RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,498
Posts: 5,511,095
Members: 25,134
Currently online: 467
Newest member: Taelon

TrekToday headlines

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17


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 I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 10 2012, 12:01 PM   #16
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The Genesis Sunrise

The "at least one more" idea doesn't explain where the original Regula star would go: all the Genesis action is within spitting distance of Regula the star and Regula the rock, so the Genesis planet ought to have two stars on its sky if another one somehow was created, or emerged when the nebula was dispersed.

The simplest assumption is that we're seeing one and the same star all the time. And quite possibly the Genesis planet is also the Regula rock, simply transformed by Genesis exactly as the designers intended. Not only is the distance right, but the nearby horizon suggests the size is the same as well.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2012, 09:08 PM   #17
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: The Genesis Sunrise

SonicRanger wrote: View Post
Nebulae are usually star-forming areas. The nebula easily could have had at least one star.

Or it was really a protoplanetary nebula around a sun.
I had always just figured the Genesis thing accelerated the nebula star creating process and popped out a star. Why not? The rest of it's pretty much technobabble magic too.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12 2012, 12:31 PM   #18
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The Genesis Sunrise

The two big problems with that have been discussed frequently...

1) The Genesis technology wasn't flexible. It was designed to turn a dead planet into a living one, not to turn a nebula into a star, and even its creators could not "cram another byte into it". It must have been struggling already with being detonated so far away from any planets; it would be rather logical to assume that the Genesis planet only emerged when the effect hit the preexisting planet Regula.

2) New stars don't explain what happened to the old one. A crippled starship won't get far enough at low impulse speed to hide the preexisting star from view.

Here's a bonus one:

3) The planet was a failure, and apparently began to spin out of control and perhaps even break apart when we last saw it. The star didn't show signs of corresponding failure, though; could it be a Genesis product in that case? Granted, Spock didn't explode, either...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12 2012, 04:43 PM   #19
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: The Genesis Sunrise

With respect to #1, how do we know how flexible the Genesis technology was? We know what it was "designed" to do, but any computer programmer will tell you that just because something's designed to behave a certain way doesn't mean that you'll get the expected results. I'll grant your point that they'd apparently hit some sort of limitation, but perhaps they hit that limitation precisely because they were trying to keep Genesis adaptable.

With regards to point #3, as there've been at least two theories for why the Genesis planet failed (protomatter, the target being a nebula rather than an existing planet), and, as you pointed out, Spock continued to survive, perhaps the failure point would impact a planet but not a star.
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago 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 01:14 AM.

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