Was the historical problem with City/Forever ever addressed?

...But change just a few variables, and Japan could easily have occupied Hawaii with that sortie. The resources were there, included as part of the very operation even - Japan just squandered them. A reckless idiot like Hitler would have put all the eggs in one basket and pelted the enemy with them to total submission, such as with his gambles on the Netherlands, or Norway, or Crete. Yet for Japan, mere bombarding of the battleships was gamble enough.

Russia in turn could have fallen simply if Stalin had a rare sober day and sensibly evacuated from Moscow when the Germans approached; a drunken speech on patriotic defense turned an entire nation at a key moment.

There are many ways to give victory to underdogs in the mid-20th century big fight; simply changing the schedule by just a couple of years would work wonders in many cases, and Keeler is a plausible ingredient in such changes. There are fewer ways to give enduring victory to nations that cannot match the production capabilities of the US and the USSR and do not possess comparable resources within their own secure national borders for the whole length of the conflict. But nobody speaks of endurance in the episode. Germans probably simply made a mess of Earth and rendered it incapable of playing the role it needed to play in getting the UFP founded. Kirk merely had his starship vanish - he didn't get it mysteriously replaced by Reichssternenschiff Bismarck, its all-Aryan crew on a mission to bombard new worlds and destroy new civilizations so that swastika flags could be planted in the ruins.

The question Shawnster brought up is an interesting one: how much of Spock's report on alternate history is speculation? Supposedly, Spock would have searched the Guardian visuals up and down when hoping to isolate the timeline-changing event; his research ought to have turned up solid facts on the subjects be mentions, such as the use of A-bombs at the tips of V-2s specifically, or Germany "capturing" the world. Would he have settled for spotting the timeline-twister event (by luck, early on in the search) and then leaving the following alternate history to mere speculation?

Timo Saloniemi

 

IIRC, one of Harlan Ellison's early drafts had Kirk and the landing party beaming back up to find themselves not on the familiar Enterprise, but on a pirate-like vessel named the Condor as a result of the altered timeline.

 

^That was the finished first draft that Ellison himself submitted to the WGA for consideration. It is included in his book, along with his screed against Gene Roddenberry's very existence.

Harlan Ellison has long been a very, very bitter man.

 

The embargo on oil and rubber the U.S. instituted against Japan after their invasion of China was a reactively modest factor in the Pearl Harbor attack and one that has been way overblown in its role of Japan deciding to attack.
The Japanese had decided years before to establish an order patterned after the British empire encompassing most of Southeast Asia and a majority of the pacific including Australia. The Japanese realized the only country that could and eventually would try to stop their plans was the United States, specifically the U.S. Pacific Fleet and it would have to be dealt with sooner or later. The embargo may have sped up their plans a bit, but Pearl Harbor was coming sooner or later and nothing was going to stop it.
It wasn't going to be delayed very long either. In Dec 1941 Japan had an advantage in number of fleet carriers and number and quality of battleships in the pacific and a superior fighter and torpedo plane.

These advantages were not going to last long though. The U.S. was getting the Essex carrier program rolling. 5 were already in early stages of construction by December 7th. The USS North Carolina, America's first new battleship in 20 years had just been commissioned and 9 others were in various stages of construction. The last four being the Iowa class which was a rival to the Yamato super battleships Japan was just finishing. the corsair and hellcat, both superior to the zero were in development, as was the avenger a FAR superior torpedo plane to the obsolete devestators the navy had.

All but the most fervent Japanese senior officers knew that once US production got cranked up Japan had no chance of keeping up. Yamamoto was especially aware of this fact having spent years in America and seeing its industry firsthand.
December 1941 was pushing it as it was. The only reason they probably didn't attack sooner was they felt they needed six carriers to pull off the attack on PH and their two newest fleet carriers Shokaku and Zuikaku were brand new and the ships and pilots had to be worked up. Otherwise the attack might have happened months earlier. Another six months or so into 1942 to attack would have greatly lessened the time in advantages in weapons they possessed over America

 

My assumption is that a more passive United States doesn't attempt to butt heads with Japan in the late 1930s. For whatever reason the Second London Treaty happens and the Americans do not start rearming regardless of what Japan is doing. The following year after Japan invades China, the US does basically nothing, the money from the oil sales to Japan help fuel the depression era economy (I guess). The final bit is that the Pacific Fleet does not move to Hawaii, but stays in California.

If this string of events happens, the US, while still a potental threat to Japan's goals in Asia, is not a dire threat. The US is not preventing Japan from its continued pushes in to China. This lack of prevention means that Japan does not need to extent to the Dutch East Indies or Southeast Asia at this time. Nor do they need to worry too much about the US Philippines. The US Pacific islands are not fortified. The US Fleet almost entirely across the Ocean in California. They are not a clear and present threat to anything Japan is doing in China. Attacking Pearl Harbor, at that point, is a waste of resources.

If the Americans somehow do go to war with Japan, they will not have the new battleships and carriers because they aren't gearing up for war (pacifist movement remember). Japan can relax while pounding through China. If the Americans come, they will follow Plan Orange, which really fits the Japanese idea of the Decisive Battle perfectly. They will get their slugging match with cover from their six plus fleet carriers, and any US ships sunk will stay sunk this time.

Basically the easist way for Edith Keeler's movement or ideology to effect the US entry into the War is to prevent to US from aggitating Japan. No aggitation, the Japanese have less reason to go to war with the Americans at that time. No Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor in 1941, no sneak attack on December 7th. They aren't going to send the fleet all the way to California to sneak an attack at San Diego. That is just too far to go as there is nothing between Hawaii and California. Just open ocean, one of the West Coast's best sources of protection.

 

It is only a slight exaggeration to say every German scientist defected to help the Manhattan Project between 1930 (well, 1933) and 1941.

 

Agreed. If Japan eventually decided to take over the Philippines, that might well overcome any US pacifist movement, but without the urgent oil demand that timetable could be set well back as required in the episode.

On a minor note, the US Fleet battleships and carriers (except for Ranger I think) were homeported at San Pedro. The Battle Force cruisers (the old Omaha class and Brooklyn and St Louis CLs) and destroyers were at San Diego, while the Scouting Force cruisers (most of the CAs) were at Pedro.

 

Mt grandfather was at Pearl on 12/7/41. When he got stationed there my grandmother back in southern Illinois was so happy he was going somewhere so far away from the action...nothing would happen way out in Hawaii.

His ship, a cruiser named the USS Helena was berthed right next to the Arizona. The Helena was 'sunk' but was on patrol near Australia not too long after that. I think it only 'stayed sunk' for a few weeks.

When the Helena was torpedoed the only thing that saved my grandfather was a fortunate closing of a random hatch. This caused the blast to go right around him as it was following the path of least resistance.

 

The longer the timeframe the larger the butterfly-effect. So you have to look at all the possible causes and effects from 1930 onward. Something seemingly small becomes more significant over time. Spock doesn't fill us in on all of the difference in the timeline, so you can use your imagination on what tilted the deck in favor of the axis.

 

Agreed. Historians will never settle the question of what happened on Earth in McCoy's alternate timeline. It's too complicated.

But this board seems to have a pretty deep bench, intellectually. Whatever comes up (STEM, history, the humanities...), we can get quite a conversation.

 

I respect that your grandfather served well in such times. Mine did as well, though they were both Army (one was with the Flying Tigers in India and Burma later in the war as a parchute packer, with the other stayed stationed in Oregan due to having Meningitis for a year. A great uncle served under Patton in Africa and Italy as a major.

I would say that the information on USS Helena is partly incorrect, though to a sailor inside a ship that is flooding might not see it that way. USS Helena was docked where USS Pennsylvania (fleet flagship) would normally be docked (Pennsylvania was in drydock on December 7th instead of her usual spot). That is across from Battleship Row closest to USS California on that day, near the drydocks. USS Helena was torpedoed by one toropedo bomber. The rest pulled off once they recognized that she wasn't a primary target (Pennsylvania). Helena's damage control crews kept her afloat. They did realized she was pretty baddly damaged while trying to get her mobile just five hours after the battle started. This had stressed the engines to much. They put her in dock for a few week at Pearl then send her back to California for more extensive repairs and a refit for better radar and the like. She was back after six or so months. 34 sailors died that day onboard. However she did not sink that day. A year and a half later at the Battle of Kula Gulf was where she finally went down.

My assumption of if Keeler's pacifist movement influences US politics enough, then USS Helena probably wouldn't have been built as she was a newer ship built in the later half of the 1930s. But then without the US being a clear and present danger to the Empire of Japan's movements in China (nor cutting off trade of oil and rubber), the Japanese would not have a dire reason to attack the Americans, nor would the Pacific fleet be out in Hawaii (they'd still be in California with a small force with the Asiatic Fleet in the Philippines).

Thus delaying the US entry into World War II, as it would have to be based on something Germany did instead of a direct attack by Japan starting the war for the Americans.

 

I'm liking the suggestion that Keeler met then-Governor Roosevelt. They maintained contact through his election and she may have even been invited to join his cabinet or at least be an adviser.

Keeler's influence of the next ten years results in in Roosevelt delaying the start of the Manhattan Project. Perhaps Roosvelt vetoes the entire idea of developing nuclear weapons. Further, the peace movement pushes the United States toward an even more isolationist nature, resulting in their non-interference in Japan's war efforts.

The result of all this is the United States avoids being attacked on Dec. 7, 1941. The United States does not enter World War II until it is inevitable, some time in 1942 or 1943. This delay, coupled with the lack of any US atomic development, results in Germany building the first atomic bomb. German V2 rockets bomb London and maybe a Soviet city, possibly Lenningrad.

The world surrenders to the Nazi powers and the rest is history.

 

Or it could have been something as simple as no Lend/Lease and no Arsenal of Democracy. Without US industry keeping them alive and fighting both the UK and the USSR would have folded. Even Stalin admitted that without US production the war would have been lost.

 

That takes us to the reasons why Hitler declared war to the US when it did. Nobody really knows what went on in that weird head of his, but certainly he had been itching to take the US out of the Atlantic equation, and the Pearl Harbor attack presented him with the perfect moment. Yet if there was no US support to Britain, Hitler would be less motivated even in those timelines where the Japanese did attack; consequently, the US might fight a "Pacific first" war and a few years later suddenly find itself losing to the Atlantic enemy.

...Except in Star Trek, where it seems to dampen out pretty quickly.

Or then it dampens out within the first fifty years or so, but still manages to wreak havoc in the initial decade. I know, sounds contradictory - but what I mean is that if the core meddling with the past is minor (take a few whales, fight a little fight with the Borg), then after fifty years the same people will still be born. Yet if it is major (Nazis take over the planet), the magical dampening effect is still there and the ancestors of Jim Kirk are born, but they are born to a world significantly changed. And most of the time-travel adventures fall in the first category (minor core alteration), but not this one.

Timo Saloniemi

 

Agreed, and for technical reasons. The idea is discussed in the episode:

If Columbus hadn't made his voyage, someone else would have. There were many others with the same idea, and lots of compelling reasons to make such a voyage. (All of this is beside the historical and archaeological evidence that many others—all the way back to the Solutreans—may have "discovered" the Americas before Columbus.) What about the United States? That also may have happened, but due to other people, again for common political, economic and philosophical reasons. Or perhaps the "rift" in history would have closed by the time of the American colonies, and a city in Ohio would have a different name, but everything else the same.

The point is, butterflies are not bullets fired out of a gun, where off-the-mark by a tiny bit means missing the target by a wide margin over a greater distance. Any "noise" in the air currents caused by the butterfly would be swamped by larger "trends." Compare that one butterfly against all the other, more massive and influential forces in the world. Pushing your finger into the current at one side of the river does not produce a protuberance of water on the other side, nor does it alter the course of the river.

Geeks love the idea, though—that history is precarious and delicately balanced and looking at it funny will destroy the universe!

​

Edward Lorenz named the butterfly effect after restarting a computerized weather model halfway through, and rounding off the starting numbers at that point. Anyone who has done particle effects in 3D animation is familiar with the problem. Computers have different CPUs that round off numbers in different ways. So the numbers for a particle sequence are calculated ahead of time, known as "baking," so that there will be no discontinuities in the final rendering (even if the scene includes butterflies). Baking is needed even for identical computers (or the same computer restarted later). The pre-calculated list is then divided up into "batches" so that many computers can be used to render a single scene.

There is also a statistical fallacy in the idea. Lorenz's weather model had pre-defined factors to be calculated, and nothing else to dampen the model if it "changed direction." This is like focusing on a pre-established group that looks interesting, then declaring incredibly high odds at the end of the "study."

There are no ballistic butterflies (unless you're cyber-warrior Gally in the manga series GUNNM.)

 

I don't believe you've understood what's interesting about Lorenz's work.

He was running numerical simulations of a perfectly deterministic system, and he'd wanted to re-run a sequence he found interesting. He had to start the simulation using a rounded-off version of the numbers describing the system at that point. In an nicely behaved, normal system that isn't a problem: starting from a slightly different point would be expected to produce an error, but that error would be expected to stay reasonably small for a good while, and to grow in fairly sedate ways.

But what Lorenz found was that this tiny round-off error produced wildly different results, almost immediately, and far faster than would match an intuitive sense for how deterministic systems ought to behave.

This was the numerical discovery, or rediscovery, of some astounding work from the late 1890s and early 1900's by Henri Poincare. Poincare found that it's not difficult to develop mechanical systems that are perfectly deterministic, perfectly predictable in principle, but which are unpredictable in practice because even infinitesimally tiny errors between what we think the system is and what it actually is will dominate the behavior of the system in short order. It's astounding work, particularly since it seems to challenge what the idea of a deterministic system even is.

 

The guys on Mythbusters learned this when they bought two pickup trucks of the same make, model and year to perform an experiment with gas mileage. They eventually discovered they couldn't use different trucks for each half of the experiment, but rather had to perform the test twice with the same truck, as the performance was too dissimilar between them. They came to the separate conclusion that even two trucks from the same assembly line, built one right after the other, would be so filled with minor differences in construction tolerances that testing them against each other would give them nothing more than the difference between the two vehicles.

 

I'm wondering if the mirror universe could have been created by the events of McCoy saving Edith Keeler? He saves her in the street when he first arrives in 1930 but later on Kirk and Spock correct it for our universe but not for the other? And instead of a benevolent Federation here they get a militaristic corrupt empire? Think about it?
JB

 

Only if Keeler were evil and lesbian. Would the incident be enough to trigger that?

I don't believe in any sort of "divergence" between the regular and mirror brands of the Trek pseudohistory. The latter isn't a timeline where different choices were made - it's a universe where people who carry the evil gene live a life differently from how our heroes, devoid of such a gene, would have lived it. In the mirror universe, the very first protozoa betrayed and backstabbed each other, and instead of sexual reproduction, they discovered bisexual reproduction!

Timo Saloniemi