not fit with his time. I question you, my fellow time travelers, what non-modern skill would you like to develop? Would being a knight bring appeal to you? Perhaps living under the feudal system a while?
5. Perhaps this question is as old as the idea of teleportation of any sort, across space or space and time. However, I have to say that the type of time travel that the scientists here have created that requires dissolution of a person and recreating them elsewhere seems to be destroying one person and creating a nearly identical person elsewhere. I don't think that the person who is transported is the same person with the same consciousness. They may have the same memories, but the original person has ceased to exist. The person who travels in time is merely a facsimile. And the person who returns to the present from the past is merely a facsimile of the person who has done the traveling. The facsimile would never be conscious of the fact that they're a facsimile. But the consciousness of the original no longer exists. Thoughts? Do you agree with this analysis? And if you do, it this type of space and time teleportation ethical?

I have a couple other books to read first but I hope to listen to a recording of Timeline in the next couple weeks. I read and enjoyed it a long time ago before the movie came out.

I actually just finished Timeline in January, reading it for the third time. Fantastic book. Michael Crichton's pace and character development always helps me get jump-started in my own writing.

I'm going to read this one. I've never read the book or seen the movie.

I read this one in February and really enjoyed it. It is a page turner and pretty violent. I watched the movie shortly after finishing the book and I didn't hate it. Of course there is stuff that was cut out or altered for the sake of time constraints and such (and the casting was wildly different than in my imagination) but it was better than I expected.

I may be in the minority here but this is one of my least favorite time travel stories. The beginning caught me and held my interest but as the story went on it turned into a "don't worry-the good guys are going to win no matter what happens" type of story. Don't want to add a spoiler but (to me anyway) it reminded me of the type of movie scene that has four or five "bad guys" shooting machine guns at a good guy and they just can't seem to hit him--maybe just divine intervention or something. Not one of my favorites-sorry.

I read the book years ago, and I really enjoyed the mideval time period. The movie was terrible...I look forward to reading it again as a group.

I've never read the book or seen the movie (didn't even know there was a movie), but I'll give it a try.

I tried to read Jurassic Park back before it was made into a movie, and I think I ended up not liking it enough that I never finished it. I really didn't like Crichton's style, if I remember the issue. I was much younger then too, so that could be a factor.

I'll give this one a shot.

I read this one when it first came out in 1999, and I loved it. It was one of the books that got me interested in the time travel genre. I'm not a big fan of the grocery-store-best-seller writing style. But I do have to admit that it makes for a compelling read. The settings and characters are always well fleshed out.

I was very disappointed with the movie version when it came out in 2003. Paul Walker didn't seem right for the part of Chris. And there were too many plot holes. I got the feeling that some scenes must have been cut that would have made the movie make sense.

I find it interesting that the author opens up with a listing of all the modern inventions in 1999 that would wow people from the 1800s. It made me very aware of how much our technology has changed even from 1999. They have cell phones, but they're probably flip phones with clunky menus and Star Wars themed ring tones. The internet is there, but everyone's still in chat rooms or getting random IMs from strangers who liked their Yahoo profile. And a large number of us were still dialing up through AOL. Palm Pilots were just starting to pave the way for the future of tablet computers and touch screen phones. The vision for the current version of our smart phones and tablets was starting to emerge, but the idea was still fuzzy around the edges. I have to wonder if this book would have been written any differently in 2015 than in 1999. Strangely, I'm not finding anything yet that would suggest that it would be. What do you think?

This is one of my all time favorite books! I have read it 4 times, loved most of Crichton's books. I liked the movie but nowhere near how much I loved this book!

Amy wrote: "I read this one when it first came out in 1999, and I loved it. It was one of the books that got me interested in the time travel genre. I'm not a big fan of the grocery-store-best-seller writing s..."

I found the beginning to be very interesting as well comparing 1899 with 1999 and yes a lot has changed in 16 years....but I don't think it would of changed much of the content of the book except to say, theoretical science of 1998 or even 2015 could be very realistic and more science than science fiction given a hundred years of research...I can't wait for teleporters...

I read this long time ago, when I was enjoying lots of Crichton. I've not seen the movie and have no desire to. I will try to reread this, but I will put it down if I'm not enjoying it. (It's on order for me from the library.)

I've read this but not seen the movie. Would like to participate in discussion!

I tried to find Monastery Sainte-Mere, Castelgard, and La Roque on the map in the Dordogne River area in France. But the more I looked, the more it seemed that, while the area is a real area with similar features and edifices, that these aren't real places. Previous readers seem to be unable to agree which castles, etc., might have been the inspiration for the ones in the book. However, this website give a decent proposed map of the area: http://www.windofkeltia.com/crichton/...

I also had read this book years ago and absolutely enjoyed it. I also enjoyed the movie version which I always treat movie adaptions as a seperate entity entirely but surprisingly this was fairly faithful to the narrative of the book. The film was slated by most but was good enough for my enjoyment.

Chrichton was my favourite sci fi author and was quite blatantly outspoken on world politics. his departure from life was painful news for me.

But like many of Chrichton other books, Timeline is a an adventure that almost felt like a modern day Jules Vernes. There is no pretentiousness and deep philosophy, just good ol fashion romance and adventure wirh Chrichtons trademark eye for future technology and its implications

Nice to see this finally being read by the group as it was being nominated for years!

Definitely reading. First Chrichton read for me. Definitely looking forward to it.

I'm really enjoying this so far. I loved the overview of technology and the basic setup. The frequent point of view changes work well in this case to keep your attention without driving you crazy. There is a definite art to that. It's nice to be reading a book that I really look forward to picking back up each time. Not all of our group reads hit that mark.

Chrichton is easily digestible so I won't mind this read (Prey was my favorite). I started it about 9 years ago (yikes) but stopped when baby #2 showed up. Then I lost track of the book. Literally, I have no idea where it is at. But I will go to the library in order to finish it.

Reading Question 3 (23%, p. 88, Location 1746):
Of course, the reader knows that this is a time travel novel, so it's no great shock to the reader when the archaeologists find what they do in the catacombs of the monastery. However, assuming that you're an archeologist who does not know that time travel is possible, how would you react to the find? Would you think that it's a hoax? If not, how would you go about (view spoiler)[responding to the professor's plea for help? (hide spoiler)]

As a scientist I'd hope that I would try to prove/disprove the truth of what I'm looking at. Apply the scientific method and test the hypothesis :)

Amy wrote: "Reading Question 3 (23%, p. 88, Location 1746):
Of course, the reader knows that this is a time travel novel, so it's no great shock to the reader when the archaeologists find what they do in the c..."

Amy,

I think I am exactly where you threw out the question 23% or so...and I think the scientists reactions are realistic, disbelieving but also, doing what they are trained to do to prove otherwise.

Also, for the X-files department (view spoiler)[I am reading along alone in a dark basement...lit paper white my only source of illumination and the Professor cries out for Help

HELP ME
4/7/1357

Today is 4/7/2015??!!! (hide spoiler)]

Reading Question 4

Marek seems to live in his own time learning jousting and archery and does not wear a beard as it does not fit with his time.

I question you, my fellow time travelers, what non modern skill would you like to develop? Would being a knight bring appeal to you? Perhaps living under the feudal system a while?

I asked my dad this question over lunch...He said he would like to learn how to fly the Wright Brothers plane.

The need to snap individual pictures and the "stitch" them together would be different in 2015. Panorama app on your phone can do that now.

Lincoln wrote: "what non modern skill would you like to develop? Would being a knight bring appeal to you? Perhaps living under the feudal system a while?"

In terms of skills, I'd like to know how to hunt, fish, trap, gather edible plants, basically live off the land. Also to "steer by the stars" -- be able to navigate using nothing but the stars and other naturally available phenomenon.

In terms of experience, I would LOVE to be a member of the royal court during the Renaissance :)

Question 4

I would like some speed archery skills like Lars Andersen. I feel like he would be a major asset to any historical time traveling team.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9...

Michele wrote: "In terms of experience, I would LOVE to be a member of the royal court during the Renaissance :) "

Ann Boleyn loved it to death.

Nathan wrote: "I would like some speed archery skills like Lars Andersen. I feel like he would be a major asset to any historical time traveling team.

He is UNBELIEVABLE. Spouse showed me a video of him last month and I was completely blown away. Katniss Everdene has nothing on this guy :)

Tom wrote: "Ann Boleyn loved it to death."

Hey, she was just trying to get ahead ;)

Farming, the old way. There are volumes of knowledge lost from just 200 years ago on how to farm properly.

To the east, Marek saw the dark outlines of mesas beneath low-hanging clouds.
Soon they were driving down a highway, dense forest on both sides of the road.

I call shenanigans on this description of New Mexico...Yes we have mesas and yes we have forests...but not dense forest like the south and mesas and dense forest do not exist close together...You see the mesa's because there is literally nothing growing and blocking the view of the feature sticking up out of the desert.

Not a huge deal...Just being from New Mexico, I felt obligated.

Carry on.

Question 5
Perhaps this question is as old as the idea of teleportation of any sort, across space or space and time. However, I have to say that the type of time travel that the scientists here have created that requires dissolution of a person and recreating them elsewhere seems to be destroying one person and creating a nearly identical person elsewhere. I don't think that the person who is transported is the same person with the same consciousness. They may have the same memories, but the original person has ceased to exist. The person who travels in time is merely a facsimile. And the person who returns to the present from the past is merely a facsimile of the person who has done the traveling. The facsimile would never be conscious of the fact that they're a facsimile. But the consciousness of the original no longer exists. Thoughts? Do you agree with this analysis? And if you do, it this type of space and time teleportation ethical?

Lincoln wrote: "I call shenanigans on this description of New Mexico..."

Yes, that description stuck out like sore thumb.

Amy wrote: "Lincoln wrote: "I call shenanigans on this description of New Mexico..."

Yes, that description stuck out like sore thumb."

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-glor...

Not trying to be argumentative, but there are areas of the southwest where forests (not what I'd call dense, but that's somewhat subjective) sit at the base of mesas. I spent 10 years in Arizona and two of those years flying in and out of rinky dink airports all over New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado.

Chrichton might have easily found a picture like this one (see link) and said, "oh, pretty, lets have the road pass through that forest."

So just for the record, "transcription errors" sound like a terrifying way to go. Not having your blood vessels line up? Sheesh. No thanks.

Okay, There is something I don't get. I'm at 74% right now so maybe someone who has finished can help me out (view spoiler)[ Lady Claire is in cahoots with Guy, and her whole hating him thing is a ruse while they conspire for land etc. so why would she bother to save Chris in the beginning? She had no problem with all of them getting executed later. I don't really get why she was fleeing Guy in the first place when they first arrived. Was it because she's two-timing him with the dude at the monastery? (hide spoiler)]

Amy wrote: "Question 5
Perhaps this question is as old as the idea of teleportation of any sort, across space or space and time. However, I have to say that the type of time travel that the scientists here hav..."

This might be uncalled for crossing of the threads...but I sort of feel like it can relate. I see that Paul's answer related first to the giveaway regarding reincarnation so I am not completely off base. We are half way through the month and the giveaway is not getting any love...

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

I feel as though spiritual beliefs of the soul and the spirit of a person is easily called into question when a body is destroyed, or a duplicate self is created in various timelines. Paradoxes of this nature is a hazard of the genre. Years ago, I started writing a story that got about 20 pages in and it involved a man who could visit the void...a huge nothingness and than just imagine a year and place with a few details and travel there. I showed my parents and they wanted to know if the Void was hell...I had said I had not considered the religious ramifications...but I didnt feell like writing fiction had anything to do with questioning my beliefs.

Anyways, that just got way deep.

The soul/spirit is something intangible and therefore a lot of hard science folk never consider the ramifications of transporters. My guess is that once this technology comes closer and closer to usage, the topic will be discussed a great deal from an ethical point of view.

Okay. Finished it. Liked it. (view spoiler)[Still don't get Claire. I feel like she played for about every team in this book. (hide spoiler)]

I'm still waiting for the book to be available at library. Possibly because this being the book of the month, both libraries that are local and I have memberships to have all copies of this book (physical or ebook) out on loan. I'm next in line when the ebook is available now.

Decided to watch the movie again for comparison. It's still bad. I especially hate the disparity between the way the women characters are portrayed. In the book, Kate and Claire are both really strong and clever. In the film, Claire can't even manage to get a noose off her own head without help.
I also disliked how the director felt all the characters needed to stop and mope about every soldier they killed. "I killed that man. I'll have to live with that the rest of my life." (Kate stares at bloody hands) I get being aware of having killed someone being serious, but come on. They were all trying to kill you. In the book they slaughter half the castle practically and don't really fret about it.

I just started listening to the audio version today. So far I am enjoying it, as I did when I read it shortly after it was first published.

Nathan wrote: "Decided to watch the movie again for comparison. It's still bad."

lol yep

More thoughts on Q5:
Thinking of the problem of destroying one person and creating another in light of the idea of souls an an afterlife, and assuming that each duplicate also has a soul ... Just for one trip to the past and one return to the present, you'd end up with 1 original and 2 copies in the afterlife. Person Version 1.0 would have only the memories of the life before the trip to the past. Person Version 2.0 would have all the memories before the time travel trip and during the time travel trip. Person Version 3.0 would remember before the trip, during the trip, and after the trip. "So, tell me," says Persons 1.0 and 2.0, "how did my life turn out?"

Would you volunteer for time travel or teleportation knowing that the person that you are right now would never know how your life turned out? I certainly wouldn't any more than I'd want an Amy look-alike to murder me and then pretend to be me for the rest of my life. Same difference even if the time traveling reconstructed version of me is an exact copy (with possible transcription errors).

Q4:
I'd like to learn more about wild edibles and alternate uses for plants (edible, medicinal, etc.) beyond knowing that I can put red bud buds in my salad, chew willow bark for for pain relief, make dandelion tea or coffee, and turn acorns into flour (after much grinding a soaking to remove tannins).

At least the ebook finally became available from library so I could get it and just barely start it. I can finally read it now. :)

Most of my siblings have had Lasik eye surgery and tell me how wonderful it is to not to have to worry about glasses. Despite the appeal and I can't submit to lasers cutting my eye...So...even the idea of time travel keep your lasers away from ME!!

Lincoln wrote: "Most of my siblings have had Lasik eye surgery and tell me how wonderful it is to not to have to worry about glasses. Despite the appeal and I can't submit to lasers cutting my eye...So...even the..."

Oh, but the valium they give you for lasik makes you not care one fig about the lasers. However, I'm not sure even valium could relax me enough to ever get me to sign the papers for this sort of time travel. It's probably best to just not tell the time travelers the whole story about what's going to happen to them during their de-animation/re-animation ... which is exactly what these scientists did.

Amy wrote: "Oh, but the valium they give you for lasik makes you not care one fig about the lasers. However, I'm not sure even valium could relax me enough to ever get me to sign the papers for this sort of time travel. "
If the valium doesn't work, maybe petting the kitty would help.

W. wrote: "Farming, the old way. There are volumes of knowledge lost from just 200 years ago on how to farm properly."

But modern techniques far outproduce the old ways! In what way could the old ways be better?

I just started reading this book a few days ago.

One thing that bothered me was the assumption that the interfering particles MUST be particles from another universe. They could just as easily be particles that have not yet been discovered because we as yet have no means of detecting them.

I get the feeling that these scientists have so much hubris that they cannot admit to not knowing something. Is any of what Crichton wrote on this true?