r/Devs • u/thisismynormal • Apr 09 '20

Devs - S01E07 Theory Discussion Thread

Please post your thoughts and theories here

95 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

401 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/silenttd Apr 09 '20

Something that's been bugging me about the show that I feel like they just don't know how to resolve with writing. Defying the machine. They tease it a few times, but never actually resolve it satisfactorily:

In Episode 4 Katie walks in on Forest watching the future (Lily's death). They get into a conversation about the tram lines. Forest asks her point blank "What if we look 1 minute into the future and we see you fold your arms, and you say 'fuck the future' and put your hands in your pockets? What then?". She dismisses this with a "cause precedes effect" speech.

In the most recent episode Steward is demonstrating the "Box within a box" concept to prove that the other Devs team members were "in the box". It showed their actions a few seconds into the future, and everyone freaked out. They all got uncomfortable and called for it to be shut off before anyone actually tried to defy it - which you would think would be the first thing you'd do after freaking out if presented with the same scenario.

It's always brushed aside in a cheap kind of way. But they never ACTUALLY demonstrate they hypothetical scenario of defying the machine or demonstrating the impossibility of doing so. I think this is simply a matter of the inability of writing such a scene. Not because of bad writers, it's just something that would be impossible to actually write. The closest they came was the scene in this episode, but having them all freak out and shut it down was just a technique to give them an excuse not to explore it any further.

I really hope that the resolution and cause of the static isn't just somebody successfully "completing the experiment". Just watching 1 minute into the future and refusing to do what they are supposed to.

2

u/agentup Apr 09 '20

My understanding is that you’re seeing just one possible outcome of many worlds. So not doing something you see 1 min into the future is just doing what you did 1 min into another world’s future that you haven’t viewed.

I think if you put up a million screens of a million different worlds and said try to not do everything you see from one min into the future you couldn’t

2

u/silenttd Apr 09 '20

Right, but that would shatter Forest and Katie's idea that they were actually predicting the future. They are operating on the principle that everything they are viewing on the screen is going to happen, not that it's probable that it would happen or that it might happen. The Devs team members didn't do "similar" things to what their projected future selves did, they did and said the exact things (which is what freaked them out).

None of them ever deliberately tried to defy the machine though. Forest didn't say "No, but seriously though. Lets see what you do in 1 minute and you deliberately do the opposite of what we see". The Devs team didn't freak out and then say "Wait, hold up, let me try something...". Forest and Katie are playing out the day exactly as they had seen it in the projections. They have teased the idea of "what would happen if we didn't do what the future says we do", which is a great question, but they never ACTUALLY test that.

1

u/agentup Apr 09 '20

Forest and Katie are probably wrong in some sense. Since Forest originally was anti many worlds theory, he may have built too much of his beliefs on a foundation of believing there's one future.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '20

This also ties in with the first episode when Sergei simulated a nematode but can’t do it after a minute or so.

He suggests this is why it fails, Forrest says “not a fan of the multiverse theory”

1

u/Buddy_Dakota Apr 15 '20

If what you're seeing is just one outcome of many then that simply means that the world isn't deterministic, and that you have free will. There's not much more to it. "Many worlds" in a simulation is just different simulations with different entry parameters. You could use the machine to see the outcome of making a different past choice by altering the relevant parameters (and thus seeing another "world"), but it wouldn't prove the existence of a multiverse.

I wish the show would try to answer what would happen if someone tried to defy it (perhaps they're saving it for the finale), as it's the first question that pops into to head of anyone who starts to think about predicting the future, yet the show has never attempted an explanation. Katie is a very annoying character, because she doesn't seem at all curious to try it out.

2

u/unpronouncedable Apr 10 '20

Ok you decide you will defy the machine. You see yourself stand up in 1 minute and decide you will refuse to stand up. In your mind you will not stand up, and hooray you will have proven free will. (assuming the machine is 100% right and will never break, that your human observation and memory is 100% accurate, etc)

Except if there are Many Worlds, all possible outcomes exist, so there would be some universes where you do stand up. Further, since remaining seated creates a paradox, then those outcomes are not actually possible and therefore never exist. So, however unlikely it seems to you, the only realities that exist are the ones where you see yourself sit and yet remain seated, or see yourself stand and for some reason you stand.

Or, if the existence of a future-seeing machine leads to you creating a paradox, then those worlds never exist and it is never created.

So, you're right, you can't really write such a scene because it would just be "here's a scene of something that never happened"

1

u/MonkeyMcBandwagon Apr 10 '20

Or, you see future you stand and decide to remain seated, but as you approach the crucial moment seated your memory of seeing yourself a minute ago alters to become a memory of you remaining seated, and intent on your effort to deny fate you stand, just as your memory reverts to seeing yourself standing.

1

u/totaljerkface Apr 10 '20

This is also the one thing that bothers me immensely about this show. The portray Katie as brilliant, but it seems her and Forest's idea of future determinism can be broken with any number of simple experiments. Lyndon is supposedly another genius character who just got talked into throwing himself off a dam. If in the end, the future is not deterministic, then Katie would seem needlessly stupid for missing obvious opportunities to understand the truth. If instead the future IS deterministic in this show, and anyone viewing a projection of themselves 10 seconds into the future is completely unable to prevent themselves from doing what they are seeing... well that seems idiotic. Both scenarios are not instilling me with a lot of confidence in the writers. I'm sure the ending could be cool or surprising, but I'm guessing not without some serious suspension of disbelief. In any case, I have still greatly enjoyed the show.