Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

[Nerys Myk]

I thought he said, "I'm gonna kill me a Scotsman!"

[SalvorHardin]

He said cheeeeese!

[Dale Sams]

King Daniel wrote:

---

Braga was speaking (or tweeting) from the wrong end. They had previously said that Future Guy "was probably Romulan" and that they never had any real plan for the character.

Future Guy in DTI: Watching the Clock is definitely not Jonathan Archer. He's revealed to be...

A Romulan/Suliban/Tandaren hybrid named Jamran Harnoth.

My own reasoning for guessing it was Archer was based on the interest future guy had in saving Enterprise a couple of times (and yes he seemed to also try and destroy them too) and... i think there was an ep where Archer was stranded in the future??

Also there was something in the profile that made me think it was Archer.

[M'Sharak]

Dale Sams wrote:

---

My own reasoning for guessing it was Archer was based on the interest future guy had in saving Enterprise a couple of times (and yes he seemed to also try and destroy them too) and... i think there was an ep where Archer was stranded in the future??

Also there was something in the profile that made me think it was Archer.

Well, in that particular instance,

he was speaking with Future Guy, via the usual means, only to get two boots planted in his chest as Archer abruptly returned from the 31st century through Future Guy's communication portal.

[Ketrick]

R. Star wrote:

---

They is why a clean reboot instead of some loose end tying to the other universe would've been preferable. It's bad enough to take an old deck, shuffle the cards and sell it as a new game, but keeping the connection to the "prime" universe just really undermines it.

I'm glad they didn't do a "clean reboot". While it wouldn't have been as successful, I still think a straight prequel, if done right, could have worked. However, what they did was fine in my eyes. Plus, this way we can still get hints and glimpses of the pre-2233 Prime universe which I think is very cool.

BillJ wrote:

---

I thought the Enterprise-J timeline ceased to exist once the Sphere Builders were defeated?

That is assumed. However, the Sphere Builders have 400 years to get over their defeat by Enterprise, so it's posssible the timeline doesn't cease but is merely altered, and they find some way other than the spheres to transform our dimension.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ There is no way the Sphere Builders could rebuild the expanse to cover 1/4 of the galaxy like in the Ent-J timeline. That version of history assumed that work on the expanse began prior to ENT, and lasted continuously for 400+ years. Even if the Sphere Builders started over, as of the 24th century, it would take much longer for them to get it done.

(Assuming the Sphere Builders even survived the events of Zero Hour - which is hardly conclusive.)

Besides, now that it is widely known how to destroy the spheres, they wouldn't dare try again anyway.

[E-DUB]

My thinking has been that there was always an NX-01 captained by Jonathan Archer, even in the original (whatever that means in this context) timeline, but that is was named "The Dauntless".

[Ketrick]

Mr. Laser Beam wrote:

---

^ There is no way the Sphere Builders could rebuild the expanse to cover 1/4 of the galaxy like in the Ent-J timeline. That version of history assumed that work on the expanse began prior to ENT, and lasted continuously for 400+ years. Even if the Sphere Builders started over, as of the 24th century, it would take much longer for them to get it done.

(Assuming the Sphere Builders even survived the events of Zero Hour - which is hardly conclusive.)

Besides, now that it is widely known how to destroy the spheres, they wouldn't dare try again anyway.

You're right that it took the Sphere Builders a very long time to build up the expanse to the extent it was prior to the destruction of the sphere network. However, assuming they survived in their dimension (which I see no reason why they wouldn't have), there's no reason to think that over the time interval between the destruction of the expanse and the battle shown in "Azati Prime" that they couldn't develop a much faster method of transforming the galaxy without using spheres. Also, it's unlikely that they would attempt rebuilding the expanse in the same region of space. They'd probably choose a region of space away from Federation space in a distant part of the galaxy that wouldn't be noticed by them or the Xindi right away to begin transforming the galaxy again.

E-DUB wrote:

---

My thinking has been that there was always an NX-01 captained by Jonathan Archer, even in the original (whatever that means in this context) timeline, but that is was named "The Dauntless".

My thoughts are similar. Though, I wouldn't consider there to be a new timeline to have been created by the name change anymore than I think a new timeline was created by Commander Sisko taking Gabriel Bell's place and I don't think Dauntless was necessarily the original name (though it could be).

[E-DUB]

Changing the name would create a new timeline. Changing your socks would create a new timeline, from one where you didn't. The name change resulted from Picard and the Ent E being back in time for the events of "First Contact". This explains why the crew of Voyager, upon seeing the fake starship labled NX-01, Dauntless, didn't dismiss it as an obvious hoax. Voyager's crew and memory banks were unaffected by the change to the timeline because they themselves were temporarily absent from the "present" when the timeline changed as they were in the past dealing with Henry Starling. And speaking of Henry Starling, did all the advances in computer technology he introduced cause anything to change. We know that Janeway said "This was part of our past" but hey.................

[Mr. Laser Beam]

E-DUB wrote:

---

The name change resulted from Picard and the Ent E being back in time for the events of "First Contact".

That wasn't a change. That was always supposed to happen.

[Pavonis]

How can someone tell the difference between a predestination paradox and a timeline that was altered and/or subsequently restored to a "close-enough" condition? Seems to me the events depicted in the movie First Contact are a "close-enough" restoration of the original timeline and not necessarily a predestination paradox.

[Ketrick]

Pavonis wrote:

---

Seems to me the events depicted in the movie First Contact are a "close-enough" restoration of the original timeline and not necessarily a predestination paradox.

I agree with your assessment. Canonically, however, First Contact is a Pogo paradox, in other words, it's a causality loop, not a predestination paradox. Though, those events may have set up a predestination paradox at the end of "Regeneration".

[E-DUB]

True but the Borg were already back in time and could/would have sent their message to their DQ comrades at some point anyway once the whole Earth was assimilated, which might have taken some time given that they were starting with only the compliment of a sphere.

Starting with that small a contingent, assimilating an entire planet would not have gone quickly.

[Ketrick]

E-DUB wrote:

---

True but the Borg were already back in time and could/would have sent their message to their DQ comrades at some point anyway once the whole Earth was assimilated, which might have taken some time given that they were starting with only the compliment of a sphere.

Starting with that small a contingent, assimilating an entire planet would not have gone quickly.

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Please elaborate.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Pavonis wrote:

---

How can someone tell the difference between a predestination paradox and a timeline that was altered and/or subsequently restored to a "close-enough" condition? Seems to me the events depicted in the movie First Contact are a "close-enough" restoration of the original timeline and not necessarily a predestination paradox.

There's no way to prove it was not a predestination paradox, let's put it that way.