RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,408
Posts: 5,359,596
Members: 24,629
Currently online: 529
Newest member: Karzak


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 January 13 2013, 04:40 PM   #76
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

The problem is that the specific reset button was used many many times in the original universe. Time travel is possible. And there is a clear and definite "natural" course of events that happened WITHOUT any time travel incursions. Nero was an invader from the future who fucked up the timeline in a HUGE way. Someone's gotta repair that, because we have already seen in many other episodes of the original universe that Starfleet protects the timeline.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:06 PM   #77
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
The problem is that the specific reset button was used many many times in the original universe. Time travel is possible. And there is a clear and definite "natural" course of events that happened WITHOUT any time travel incursions. Nero was an invader from the future who fucked up the timeline in a HUGE way. Someone's gotta repair that, because we have already seen in many other episodes of the original universe that Starfleet protects the timeline.
Except other than Spock Prime everyone is in what they see as the right timeline and probably don't want to alter the lives of billions based entirely on the word of some old Vulcan Kirk found, and without their help Spock Prime can't really do anything now can he.

Besides in the TOS era lots of planets were destroyed and we didn't see Kirk going back in time to save them.
Hartzilla2007 is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:13 PM   #78
Jackson_Roykirk
Commodore
 
Jackson_Roykirk's Avatar
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
The problem is that the specific reset button was used many many times in the original universe. Time travel is possible. And there is a clear and definite "natural" course of events that happened WITHOUT any time travel incursions. Nero was an invader from the future who fucked up the timeline in a HUGE way. Someone's gotta repair that, because we have already seen in many other episodes of the original universe that Starfleet protects the timeline.

In TNG: Parallels, our prime universe heroes didn't seem too concerned about making sure each of the alternate universe matched theirs.

So, rather then thinking of Nero's time travel as being the event that creates an alternate universe, think of it instead as an already existing alternate universe in which Nero time travels. The distinction is subtle, but there is a distinction, nevertheless.

The distinction being that perhaps the alternate universe existed even before Nero time traveled -- perhaps created by the Romulan supernova/black hole that sent both Nero and Spock back in time and in an alternate universe.
__________________

...With shoes that cut, and eyes that burn like cigarettes
With fingernails that shine like justice and a voice that is dark like tinted glass...
Jackson_Roykirk is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:21 PM   #79
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Ovation wrote: View Post
YARN wrote: View Post
TheRoyalFamily wrote: View Post

The kinds of minds that come to certain web fora dedicated to something that was old years ago.
Our responses are now down to

"It's just a movie!" (genre pleading)

"The same question applies to other Trek stories!" (Tu Quoque)

"Only weirdos who like old Trek would care" (Ad Hominem).

Strange that one is shamed for getting one's geek on at a geek board.
You asked a question in the original post. Respondents are under no obligation to furnish answers that support your point of view.
I love responses like this, because they are evidence that members of the opposition can do no better than appeal to fallacies. No one is going to admit they're out of ammo, but when they start lobbing mud, you know they're running short.
YARN is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:26 PM   #80
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Rarewolf wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
What age is Sulu supposed to be? (Not John Cho, Sulu)
Roughly the same age as Chekhov, I'd say.

Why would a full Lieutenant, with several years of experience be the same age a Ensign?
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:27 PM   #81
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

YARN wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
YARN wrote: View Post

Our responses are now down to

"It's just a movie!" (genre pleading)

"The same question applies to other Trek stories!" (Tu Quoque)

"Only weirdos who like old Trek would care" (Ad Hominem).

Strange that one is shamed for getting one's geek on at a geek board.
You asked a question in the original post. Respondents are under no obligation to furnish answers that support your point of view.
I love responses like this, because they are evidence that members of the opposition can do no better than appeal to fallacies. No one is going to admit they're out of ammo, but when they start lobbing mud, you know they're running short.
Your question's been answered. You just don't like the answers.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:31 PM   #82
Jackson_Roykirk
Commodore
 
Jackson_Roykirk's Avatar
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

YARN wrote: View Post

Our responses are now down to

"It's just a movie!" (genre pleading)

"The same question applies to other Trek stories!" (Tu Quoque)

"Only weirdos who like old Trek would care" (Ad Hominem).

Strange that one is shamed for getting one's geek on at a geek board.
Your example of the Tu Quoque fallacy really isn't a fallacy in this case, because Star Trek does not need to follow what you think should happen in the real world. It only needs to follow what usually happens in the Star Trek world.

I don't care what real world logic applies to time travel and alternate universes. All that matters is the logic that Star Trek says applies to time travel and alternate universe...

...and, by the way, that Star Trek logic is not always overtly consistent with itself, and reconciling that inconsistent logic requires the fans to fill in the blanks/rationalize the inconsistencies (i.e., make some shit up).
__________________

...With shoes that cut, and eyes that burn like cigarettes
With fingernails that shine like justice and a voice that is dark like tinted glass...
Jackson_Roykirk is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:35 PM   #83
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

His question isn't quite the "gotcha" moment he thinks it is.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:41 PM   #84
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

YARN wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
I don't think it should ever be on the table. You could never, in good conscious, move forward after any and all tragedies. What makes the Vulcans more special than the crew of the Kelvin or those aboard the forty-seven Klingon ships that were destroyed? Pure numbers?
In that case, how could Kirk and Spock risk going back in time to save the Earth in Star Trek IV? What makes Earthlings so special? Maybe it has something to do with losing an entire planet? Your own planet?

Shouldn't the crew have been punished even more? Instead they gave Kirk his command back and the crew a new Enterprise.
The destruction of Vuclan and what Kirk did to prevent Earth from being destroyed in TVH are not the same thing at all.

In TVH Kirk faced an unfolding disaster on Earth. He cleverly used time travel to find the whales, then come back to his time to stop the disaster as it was happening and before Earth was destroyed. That's totally different from using time travel to change something that already happened (like if the probe had destroyed Earth before Kirk could do anything).
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 05:59 PM   #85
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Jackson_Roykirk wrote: View Post
Your example of the Tu Quoque fallacy really isn't a fallacy in this case, because Star Trek does not need to follow what you think should happen in the real world. It only needs to follow what usually happens in the Star Trek world.
You are not understanding how the Tu Quoque operates as a response. A TNG fan says Kirk was fat. A TOS fan says Riker was fat too. The rejoinder, even if it is correct, does nothing to repudiate the claim that Kirk is fat. In fact, it concedes the point in the hopes of leveling both shows in terms of quality.

If you wish to say that this aspect of nu-Trek is no less questionable, then I am happy to agree with you.

My question, in this case, however, is why Spock does not attempt to save Vulcan, since this instance appears similar to other temporal alterations the Trek crew has made to save their respective homeworlds. I agree that they had a reset button to save countless colonies destroyed by rubber lizards, corn chip-shaped death machines, and flying boogers that hijack minds. They'll pull all the stops to save Earth or Spock, but not so much love for everyone else.

Jackson_Roykirk wrote: View Post
I don't care what real world logic applies to time travel and alternate universes. All that matters is the logic that Star Trek says applies to time travel and alternate universe...
And that is why we are testing Trek via coherence, in terms of its own rules. And Trek's rules include both closed-loop and branching time-travel.

When Trek is not consistent with itself, it fails its own test.

Jackson_Roykirk wrote: View Post
...and, by the way, that Star Trek logic is not always overtly consistent with itself, and reconciling that inconsistent logic requires the fans to fill in the blanks/rationalize the inconsistencies (i.e., make some shit up).
Of course it isn't. Indeed, we've had some interesting posits already offered in this thread in response to my question!
YARN is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 06:03 PM   #86
Jackson_Roykirk
Commodore
 
Jackson_Roykirk's Avatar
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

You would think that in The Immunity Syndrome, after they figured out how to stop the giant space amoeba that they would slingshot themselves back in time and save the billions of inhabitants Gamma Seven-A.

Heck, they could do the same to save almost anyone who dies -- although I suppose there would be an ROI (Return on Investment) factor to consider -- i.e., the amount of resources expended to save the life of someone -versus- the importance of that life. I would think saving a redshirt is not important, but preventing Kirk from being crushed by a metal bridge might be something to consider.


Seriously though, nuTrek is an alternate universe, not a change to the prime timeline.
__________________

...With shoes that cut, and eyes that burn like cigarettes
With fingernails that shine like justice and a voice that is dark like tinted glass...
Jackson_Roykirk is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 06:11 PM   #87
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Let's just cut straight to Orci's response to the same question you asked, YARN.

Robogeek: Why doesn’t Spock Prime try (or even want) to fix/restore the timeline, and save Vulcan?”

Bob Orci: Two reasons: The RED MATTER Device is destroyed, so even if he wanted to go back in time, he can’t. Secondly, our story is not based on the linear timeline of Einstein’s General Theory of relativity upon which most movies about time travel are based (like say, BACK TO THE FUTURE, or TERMINATOR, both of which I LOVE). The idea of a fixable timeline has been a wonderful staple of sci-fi since the 50’s, but in reading about the most current thinking in theoretical physics regarding time travel (Quantum Mechanics), we learned about the speculative theories that suggest that if time travel is possible, then the act of time travel itself creates a new universe that exists in PARALLEL to the one left by the time traveler.

This is the preferred theory these days because it resolves the GRANDFATHER PARADOX, which wonders how a time traveler who kills his own younger grandfather would logically then cease to exist, but then he’d never be around to time travel and kill his grandfather in the first place. Quantum Mechanically based theories resolve this paradox by arguing that the time traveler, in killing his grandfather, would merely split a previously identical universe into a new one in which a man who is his grandfather in another universe is killed in the new one. The time traveler does not cease to exist, although he is no longer in his own original universe (where he is now missing). Or something.

To summarize above on the time travel issue, going back in time is the equivalent of stepping into a parallel universe, according to current speculations based on Quantum Mechanics. Starfleet and Spock, basing their decisions on this theory, would see that their is NO SUCH THING as “rectifying” the situation in a MULTIVERSE.
… and finally, my ace in the hole, a TEMPORAL PRIME DIRECTIVE.
M'Sharak also pointed this out to you in a post. These were the rules Orci and Kurtzman operated by. In this universe, you can't do what you're asking for.
If you don't like that answer, then you have to take it up with Orci and Kurtzman.

Source of where the question was asked:
http://trekmovie.com/2009/05/18/orci...-impromptu-qa/
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 06:17 PM   #88
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
His question isn't quite the "gotcha" moment he thinks it is.

And that is what this is about.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 06:44 PM   #89
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

If nothing else works, appeal to authority and claim the authority is the final word. Ad Verecundiam.

Franklin wrote: View Post
Let's just cut straight to Orci's response to the same question you asked, YARN.
Lets, indeed.

Franklin wrote: View Post
BobOrci: Two reasons: The RED MATTER Device is destroyed, so even if he wanted to go back in time, he can’t. Secondly, our story is not based on the linear timeline of Einstein’s General Theory of relativity upon which most movies about time travel are based (like say, BACK TO THE FUTURE, or TERMINATOR, both of which I LOVE). The idea of a fixable timeline has been a wonderful staple of sci-fi since the 50’s, but in reading about the most current thinking in theoretical physics regarding time travel (Quantum Mechanics), we learned about the speculative theories that suggest that if time travel is possible, then the act of time travel itself creates a new universe that exists in PARALLEL to the one left by the time traveler.
Orci is not a physicist. He's miles from being a physicist. He's a sci-fi writer. He has no more authority on these matters than you or I.

Lets' note a few things.

1. Relativity theory has not been overturned. It is in fact one of the most accurate and reliable physical theories ever produced. Relativity theory and Quantum Theory do not mesh well, which is why physicists have been chasing a grand theory of everything for many decades now.

2. If you want to see what scientists have to say, many would tell you that time-travel is impossible, full stop.

3. Speculative theories are just that, speculative. The Everrett/Wheeler "no-collapse" interpretation of quantum mechanics (which simply posits that the universe branches or splits every time a measurement like event occurs - which gives us a branching proliferation of universes) has been around for a half century. This isn't cutting edge speculation.

4. What is possible in Star Trek has nothing to do with what is possible in the real world. There is no such thing as Red Matter or phasers or Romulans. This is the point that really matters.

Franklin wrote: View Post
This is the preferred theory these days because it resolves the GRANDFATHER PARADOX,
The time travel is impossible view (i.e., Einstein's personal view) also resolves causal paradoxes.

Orci, however, has also claimed that the prime universe is still real and that it is still there. He brought Spock from the old universe into the new universe. He didn't do a hard reboot. Old and new are narratively connected. The old universe is not only real, but has overlapped with the new universe, and they are causally connected since events and agents from one universe have connected with the new universe.

You don't get to eat your cake and have it too. You don't get to do a soft reboot and use the ethos of Nimoy to confer legitimacy to the new regime, but then repudiate narrative facts that are part of that ethos.

Franklin wrote: View Post
To summarize above on the time travel issue, going back in time is the equivalent of stepping into a parallel universe, according to current speculations based on Quantum Mechanics. Starfleet and Spock, basing their decisions on this theory, would see that their is NO SUCH THING as “rectifying” the situation in a MULTIVERSE.
No, Old Spock would certainly know about sling-shotting and he would also know that it is closed-loop time travel. Seeing as how Old Spock had the secret formula for transwarp beaming, others would be inclined to respect his knowledge of the universe.

Franklin wrote: View Post
… and finally, my ace in the hole, a TEMPORAL PRIME DIRECTIVE.
I've already dealt with this one upthread. My analysis applies here too.

Franklin wrote: View Post
M'Sharak also pointed this out to you in a post. These were the rules Orci and Kurtzman operated by. In this universe, you can't do what you're asking for.
This has been dealt with upthread too.

Franklin wrote: View Post
If you don't like that answer, then you have to take it up with Orci and Kurtzman.
If I had wished to pose the question to them, I would have sent them an email. I didn't. I am, rather, asking the question of fellow Trekkies. If you don't have an answer besides that cut-and-paste, fine, stand aside then.
YARN is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 06:50 PM   #90
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

At the end of the day, it's fiction. Each individual story is going to use the elements needed to tell the story the writer wants to tell.

We can go to every single Star Trek story and go "why didn't they do this? It was done in episode 'x'!"
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is offline  
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 11:59 PM.

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