Termina: Alternate Dimension or Parallel Universe?

This is a relatively recent theory that has been espoused by Ogmios. It was created to explain how one could consider the "Legend of the Fairy" in the Tower of the Gods in WW canon and still believe in a split timeline. Essentially he says that Termina was unaffected by the split in Hyrule and could therefore receive visitors from either timeline or enter either timeline.

This statement rests on the belief that the phrase "parallel universe" should be taken seriously. In essence, it means that there is no real relation between the two at all: it just happens to be the case that you can go from one to the other.

An "alternate dimension," however, would mean that Termina exists in another direction from Hyrule that you normally could not go in. Dimensions usually refer to concepts like length, breadth, width, and duration. Therefore, a split in time would affect an alternate dimension.

Some things that should be cleared up: this does not necessarily mean that MM Link was in danger of accidentally entering the Adult Timeline. We do not know very many details about how one travels between universes. It is very probable that if one entered the world in one way, they must go back the way they came. Of course, it may be possible to choose where you go: heck, you might choose to go to Bizarro Hyrule from Termina, seeing as all alternate dimensions of Hyrule would be an equal distance from you. I believe that Link would not be able to understand that he could do that (or how he would do that) and therefore would return home by default. It's not like he knew his options!

Arguments against this theory remind me of arguments against the split that I used to endorse: ideas centered around how you think the universe should work. Hyrule and Termina do not have to conform to our laws that we mostly derive from scifi and fantasy anyway.

I do not believe that there is any canonical evidence against this idea, neither interview nor in-game quote.

Well, the worlds are very alike, and all of the laws such as lenght, deph, time, movement and whatnot, seem to be the same. So "alternate dimension" in the sense that the rules are different (like 1st, 2nd and 3d dimension), is out, right?
Then I would go with parallell universe. And that's about all I have to say in this matter. For now, at least.

I'm sorry: I was trying to explicate the difference between "alternate dimension" and "parallel universe." I do not think I succeeded. I shall try again.

An alternate dimension is actually short hand, judging from the way it is typically used, for "another place that we can only reach by moving in another dimension." This sort of place would be affected by Hyrule's time dimension, since the same dimension of time is present in both.

A parallel universe, though, would be affected by the split in Hyrule's timeline in a manner akin to how we would be affected: it sounds interesting, but it does not affect how our world works. Of course, it can still be influenced by Hyrule; but it can be affected by any Hyrule at all.

I've pretty much finalized my views on this and tried to explain it as clearly as possible and posted it in the Legend of the Fairy thread. I'll post it here, too. Bear in mind, this post was made in response to a post by LexLionHart, so it's directed towards him, and isn't just a general statement.

Let's take a look at causality, then. You're still assuming that Hyrule and Termina are somehow linked by a timeline, when I've shown that since a timeline is a series of events, or a chronology, it's basically a history. Since Hyrule and Termina share no history, they share no timeline. In the case of Termina, since it has a timeline not linked to Hyrule, it makes no difference where Link comes from. Let me try to draw this out.

---------------------Adult Timeline
---------------------/
Hyrule before split ->
---------------------\
---------------------Child Timeline
(gap between universes)
Termina------------>

Now, Hyrule shares a common history up until the point probably around the time when Link first ventures into the Great Deku Tree until sometime after the Door of Time is opened; somewhere between there. After some point, one Hyrule goes on with Link being sealed in the Sacred Realm and Ganondorf conquering Hyrule, then being defeated by Link. Link then returns to the past. In the other Hyrule, Link has returned from the future and prevents the future from happening and Ganondorf is sealed in the Twilight Realm. In both timelines, time travel is involved. At the end of Ocarina of Time, Link goes to the past to live out his life and to prevent the future from happening. In the other timeline, he's another Link, not necessarily the original Link of that timeline, seeing as how he has been to that future. Probably something like the Trunks from the future co-existing with his past self, albeit briefly. So, in the adult timeline, it is known that Link leaves that timeline and goes to the past. In the other timeline, he comes back from the future. The groundwork is laid in the Adult Timeline for Link to get to Termina at some point.

Hyrule shares no common history with Termina, so Termina just continues on its merry way. This up until the point that the Skull Kid wreaks havoc. The Link who returned from the future finds himself now in an alternate time. He falls in what is apparently the gap between the universes, and finds himself in Termina. He eventually saves it.

The point I'm getting to is this: the very fact that Link is sent back to Hyrule's past at the end of Ocarina of Time is what ensures Termina's survival. If the game ended and Link didn't get sent back in time, then it's possible that Termina would've been destroyed, because Link is integral to its survival. But that's the only thing, since it's a separate timeline.

The timelines run on a continuum, since the multiverse was likely created at the exact same time. The Gods or Goddesses likely didn't create one universe, then create another. As such, year 0 in one timeline is happening at the same time as year 0 at another. Let's say the beginning of Ocarina of Time is year 0, and the ending is year 7. The beginning of Majora's Mask is also year 0, but in a separate timeline. After Link is sent back in time to a point shortly before or after year 0, there will then from that point on be two years 1's, 2's, et cetera in two Hyrulean timelines. But there is only one Terminian one, and those year 1's and year 2's are happening at exactly the same time as those in the Hyrulean ones. Therefore, since they are all happening at the same time, if in a time shortly after year 0 in one Hyrulean timeline Link is sealed in the Sacred Realm, and in another he's running around, that one that's running around is all that's required for a Link to end up in Termina to save it in a time shortly after year 0 in Termina. It's not dependent on the timeline itself.

What you're arguing is this: that because Link goes to Termina Year 0 after he has been to a Hyrulean Year 7, it's actually happening after that Hyrulean future in the grand scheme of time in the multiverse. But it's not; it's happening before. And because of this, and since it's on a separate timeline, it's existence is not determined by Link being in the Child Timeline of Hyrule as opposed to the Adult Timeline of Hyrule. Rather, it's dependent on him being at a Year 0, period, anywhere in the multiverse, that allows Termina to exist if the Link in the Adult Timeline hasn't gone there.

You have an odd take on how time works. Time is a physical property, not something purely philosophical. The reference to timelines that is normally used is rather ambiguous on this point: traditionally, "timeline" means the sequence of events. But the Child and Adult Timelines are usually spoken of as different branches of Hyrule.

The reason Hyrule split is not due to different events: rather, the different events are due to the split. Time travel has been postulated to have the ability to create a new future every time you change something in the past in addition to the one from which you hailed, e.g. Link plants a bean in the past and creates a future where there is a beanstalk. Of course, it is also possible that the old futures die immediately. In OoT, the latter was true, for the most part (sort of). The split means that the newest old future (the one where Ganondorf was sealed) was preserved as well as the newest future.

If Termina was an "alternate dimension," then it would be affected by the split regardless of whether or not its history was affected by Hyrule. What I think you are really trying to say is something close to the "parallel universe" concept. You are just a bit confused on how the split is supposed to work.

I argue that they do share a history, that an action in Hyrule such as "Happy Mask Salesman leaves Hyrule" chronologically happens before event "Happy Mask Salesman enters Termina."

That, in and of itself, is a basic timeline.

Event A: Happy Mask Salesman leaves Hyrule
Event B: Happy Mask Salesman enters Termina

A -- > B

Of course, as this pertains to Link, in the Adult timeline Link would not have his own Event A, so why should he still have an Event B? Link only mimics Event A in the Child timeline, hence why hypothetical Event C (Link leaves Termina) doesn't seem to have any bearing on the Adult timeline, from which OoT/MM Link seems fully intended by our favorite Japanese guys to leave and never come back.

So my model of time is like this:

Child Line: A -- > B -- > C
Adult Line: (no interaction between Link and Termina)

However, Ogmios22188 seems to be suggesting that the model work like this.

Child Line: A -- > ***C
************* \ /
Termina Line:**** B
***************\
Adult Line:********C

Lex, I'm a bit confused by your post: do you think this theory is supposed to prove that MM Link enters the Adult Timeline? Because I thought the primary reason for this theory is to allow the LotF to be considered more than an Easter egg, and still allow WW to be placed in the Adult Timeline.

Originally Posted by HurriPen

Lex, I'm a bit confused by your post: do you think this theory is supposed to prove that MM Link enters the Adult Timeline?

It doesn't have to.

Because I thought the primary reason for this theory is to allow the LotF to be considered more than an Easter egg, and still allow WW to be placed in the Adult Timeline.

Tingle universe-warps. It's part of his game. No further explanation needed.

Originally Posted by HurriPen

You have an odd take on how time works. Time is a physical property, not something purely philosophical. The reference to timelines that is normally used is rather ambiguous on this point: traditionally, "timeline" means the sequence of events. But the Child and Adult Timelines are usually spoken of as different branches of Hyrule.

I am arguing that time is objective and physical, and not solely determined by individual experience. Year 0 is happening anywhere in the multiverse at the same time. Hyrule's Year 0 does not happen at a point before or after Termina's year 0. They happen at the same time.

The reason Hyrule split is not due to different events: rather, the different events are due to the split.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Stop right there. The split is not due to different events? Then what is the split caused by? Time just said "eh, this sucks, I think I'll split?" No. Zelda sends Link back to the past, and he causes things to occur differently. These differences are irreconcilable with the past of the future he returned from, thus causing a split in time to accomodate them.

Time travel has been postulated to have the ability to create a new future every time you change something in the past in addition to the one from which you hailed, e.g. Link plants a bean in the past and creates a future where there is a beanstalk.

You're contradicting yourself. The new future, i.e., the split, is caused by the changes you make. Not the other way around.

Of course, it is also possible that the old futures die immediately. In OoT, the latter was true, for the most part (sort of). The split means that the newest old future (the one where Ganondorf was sealed) was preserved as well as the newest future.

I have always argued that it was never possible that the old futures would die out, since Link experienced them. Year 0 happens before Year 7. If something in Year 0 could prevent Year 7 from happening in the way in which it did, Year 7 never would've existed in the first place, and would never have been able to exist. Let me use myself as an example. I exist and have existed for a little over nineteen years. My existence shows either one of two things: 1) that time travel is impossible or 2) someone cannot go into the past and erase me from existence, because if they could, I wouldn't exist now.

If Termina was an "alternate dimension," then it would be affected by the split regardless of whether or not its history was affected by Hyrule. What I think you are really trying to say is something close to the "parallel universe" concept. You are just a bit confused on how the split is supposed to work.

That's precisely what I'm saying. I've been arguing for the split timeline ever since I've been a member of this forum for the very reason I just used above. I am one of the few people on this forum who has always understood how it works, even in the face of plenty of people who didn't. The only person who apparently doesn't know the split works is you, if you think that the split causes the differences and not the other way around.

Lex, as I said in the other thread, the only history in Hyrule is that the Salesman left and the only history in Termina is that the Salesman came. The history and timeline isn't directly affected by where he came from or went to.

Tingle's ability to universe-warp may or may not allow him to access parallel timelines: we do not know if this is the case. In fact, the game's canonicity has yet to be determined.

One thing may be said on this subject: this explanation of the LotF would only hold water if Tingle of Tingle's game is Tingle born and raised in Termina. MM Tingle had a father present: therefore he is a natural resident of Termina. If this is not so, then the warping Tingle must be a doppelganger who resembles him, and therefore could only obtain the legend by going to Termina, then to Adult Hyrule. It seems to be a bit of a stretch, though.

Ok,I haven't read everything posted here as yes,but I am going with Alternate Dimensions.

The Following is something I posted a short while ago in another topic:

Originally Posted by oni_lunk

Ok,honestly,I've had a major headache over the past few days,so forgive me if i get this wrong.
From your post above,am I correct in assuming that you are saying that termina is a completely separate timeline from hyrule??
(I've seen somewhere that people also believe that both timelines share ONE termina).

I think that if either of these is what you are thinking about,to me,its flawed.
I think it should be more like this:
---------------------Adult Timeline(UNIVERSE X)
---------------------/
UNIVERSE---------->
---------------------\
---------------------Child Timeline(UNIVERSE Y)

In this I think that,at first,there is one Universe containing Hyrule,Termina,and any other dimension that Nintendo may or may not want to throw in there in the future.
When the split occurs,the Universe is split to give us what we now refer to as the Child and Adult Timelines.
By splitting the Universe we now have two Universes.And by my definition of the Universe several lines above,there are now two hyrules,two terminas etc.

And this here is what I meant by sharing ONE termina(Thanks Lex):

Originally Posted by LexLionHart

Child Line: A -- > ***C
************* \ /
Termina Line:**** B
***************\
Adult Line:********C

Originally Posted by Ogmios22188

The history and timeline isn't directly affected by where he came from or went to.

Okay. Let's add to this:

Event A: Salesman leaves Hyrule
Event B: Salesman enters Termina
Event C: Salesman teaches Link Song of Healing
Event D: Link defeats Majora and he and the HMS return to Hyrule
(NOTE: Event D cannot possibly happen without Event C having been instigated at some point in Link's constant cycling through the three days. Event B happens before Event D in all Termina cycles.)

Event B is a Termina event that follows directly from Hyrulean Event A. Termina's timeline is directly affected by the fact that Event A happened, even though Event A didn't happen in Termina.
Event D is a Hyrule event influenced by the completion of Link's quest in Termina (which consists of a set of other Events in Termina). The actions in Termina allow for Event D (in Hyrule) to happen.

No time travel is involved in traveling to Termina; logic applied to Link's progression when entering various alternate timelines does not apply to Link entering Termina.

Originally Posted by LexLionHart

No time travel is involved in traveling to Termina; logic applied to Link's progression when entering various alternate timelines does not apply to Link entering Termina.

Why would time-traveling be involved in going back and forth between universes? The key to this theory is Termina and Hyrule not sharing the same dimension of time.

Originally Posted by Ogmios22188

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Stop right there. The split is not due to different events? Then what is the split caused by? Time just said "eh, this sucks, I think I'll split?" No. Zelda sends Link back to the past, and he causes things to occur differently. These differences are irreconcilable with the past of the future he returned from, thus causing a split in time to accomodate them.

What I was trying to say through this statement is that events occurring differently in the Child timeline is not the root cause of the split. It is the fact that time travel occurred that caused the split. If Link had made a decision to repeat events in history, it would still have been another physical timeline (albeit, a redundant one).

I have always argued that it was never possible that the old futures would die out, since Link experienced them. Year 0 happens before Year 7. If something in Year 0 could prevent Year 7 from happening in the way in which it did, Year 7 never would've existed in the first place, and would never have been able to exist. Let me use myself as an example. I exist and have existed for a little over nineteen years. My existence shows either one of two things: 1) that time travel is impossible or 2) someone cannot go into the past and erase me from existence, because if they could, I wouldn't exist now.

This view of time travel is not conducive to the split: the split requires that, if you went back in time to prevent your birth, you could succeed, since your timeline where you were born still exists. The argument you are using is usually used to prove that time-travel cannot change history.

You may understand the split better than I do, but I am not convinced that you understand time-travel better than I do.

I agree with oni_lunk on the splitting of the entire universe. I made this picture for another thread which sort of captures the idea:

Note that this diagram does not include the factor "time", it is just a representation of the parallel dimensions. The green line represents the universe. All existing dimensions are contained in it. The first split is there just to show two parallel worlds, Hyrule and Termina. They are both parts of the same universe (green line). The universe isn't actually split at any point in time, I'm just opening it up so that you can see what I'm getting at. The second split shown in the diagram is the actual splitting of the timeline, triggered by Link's time traveling in OoT. It occurs simultaneously in all dimensions causing each to have two alternate futures. The parallel lines of the diagram are then merged back together to show the two alternate courses of time in the split universe (the two green lines).

One of the main reasons I believe this to be the case is that if Termina exists as a separate universe that is connected to both timelines, it would create crazy scenarios where anything from the other rimeline could make its way to the other. In short: One entrance can't have two exits. And since Tingle doesn't play a very significant role in the history of Hyrule, I think we can just assume that he just does his universe warp but that answer clearly doesn't satisfy all debators here. It is still the only answer with any actual in-game proof going for it.

Originally Posted by HurriPen

Why would time-traveling be involved in going back and forth between universes?

Between timelines. Different universes don't have to be on separate timelines, and that's basically what I'm arguing.

What I was trying to say through this statement is that events occurring differently in the Child timeline is not the root cause of the split. It is the fact that time travel occurred that caused the split. If Link had made a decision to repeat events in history, it would still have been another physical timeline (albeit, a redundant one).

Would it? A split timeline in and of itself and by definition requires that some event in history be changed, added, etc. to make the history into something that wasn't before. Two completely identical timelines would simply be the same timeline, i.e., one timeline.

This view of time travel is not conducive to the split: the split requires that, if you went back in time to prevent your birth, you could succeed, since your timeline where you were born still exists. The argument you are using is usually used to prove that time-travel cannot change history.

Did you exist before your birth before your birth?

If the answer to this question is no, then you have altered history before ever actually preventing your birth.


Remember, my argument is not being applied to time travel, just the movement between physical dimensions. I'm suggesting that because of the relationship of Termina and Hyrule via the interaction between them in MM (in which all causality is accounted for within a given history, as opposed to a split, where causality is placed on an event happening in another timeline).

All we see is that Link is in Termina because he entered there from Hyrule. From the Adult timeline perspective (according to the theory I'm arguing against), Link would have to be there despite never leaving Hyrule and entering Termina at that point in time in that timeline. Link magically appearing in another timeline has been shown to happen through time travel (as well as through changing events of history), but never through crossing between various worlds.

I am not convinced that universe-warping is anything more than travel through the spatial dimensions. For Tingle to reach the Adult Timeline from the Child Timeline without movement through a second dimension of time is impossible. Is he shown to be capable of this in his RPG? Keep in mind that a mere assumption of this is just as plausible as an assumption of the "parallel universe."

If this is the case, then Termina as a parallel universe would seem to be necessary for the LotF to still get through to the Adult timeline.

It's not an assumption that Termina is a parallel world.
It's an assumption that it has its own timeline, and one that contradicts Nintendo's incorporation of all its other parallel worlds throughout the series, none of which have their own timelines.

Originally Posted by LexLionHart

Okay. Let's add to this:

Event A: Salesman leaves Hyrule
Event B: Salesman enters Termina
Event C: Salesman teaches Link Song of Healing
Event D: Link defeats Majora and he and the HMS return to Hyrule
(NOTE: Event D cannot possibly happen without Event C having been instigated at some point in Link's constant cycling through the three days. Event B happens before Event D in all Termina cycles.)

Event B is a Termina event that follows directly from Hyrulean Event A. Termina's timeline is directly affected by the fact that Event A happened, even though Event A didn't happen in Termina.
Event D is a Hyrule event influenced by the completion of Link's quest in Termina (which consists of a set of other Events in Termina). The actions in Termina allow for Event D (in Hyrule) to happen.

No time travel is involved in traveling to Termina; logic applied to Link's progression when entering various alternate timelines does not apply to Link entering Termina.

The result of the event is important to the timeline, not the event itself. Link knowing the song is important. Link learning the song from someone who comes from another universe isn't. Even if Link comes home with the new song, and people ask him "Hey, where'd you learn that new song?" and he said "in another universe", that wouldn't then make it important to Hyrule's timeline, as the song didn't do anything for Hyrule, nor its people. It did not affect its history. Even if Termina becomes known to Hyrule at large, it doesn't combine their timelines, since their histories weren't related to each other and still aren't, after the fact.

Uncle Meat, in light of the fact that everyone has pretty much shunned the possibility of converging timelines, your diagram is basically impossible.

Originally Posted by LexLionHart

It's not an assumption that Termina is a parallel world.
It's an assumption that it has its own timeline, and one that contradicts Nintendo's incorporation of all its other parallel worlds throughout the series, none of which have their own timelines.

The assumption is not that of timelines: it is that of sharing the dimension of time. I have already explained how I am trying to use the phrase "parallel universe" in this sense in the third post. I do not want to have to explicate this every time.

HurriPen, sorry I couldn't respond to you before, but you are continuing to contradict yourself. You're saying that time travel is the only reason why a split is caused, and that even if Link did everything exactly the same in both timelines, there would be two identical timelines. But you're missing something very obvious. Time travel is the difference that causes the split. In one timeline, there's time travel; in another, there isn't. Therefore, the timelines aren't the same. The difference causes the split.

About preventing my own birth, yes, I could go back in time to kill my mother, but that wouldn't erase me from this timeline. It would not allow me to exist in another timeline, thus causing a split in the timeline. Not being able to change history and a split timeline theory are basically the same argument.