Hard Star Trek

[fireproof78]

I agree that nuBSG is not hard SF. However, in terms of space combat, they moved a tick or two from where the classic BSG space combat was, which was pretty much where Star Wars was, towards hard SF. They did this in terms of how the Vipers and other craft maneuvered, and in replacing the blasters with rounds of ammunition. It still wasn't hard, though.

By the way, just in brief reply to the above, Ancient Aliens works in BSG and nuBSG (it was part of the premise in classic BSG from the get-go), but seeding humanity after life began on Earth is several bridges too far for Star Trek, if not farther.

Yeah, I have to disagree with the Ancient Aliens not being in Star Trek. There was a whole episode of TNG called "The Chase" in which Humans, Romulans, Klingons and Cardassians discover an ancient race that seeded their races.

...which isn't Ancient Aliens at all.

By the way, I also wasn't speaking to the idea that aliens landed on Earth after primitive humans had already evolved and influenced culture. That has been done in Star Trek to great effect, at least twice: "Who Mourns for Adonais?" and "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth."

To clarify, I meant to be speaking very specifically against the idea that aliens seeded humans onto Earth as a species separate and distinct from all the other species that evolved on Earth (which was the idea actually under discussion). That's utterly ridiculous. It works in BSG but not Star Trek. And that's not at all what is revealed to have occurred in "The Chase."

The reason it doesn't work is because it contradicts the idea that humans evolved on Earth. In Star Trek, humans evolved on Earth. Period. Paragraph.

I misunderstood the argument, but the MA article is kind of ambiguous as well. The idea of the episode was a progenitor species that seeded life, and that they wanted various races of humanoids to evolve from that seeding.

HUMANOID: You're wondering who we are, why we have done this, how it has come that I stand before you, the image of a being from so long ago. Life evolved on my planet before all others in this part of the galaxy. We left our world, explored the stars, and found none like ourselves. Our civilisation thrived for ages, but what is the life of one race, compared to the vast stretches of cosmic time? We knew that one day we would be gone, that nothing of us would survive. So, we left you. Our scientists seeded the primordial oceans of many worlds, where life was in its infancy. The seed codes directed your evolution toward a physical form resembling ours. This body you see before you, which is, of course, shaped as yours is shaped, for you are the end result. The seed codes also contained this message, which we scattered in fragments on many different worlds. It was our hope that you would have to come together in fellowship and companionship to hear this message. And if you can see and hear me, our hope has been fulfilled. You are a monument, not to our greatness, but to our existence. That was our wish, that you too would know life, and would keep alive our memory. There is something of us in each of you, and so, something of you in each other. Remember us.

Since I have heard ancient alien theories that involve seeding all life on Earth, I do not see that as disparate. But, I'll admit that I misunderstood some things as well.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The aliens in "The Chase" did not interact with ancient humans. They were long dead by then. And the aliens in "The Chase" did not introduce the human species into the terrestrial biosphere after the other species on Earth had evolved.

 

[Autistoid]

I agree that nuBSG is not hard SF. However, in terms of space combat, they moved a tick or two from where the classic BSG space combat was, which was pretty much where Star Wars was, towards hard SF. They did this in terms of how the Vipers and other craft maneuvered, and in replacing the blasters with rounds of ammunition. It still wasn't hard, though.

By the way, just in brief reply to the above, Ancient Aliens works in BSG and nuBSG (it was part of the premise in classic BSG from the get-go), but seeding humanity after life began on Earth is several bridges too far for Star Trek, if not farther.

Yeah, I have to disagree with the Ancient Aliens not being in Star Trek. There was a whole episode of TNG called "The Chase" in which Humans, Romulans, Klingons and Cardassians discover an ancient race that seeded their races.

...which isn't Ancient Aliens at all.

By the way, I also wasn't speaking to the idea that aliens landed on Earth after primitive humans had already evolved and influenced culture. That has been done in Star Trek to great effect, at least twice: "Who Mourns for Adonais?" and "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth."

To clarify, I meant to be speaking very specifically against the idea that aliens seeded humans onto Earth as a species separate and distinct from all the other species that evolved on Earth (which was the idea actually under discussion). That's utterly ridiculous. It works in BSG but not Star Trek. And that's not at all what is revealed to have occurred in "The Chase."

The reason it doesn't work is because it contradicts the idea that humans evolved on Earth. In Star Trek, humans evolved on Earth. Period. Paragraph.

Well I prefer the idea that there were multiple stages of seeding.

First 4 billion years ago, 2nd the cambrian explosion and then around 65 million years ago.


But yes circumventing evolution entirely is dumb.

 

[fireproof78]

The aliens in "The Chase" did not interact with ancient humans. They were long dead by then. And the aliens in "The Chase" did not introduce the human species into the terrestrial biosphere after the other species on Earth had evolved.

Got it

I just find it interesting that human evolution was still manipulated but that apparently is ok.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Well, in all honesty, I found "The Chase" to be much less than OK! It's just not as bad as seeding humans. I don't think that either "Adonais?" or "Serpent's Tooth" were as bad as "The Chase."

To me, "The Chase" is drawn from the same well as the Klingon augments: the need to provide an in-universe explanation for what are essentially theatrical elements, in these cases the (understandable) use of human actors and the choice of Klingon make-up in TOS. I believe that these sorts of elements are way too self-indulgent to be broadly interesting. They're pretty good examples of the sorts of things to be avoided in future incarnations of Star Trek.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, in all honesty, I found "The Chase" to be much less than OK! It's just not as bad as seeding humans. I don't think that either "Adonais?" or "Serpent's Tooth" were as bad as "The Chase."

To me, "The Chase" is drawn from the same well as the Klingon augments: the need to provide an in-universe explanation for what are essentially theatrical elements, in these cases the (understandable) use of human actors and the choice of Klingon make-up in TOS. I believe that these sorts of elements are way too self-indulgent to be broadly interesting. They're pretty good examples of the sorts of things to be avoided in future incarnations of Star Trek.

Oh, I would put Adonais? above the Chase, hands down. The Chase feels forced in and unnecessary, save for having some amusing bits between Data and a Klingon.

But, I care so little for the evolutionary history within Star Trek that the Chase just gets pushed out of my memory

 

[T'Girl]

. And the aliens in "The Chase" did not introduce the human species into the terrestrial biosphere after the other species on Earth had evolved.

Return to Tomorrow suggests that's exactly how the Vulcan species arrived on Vulcan.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

. And the aliens in "The Chase" did not introduce the human species into the terrestrial biosphere after the other species on Earth had evolved.

Return to Tomorrow suggests that's exactly how the Vulcan species arrived on Vulcan.

Vulcans ≠ Humans.

And the episode doesn't go that far, in any case. Sargon concedes that he does not know for sure, and Spock at best only concedes that it's possible and thereby that it may also not be the case as well. As far as what "Return To Tomorrow" says about human evolution (with the passages about interstellar colonization and Vulcan prehistory) [transcript]:

KIRK: That's twice you've referred to us as my children.
SARGON: Because it is possible you are our descendants, Captain Kirk. Six thousand centuries ago, our vessels were colonising this galaxy, just as your own starships have now begun to explore that vastness. As you now leave your own seed on distant planets, so we left our seed behind us. Perhaps your own legends of an Adam and an Eve were two of our travellers.
MULHALL: Our beliefs and our studies indicate that life on our planet, Earth, evolved independently.
SPOCK: That would tend, however, to explain certain elements of Vulcan prehistory.
SARGON: In either case, I do not know. It was so long ago, and the records of our travels were lost in the cataclysm which we loosened upon ourselves.

 

[T'Girl]

Vulcans ≠ Humans.

Who said that Humans were the only possibiliy when it came to being visited/deposited by ancient astronauts.

How Sharper than a Serpent's Tooth would a classic example of ancient astronaut interaction.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Vulcans ≠ Humans.

Who said that Humans were the only possibiliy when it came to being visited/deposited by ancient astronauts.

No one said it was the only possibility, but that's what we were talking about, as per:

Secondly, I'm making the assumption that our seeds were swapped within the last 65 million years.

How Sharper than a Serpent's Tooth would a classic example of ancient astronaut interaction.

Mentioned:

By the way, I also wasn't speaking to the idea that aliens landed on Earth after primitive humans had already evolved and influenced culture. That has been done in Star Trek to great effect, at least twice: "Who Mourns for Adonais?" and "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth."

 

[BillJ]

Well, in all honesty, I found "The Chase" to be much less than OK! It's just not as bad as seeding humans. I don't think that either "Adonais?" or "Serpent's Tooth" were as bad as "The Chase."

To me, "The Chase" is drawn from the same well as the Klingon augments: the need to provide an in-universe explanation for what are essentially theatrical elements, in these cases the (understandable) use of human actors and the choice of Klingon make-up in TOS. I believe that these sorts of elements are way too self-indulgent to be broadly interesting. They're pretty good examples of the sorts of things to be avoided in future incarnations of Star Trek.

I tried to watch "The Chase" the other day and was bored out of my mind.

 

[Tim Walker]

First of all, the most important characteristic of Trek is an optimistic view of the future.

Second, heroes who boldly go..... (Even DS9 had this at first, with the first forays through the wormhole).

As for technology, some form of FTL travel is mandatory. You could have a good story set in our solar system, or even another system reached by Slow Boat. But this is too limiting for a series, especially Trek.

As for other technologies, you should first ask if they help tell good, character-centric stories.

Next, you should ask if the (good) story possibilities of a given tech have already been exhausted by Trek.

For example, are there any good stories left to be told with the holodeck?

 

[fireproof78]

First of all, the most important characteristic of Trek is an optimistic view of the future.

Second, heroes who boldly go..... (Even DS9 had this at first, with the first forays through the wormhole).

As for technology, some form of FTL travel is mandatory. You could have a good story set in our solar system, or even another system reached by Slow Boat. But this is too limiting for a series, especially Trek.

As for other technologies, you should first ask if they help tell good, character-centric stories.

Next, you should ask if the (good) story possibilities of a given tech have already been exhausted by Trek.

For example, are there any good stories left to be told with the holodeck?

No, no there is not.

Glad that was decided

 

[Tim Walker]

For example, are there any good stories left to be told with the holodeck?[/B]

No, no there is not.

Glad that was decided

TOS seemed to lack the holodeck, but told some good stories anyway.

An interesting technology, but not iconic.

 

[Tim Walker]

The premise isn't about physic powers, it's about reacting to unexplained phenom, in an exciting way that makes you think.

At no point are people gonna stop dealing with unknowns.

.

Sounds a little like the X Files.

There was a bit of unexplained phenomena in the first season of Lost. This could be intertwined with drama by being subtle.

 

[Tim Walker]

I think Trek moved a few ticks away from fantasy and towards hard sci-fi could be great. But I don't see any point in eliminating warp drive, transporters, deflectors, phasers, artificial gravity, inertial dampeners, and subspace. Take those things out, and it just doesn't have the right flavor.

You can keep artificial gravity and make it hard sci-fi by simply not designing the main ship like it's meant to sail on an ocean. You use cylinders, centrifuges or arrange the decks so that "down" is in the direction of the engines' thrust.

As for warp drive and subspace hyperdrive and hyperspace are faster. SG-1 proved it.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CentrifugalGravity

Shows the (internal) centrifuge from 2001: A Space Odysey. This was an impressive looking a set. (Basically an enclosed ferris wheel). However, I understand that it was a pain in the ass to film in.

The sequel, 2010, as well as Babylon 5 depicted ships with external sections that rotated. The ships looked very different from any Trek ship.

Simpler, of course, to assume another strategy. As I understand it, real gravity is a side effect, caused by the warping of space-time by the presence of matter. In the Trek shows I would assume that the artificial gravity (warping of space-time) is a spin off of the Warp Drive.

 

[Tim Walker]

Discussion of Quasi-Hard and Quasi-Soft science fiction, http://futurewarstories.blogspot.com/2012/01/fws-topics-hard-or-soft.html

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Vulcans ≠ Humans.

Who said that Humans were the only possibiliy when it came to being visited/deposited by ancient astronauts.

How Sharper than a Serpent's Tooth would a classic example of ancient astronaut interaction.

Plus The Paradise Syndrome has a kind of reverse of that what with aliens seeding another planet with a group of humans.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Vulcans ≠ Humans.

Who said that Humans were the only possibiliy when it came to being visited/deposited by ancient astronauts.

How Sharper than a Serpent's Tooth would a classic example of ancient astronaut interaction.

Plus The Paradise Syndrome has a kind of reverse of that what with aliens seeding another planet with a group of humans.

Yeah, I thought that the idea of the Preservers was pretty cool. Spock said that the Preservers accounted for a number of the humanoid races in the galaxy. Realistically, this is something that they should have noticed before. When you encounter beings on another planet with human anatomy, you should be wondering where the aliens are who transplanted some ancient humans there (while also duplicating at least a portion the Earth's biosphere). That's a perfectly fine hard sci-fi idea.

 

[fireproof78]

Discussion of Quasi-Hard and Quasi-Soft science fiction, http://futurewarstories.blogspot.com/2012/01/fws-topics-hard-or-soft.html

Great blog. One of my favorites for reading up on military scifi concepts and ideas.

Also, a site devoted more to hard scifi is Atomic Rockets which goes much more in to technical details of rocketry, physics and the like.

Can be pretty dense but I find it enjoyable