RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,408
Posts: 5,359,657
Members: 24,630
Currently online: 551
Newest member: DasGeneral


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old March 5 2010, 08:30 AM   #16
lawman
Commander
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Since Spock knows of Kirk's altered past, and since he cannot travel back in time (stuck on Delta Vega), it would be obvious to him that things cannot be changed.
...
The fact that Spock would have done anything to save Vulcan if he could, and that it exists in the future he came from, tells me that he knows he cannot save it.
The problem with the "writers' intent" explanation is that (A) their theory of how Trek time-travel works is dicta, coming more from interviews than from anything in the film, and (B) it's incompatible with essentially every other Trek time-travel story we've ever seen.

And since we are talking time travel here, it's kinda beside the point that Spock couldn't travel further back to correct the divergence while he was trapped on Delta Vega. Once he got off it, he certainly had both the knowledge and the means.

He's currently in a timeline different from the one he originated in: he knows that. But when he and Kirk were standing in front of the Guardian of Forever in "City" and suddenly realized that they were an anomaly in a universe wherein the Federation had never existed, did they say "oh, well, those are the breaks" or go back to undo the change? In "Yesteryear," when he discovers his own life history has been altered, does he leave it be or go back to correct it?

(Heck, for that matter (it's not Spock, but still relevant to the overall paradigm), in "Yesterday's Enterprise," when Picard is informed by Guinan that "something's wrong" about their timeline after a ship from 20 years prior pops up, even though he remembers every moment of his timeline as legitimate, Picard sends that ship back to correct the divergence.)

SOP within the Federation, from all available evidence, has always been to assume that there's a single "primary" timeline that can be but shouldn't be altered, and to endeavor to keep it on course.
__________________
Blogging on pop culture and politics at SmartRemarks
lawman is offline  
Old March 5 2010, 09:12 AM   #17
Devon
Fleet Captain
 
Devon's Avatar
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

Probably because he feels he can be a lot more useful in this universe, especially with his efforts as an Ambassador to try to bring peace between the remaining Vulcans and the Romulans at this time (albeit on the very very down low if he's logical about it.) Seeing as he knows of what's about to happen to Romulus in a century and a half, and the knowledge he possesses to possibly stop it then he can show some good intentions this way in this universe. Once his work is done, and he hasn't been hit with Bendi Syndrome (I know I probably spelled that wrong,) then he may consider a return to *some universe.*
Devon is offline  
Old March 5 2010, 06:15 PM   #18
EJA
Fleet Captain
 
Location: United Kingdom
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

It's still hugely out of character for Spock, considering how he and his friends reacted to altered timelines in the past. I can't believe he just wouldn't do anything.
EJA is offline  
Old March 5 2010, 06:25 PM   #19
OneBuckFilms
Fleet Captain
 
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

The Writer's explanation is actually not inconsistent with past depicted time travel.

Truth be told, it shed further light on what these Time Travel stories may have ACTUALLY done.

Second, the MWI interpretation of Time Travel as depicted in the movie can only be explained so far.

Also, there are many items that support it, including the scene where uhura states "An Alternate Reality", whereas nothing on screen CONTRADICTS it.

Therefore, it is the case.

Yesterday's Enterprise establishes that in THAT alternate reality, the was for the Federation was going badly, and that they would loose.

Not an SOP, just Picard's thinking at the time.

Also, MWI could only be proven by observation, and I remember a story about a cat in a box.

Going BACK in time, you create an Alternate Reality, FORWARD trips do not, so whenever someone has gone back in time, and thus created a new reality, the time traveller sees no sign that a new universe is created. Moving Forward in time is much simpler, since we do that anyway, just maybe not as fast.

If the Timeline is assumed to be ERASED when the Narada starts changing things, then Spock and the Narada would have to be radically altered by such changes, aka the Grandfather Paradox, and thus events in the movie would be simply impossible.

Therefore, MWI is the truth left after eliminating the impossible.
OneBuckFilms is offline  
Old March 5 2010, 06:28 PM   #20
OneBuckFilms
Fleet Captain
 
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

EJA wrote: View Post
It's still hugely out of character for Spock, considering how he and his friends reacted to altered timelines in the past. I can't believe he just wouldn't do anything.
If Spock believed in a Linear Timeline, the fact that 25 years of irreversible changes have occurred would tell him otherwise.

Logically, an Alternate Reality is the only logical alternative.

Therefore, travelling back in time changes nothing, and merely spawns another reality.

That is assuming he has the opportunity to even do this.
OneBuckFilms is offline  
Old March 5 2010, 08:20 PM   #21
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

First off let me state that I am a fan of having a single, malleable timeline. From a drama standpoint it is just more satisfying that everything that was and everything that will ever be is at stake in a time travel tale.

Second, you have to work from the assumption that the older Spock as depicted in this film isn't from the Prime timeline and is from a timeline where him and Jim Kirk didn't flaunt the timeline at will. It just doesn't make sense any other way. The man let his Mother die decades earlier why precisely? My Mom died when I was ten and there isn't a day that goes by that I don't wish for a way to fix it (and I'm 38). Why would he leave that burden for his younger self to carry if he has all this knowledge of ways to change the past? Exactly what good is it going to do Spock-2 to have his mother and his people stripped away from him? Does Spock Prime see this as necessary for his younger self? If he does it is one hell of a price to pay to rectify some flaw he sees in his younger self.

Third, it would be unlike Jim Kirk not to start digging around what Spock Prime knows about restoring the natural order of things. He's practically lived a life that he was never meant to live based on meddling from the future. and if time travel and changing the past can be accomplished once... who's to say it can't be accomplished a second time?
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is online now  
Old March 5 2010, 10:21 PM   #22
DaveyNY
Commodore
 
DaveyNY's Avatar
 
Location: DaveyNY
Send a message via AIM to DaveyNY Send a message via Yahoo to DaveyNY
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

Devon wrote: View Post
Probably because he feels he can be a lot more useful in this universe, especially with his efforts as an Ambassador to try to bring peace between the remaining Vulcan's and the Romulan's at this time (albeit on the very very down low if he's logical about it.) Seeing as he knows of what's about to happen to Romulus in a century and a half, and the knowledge he possesses to possibly stop it then he can show some good intentions this way in this universe. Once his work is done, and he hasn't been hit with Bendii Syndrome (I know I probably spelled that wrong,) then he may consider a return to *some universe.*

Do We know for sure that the Romulan Home world will be destroyed in the future of NuTrek?

Wouldn't it be more logical to think that Spock-Prime would do something now, to prevent yet a Third Alternate Time line being created??

Will Nemo even be the same personality in this reality???

Isn't speculation to a migraine level fun????
__________________
I must go out in2 space again for the call of adventure cries. With a steady hand & robust crew I'll take her forth with pride. I must go out in2 space again to a vagabond Captains life. Where comets play & galaxies sway like whirlwinds in the night.
DaveyNY is offline  
Old March 5 2010, 10:30 PM   #23
OneBuckFilms
Fleet Captain
 
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

BillJ wrote: View Post
First off let me state that I am a fan of having a single, malleable timeline. From a drama standpoint it is just more satisfying that everything that was and everything that will ever be is at stake in a time travel tale.

Second, you have to work from the assumption that the older Spock as depicted in this film isn't from the Prime timeline and is from a timeline where him and Jim Kirk didn't flaunt the timeline at will. It just doesn't make sense any other way. The man let his Mother die decades earlier why precisely? My Mom died when I was ten and there isn't a day that goes by that I don't wish for a way to fix it (and I'm 38). Why would he leave that burden for his younger self to carry if he has all this knowledge of ways to change the past? Exactly what good is it going to do Spock-2 to have his mother and his people stripped away from him? Does Spock Prime see this as necessary for his younger self? If he does it is one hell of a price to pay to rectify some flaw he sees in his younger self.

Third, it would be unlike Jim Kirk not to start digging around what Spock Prime knows about restoring the natural order of things. He's practically lived a life that he was never meant to live based on meddling from the future. and if time travel and changing the past can be accomplished once... who's to say it can't be accomplished a second time?
Problem: GRANDFATHER PARADOX. This means that Spock remembering different events that cannot be corrected is impossible in a linear timeline. Cause and effect can NOT be ignored, dispite wishful thinking/assertions otherwise.
OneBuckFilms is offline  
Old March 5 2010, 11:26 PM   #24
lawman
Commander
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

BillJ wrote: View Post
First off let me state that I am a fan of having a single, malleable timeline. From a drama standpoint it is just more satisfying that everything that was and everything that will ever be is at stake in a time travel tale.
QFT.

BillJ wrote:
Second, you have to work from the assumption that the older Spock as depicted in this film isn't from the Prime timeline and is from a timeline where him and Jim Kirk didn't flaunt the timeline at will.
I'm inclined to agree. As I've mentioned elsewhere, there are other clues that OldSpock's future is not that of the primary timeline with which we're familiar, and thus that this whole thing is set in an alternate reality even before Nero's intervention.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Problem: GRANDFATHER PARADOX. This means that Spock remembering different events that cannot be corrected is impossible in a linear timeline. Cause and effect can NOT be ignored, dispite wishful thinking/assertions otherwise.
I'm honestly not clear on what you're trying to say here. Fictional time travelers routinely remember events from their original history, whether they've changed it or not. This has nothing to do with what "cannot be corrected"; so long as time-travel further backward remains possible, anything can theoretically be corrected.
__________________
Blogging on pop culture and politics at SmartRemarks
lawman is offline  
Old March 6 2010, 12:05 AM   #25
OneBuckFilms
Fleet Captain
 
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

lawman wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
First off let me state that I am a fan of having a single, malleable timeline. From a drama standpoint it is just more satisfying that everything that was and everything that will ever be is at stake in a time travel tale.
QFT.

BillJ wrote:
Second, you have to work from the assumption that the older Spock as depicted in this film isn't from the Prime timeline and is from a timeline where him and Jim Kirk didn't flaunt the timeline at will.
I'm inclined to agree. As I've mentioned elsewhere, there are other clues that OldSpock's future is not that of the primary timeline with which we're familiar, and thus that this whole thing is set in an alternate reality even before Nero's intervention.

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Problem: GRANDFATHER PARADOX. This means that Spock remembering different events that cannot be corrected is impossible in a linear timeline. Cause and effect can NOT be ignored, dispite wishful thinking/assertions otherwise.
I'm honestly not clear on what you're trying to say here. Fictional time travelers routinely remember events from their original history, whether they've changed it or not. This has nothing to do with what "cannot be corrected"; so long as time-travel further backward remains possible, anything can theoretically be corrected.
Nevertheless, more information in the movie supports MWI over a linear timeline.

All you are telling me is that most time travel in Star Trek has been innacurate with regards to current prevailing theory, and somewhat inconsistent anyway.

UHURA: An Alternate Reality.
SPOCK: Precisely.

Rather than argue against it based on preference, how about based on contradictory, on-screen evidence from the movie?
OneBuckFilms is offline  
Old March 6 2010, 12:37 AM   #26
lawman
Commander
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
All you are telling me is that most time travel in Star Trek has been innacurate with regards to current prevailing theory, and somewhat inconsistent anyway.
All you're doing here is repeating O&K's claims about "current prevailing theory." There is no "current prevailing theory" about how time travel would work (although there are plenty of speculations), so realistically they were misrepresenting what the MWI means in order to rationalize their story choices about how to execute a reboot.

UHURA: An Alternate Reality.
SPOCK: Precisely.
This bit of expository dialogue was, obviously, O&K's attempt to get the point across to the slower members of the audience, slightly less blunt than having the writers themselves walk in front of the cameras and say "this is what we mean." However, at that point in the story it can realistically be nothing more than speculation on Spock and Uhura's part ("alternate to what?" is the obvious question from their POV), and moreover it provides no evidence one way or the other as to the status of the "prime" universe.
__________________
Blogging on pop culture and politics at SmartRemarks
lawman is offline  
Old March 6 2010, 01:01 AM   #27
Marten
Captain
 
Location: Southern Sweden
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

Actually, time travel is not exactly the same in all episodes. For example, in Assignment Earth, it's almost described as fatalism, since the outcome was set, and they basically couldn't fail. A single timeline, where incursions actually are a part of the events. It's like in The Time Traveler's Wife. Illogical, to say the least, since time traveling has to start somewhere.

Moving on, in The Future Guy-episodes, we have a single timeline which in fact can be altered. It's pretty much the same in TBOBW, First Contact and Year of Hell.

In Paralles, which isn't really a time travel episode, but relevant non the less, we have multiple universes, each for one possible outcome of actions. It would support the idea that it might exist a prime and an alternate universe, as in Star Trek XI.

I prefer the Future Guy one, but saying that Star Trek XI time travel is unprecedented isn't really true.
Marten is offline  
Old March 6 2010, 01:31 AM   #28
OneBuckFilms
Fleet Captain
 
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
 
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

lawman wrote: View Post
OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
All you are telling me is that most time travel in Star Trek has been innacurate with regards to current prevailing theory, and somewhat inconsistent anyway.
All you're doing here is repeating O&K's claims about "current prevailing theory." There is no "current prevailing theory" about how time travel would work (although there are plenty of speculations), so realistically they were misrepresenting what the MWI means in order to rationalize their story choices about how to execute a reboot.

UHURA: An Alternate Reality.
SPOCK: Precisely.
This bit of expository dialogue was, obviously, O&K's attempt to get the point across to the slower members of the audience, slightly less blunt than having the writers themselves walk in front of the cameras and say "this is what we mean." However, at that point in the story it can realistically be nothing more than speculation on Spock and Uhura's part ("alternate to what?" is the obvious question from their POV), and moreover it provides no evidence one way or the other as to the status of the "prime" universe.
If you are correct about the evidence about the fate of the "prime" universe, then we have insufficient data to test the idea that the movie portrays an overwritten/singular timeline.

Since Star Trek in general is inconsistent with it's implied portrayal of Time Travel, we cannot look to the rest of Star Trek as a guide to how it worked in this movie, so outside precedent carries no weight.

we are thus reduced to using the movie in and of itself to suggest whether it is an Alternate Reality, or whether linear time has been overwritten so that events after 2233 do not happen as depicted in the rest of Star Trek.

In order to accept the linear timeline theory, we have to accept the following:

- Cause and Effect have absolutely no meaning, since Spock CLEARLY observed and remembered events that simply can NOT happen since Nero's arrival.

Since the Grandfather Paradox comes in, the integrity of Spacetime is simply no more. Younger Spock would have different, contradictory memories to Older Spock, so when it comes time to go back in time, he may not do so, or would likely come back with something different to say to kirk, and the causality loop would go on indefinately.

Either that, or Spock would have to lie to kirk about events of the future.

Since this breaks cause-and-effect, it is thus not logical to assume this model.

Therefore, MWI must be the only logical alternative.

Given MWI, and Spock's generally analytical and logical approach, it is reasonable to assume that Spock:

a) Cannot go back in time to fix anything;
b) Relatively quickly reasons this to be true.
OneBuckFilms is offline  
Old March 6 2010, 01:42 AM   #29
thumbtack
Commodore
 
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

BillJ wrote: View Post
I am a fan of having a single, malleable timeline.

BillJ wrote: View Post
the older Spock as depicted in this film isn't from the Prime timeline

Illogical. Illogical. Does not compute.

Did Spock travel back in time within the same universe, or did he emerge in an entirely different universe? Seems clear he's now in an entirely nu universe, in which case, it would be highly immoral for him to try to change it into an exact copy of the old universe just to please a few trekkies.



.
thumbtack is offline  
Old March 6 2010, 04:23 AM   #30
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

thumbtack wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
I am a fan of having a single, malleable timeline.

BillJ wrote: View Post
the older Spock as depicted in this film isn't from the Prime timeline

Illogical. Illogical. Does not compute.

Did Spock travel back in time within the same universe, or did he emerge in an entirely different universe? Seems clear he's now in an entirely nu universe, in which case, it would be highly immoral for him to try to change it into an exact copy of the old universe just to please a few trekkies.



.
Yes. It would be highly immoral to try and save six billion who didn't die before.
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is online now  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.