RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,113
Posts: 5,400,572
Members: 24,744
Currently online: 421
Newest member: Ohwowmelody

TrekToday headlines

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25


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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 14 2013, 05:35 PM   #61
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

I thought he said, "I'm gonna kill me a Scotsman!"
__________________
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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2013, 05:51 PM   #62
SalvorHardin
Rear Admiral
 
SalvorHardin's Avatar
 
Location: Star's End
View SalvorHardin's Twitter Profile
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

He said cheeeeese!
__________________

SalvorHardin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15 2013, 01:34 AM   #63
Dale Sams
Fleet Captain
 
Dale Sams's Avatar
 
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

King Daniel wrote: View Post
Captain59 wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
This is the Holy Bible of Star Trek time travel. It takes dozens of seemingly incompatible time travel Treks over 45 years and makes it seem as if they all function as part of a single system with a consistent set of rules. It explains a lot of the TCW, exposes Future Guy...
Braga recently revealed that Future Guy was an older Jonathan Archer. Does the book identify him as someone else?
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...
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.
Dale Sams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15 2013, 03:05 AM   #64
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Dale Sams wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
Captain59 wrote: View Post

Braga recently revealed that Future Guy was an older Jonathan Archer. Does the book identify him as someone else?
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...
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,
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 3 2013, 02:38 PM   #65
Ketrick
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Maryland
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

R. Star wrote: View Post
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: View Post
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.
Ketrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 3 2013, 07:26 PM   #66
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

^ 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.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Mr. Laser Beam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 3 2013, 07:49 PM   #67
E-DUB
Captain
 
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

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".
E-DUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 3 2013, 09:31 PM   #68
Ketrick
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Maryland
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
^ 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: View Post
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).

Last edited by Ketrick; February 3 2013 at 09:45 PM.
Ketrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 3 2013, 10:16 PM   #69
E-DUB
Captain
 
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

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.................
E-DUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 3 2013, 10:58 PM   #70
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

E-DUB wrote: View Post
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.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Mr. Laser Beam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 3 2013, 11:31 PM   #71
Pavonis
Commodore
 
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

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.
Pavonis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 4 2013, 01:05 AM   #72
Ketrick
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Maryland
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Pavonis wrote: View Post
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".

Last edited by Ketrick; February 4 2013 at 01:16 AM.
Ketrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 4 2013, 02:38 AM   #73
E-DUB
Captain
 
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

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.
E-DUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 4 2013, 02:55 AM   #74
Ketrick
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Maryland
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

E-DUB wrote: View Post
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.
Ketrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 4 2013, 04:50 AM   #75
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Pavonis wrote: View Post
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.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Mr. Laser Beam is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 06:59 AM.

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