Improbable genetics in Predestination (2014)?
Predestination (2014) is a well-crafted time travel story, which I found quite remarkably consistent.
There was however one point in the plot that tickled the suspension of my disbelief.
The movie tells of the birth of a baby, whose parents are Jane, and
John.
Both parents respective genetic materials must be
the same, because Jane and John are the same individual, a few years (and 1 time travel) apart.
The movie suggests that the baby was created through classical human fertilization.
As this article about genes inheritance recalls, human gametes (ovum and sperm) contain half the genetic material of the parent ; and all gametes produced are genetically different from each other.
In other words gametes contain a random half of the parent's genetic material (which is why non-twin biological siblings are not genetically identical).
However the movie also reveals that the baby is
the same individual as Jane (and John).
For this to be consistent, it would mean that
the combination of the ovum provided by Jane, and the sperm provided by John, results in the exact same genome as that of Jane/John.
I estimate that this has a probability of happening of less than 0.00000000000142%, arguably smaller than the probability of time travel to ever become possible...
Were there hints or assumptions in the story explaining the occurrence of this improbable event?
Best Answer
In order for the plot to be an 'infinitely reoccurring perfect loop', the baby fertilized has to an exact copy of Jane/John.
This is required because any change in the genome of the baby would essentially give rise to the possibility of the baby taking different decisions than what their mother would have in an identical environment with identical experiences (giving the baby 'free will').
I estimate that this has a probability of happening of less than 0.00000000000142%
Assuming your calculation to be true, however small the probability is, the infinite causal loop is consistent ONLY when this happens. And if you find this probability to be absurdly low then the probability that Jane behaves in a way that leads up to her 'creating' the causal loop in the first place is also absurdly low.
In essence, what we're watching on screen is possible only if the 0.00000000000142% chance event happens. So there weren't any actions explicitly made to allow it to happen, it's implied it happened. There was no other way
Pictures about "Improbable genetics in Predestination (2014)?"
What exactly happened in Predestination?
Predestination Paradox Explained \u2013 A predestination paradox occurs when a time traveler is caught in a loop of events that \u201cpredestines\u201d or \u201cpredates\u201d him or her to travel back in time. The paradox suggests that those people who travel back in time would have no way of changing a situation.How was Jane born in Predestination?
The whole point behind the film is that Jane is in a loop. Thus female Jane will always meet male Jane and always give birth to baby Jane. This looping paradox is the reason Jane is recruited in the first place, as she could be said to lie outside the normal time stream and, thus, can safely travel through time.Is the barkeep Jane?
The BarkeepAs a girl, his name was Jane. She grew up being disliked by others her age because she was too intelligent, smart, and physically active. Unlike the other girls, she is never adopted. After she grows up, she tries to join the Space Corps program headed by a man named Mr.How did the loop start in Predestination?
He went back to trigger it all, which means in the beginning when there is just Ethan Hawke, as you say, the beginning of the loop was his past, which he couldn't change. The decisions he makes in his time line, have already been made by him in the loop.PREDESTINATION (2014) - ILLUSTRATED TIMELINE EXPLANATION
More answers regarding improbable genetics in Predestination (2014)?
Answer 2
Fiction aside, I don't see how the quote
contain half the genetic material of the parent ; and all gametes produced are genetically different from each other.
necessarily would contradict the scenario in the movie.
Take another quote (gamete being 50% of the respective chromosomes):
Fertilisation is the fusion of the nucleus of a male gamete with the nucleus of a female gamete.
The (obvious) assumption of this rule is that both parents are different thus have different genetic material thus taking a random 50% of one parent (e.g. legs + hair) and combining it with the inverse 50% of the other parents (e.g. hands + eyes) would result in one possible permutation of their shared attributes. (very simplified)
In the movies case however, both parents have the same genetic material, thus taking 50% from one and the remaining 50% from the other would result in exactly the same sequence as a result.
You are still correct in the sense that both gametes will contain a random number of chromosomes and there is a high probability that there would be a shared chromosome in both sets. I am assuming this could result in some kind of disability. How does this work in cloning of animals? Maybe someone with greater knowledge of this topic can shed some light onto this.
@Mithoron commented:
you don't consider alleles - for example child of two black haired identical clones could be blonde.
Based on this comment. We basically end up in an "Avengers: Endgame" scenario. Most viewers gladly accepted to see only the one (or two) out of 14 million possible outcomes to be brought to the silver screen. It is the same thing here. Out of a vast set of possible constructions, the most suitable for the narrative was picked. It is not likely, but possible.
And one could even argue that the time travel that happens in the movie has some side-effects when it comes to genetic information.
Sources: Stack Exchange - This article follows the attribution requirements of Stack Exchange and is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
Images: Andrea Piacquadio, Andrea Piacquadio, Andrea Piacquadio, Thibault Trillet