Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x12 - "Through the Valley of Shadows"

[Nerys Myk]

Right. I mean, it's not like TOS consulted with the RAND corporation or something. Uh-oh, wait, the Wayback Machine is jangling: What, Wayback? They did consult with RAND? Sure it wasn't Rand, as in Yeoman Janice and her Beehive Bonnet? No? Ok, it's coming through my earpiece and hooded viewer now: look, it's The Scientific American with a subtitle: "Fifty years after the original series premiere, it's still the gold standard of scientific accuracy, even with the occasional blunder."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-science-sticklers-who-kept-star-trek-in-line/

I believe GR consulted by post with Asimov too.

But no, those 60's writer producers didn't try to be somewhat scientifically accurate while at the same time making high quality tv.

Any article that quotes Marc Cushman is automatically suspect in my book.

The thing about advice, is you don't have to take it. As the article points out things did slip by the folks hired to give it. And like any piece of fiction Trek was happy to err on the side of drama.

 

[Gov Kodos]

My point is they were tryin', since someone asserted "Trek has never been very concerned with being in touching distance of any real science." This is not true.

It is true. They no more kept to science than those war vets kept Star Fleet to a military. Background and research provided a patina of verisimilitude but was never worried about for telling a story.

 

[Alan Roi]

My point is they were tryin', since someone asserted "Trek has never been very concerned with being in touching distance of any real science." This is not true. These were 1960s war vets and writers attempting to do science fiction. Props to them.

I agree with the criticism of magic blood, though there might be science in there, b/c of Khan's genetics. "Red matter" rubs me the wrong way jsut b/c it sounds goofy to my ears; though I know there is dark matter in real life. So it goes.

Kubrick was very concerned. John Sturges was very concerned. As far as Star Trek turned out, I'd suggest mild concern at the most.

 

[SolarisOne]

I'm beginning to wonder if this discussion is going to last until the next episode airs.

 

[Mr Awe]

Perhaps you should just think of them as Chroniton Crystals then?

The funny thing for me is the captions don't suit my state of mind, as I often think as 'This isn't the Trek I'm loyal to" but give it an 8 exactly because of that reason.

That was my thought. Time crystals are basically chroniton emitters.

 

[fireproof78]

My point is they were tryin', since someone asserted "Trek has never been very concerned with being in touching distance of any real science." This is not true. These were 1960s war vets and writers attempting to do science fiction. Props to them.

I agree with the criticism of magic blood, though there might be science in there, b/c of Khan's genetics. "Red matter" rubs me the wrong way jsut b/c it sounds goofy to my ears; though I know there is dark matter in real life. So it goes.

Yes, mad props to them. Robert Heinlein used to sit around the table with his wife and due escape trajectory equations for many of his books as well. Now, I'm sure there are writers who still do that, but that isn't what Star Trek has been for a bit. So, to my mind, it is unreasonable to expect this scientific accuracy that has not been a part of Trek since early TNG.

As for the Khan's blood bit, I'll just disagree. Khan's blood is more plausible based upon current scientific knowledge than transporters. The unfortunate label of "magic blood" ignores actual blood therapies utilized in the real world.

Red matter just generates an artificial singularity, something the Romulans have done since TNG.

Again, it's no more and no less, plausible fake science than other parts of Trek.

 

[Noname Given]

Elitist my [eye]. Trek made its name by being better than the junk that came before it, and some of the best stuff I like about it come out of the efforts it’s made in that way. Look around you — other fans feel the same. You just called it “junk” too. Stand by that and maybe you’ll see less of it. Hell, that’s why TVs gotten better over time — more “sophisticated” audiences.

As someone who has watched Star Trek since the 1960ies; you couldn't be more wrong.

Yes Star Trek was less of a science fantasy then the Irwin Allen fare of that time (stuff like Lost In Space, Time Tunnel, etc.) but it was still considered fluff from the literary science fiction crowd (They're the ones who started the term "Trekkie" as a derogatory term when Trek fans (and actors) started showing up at Science Fiction Conventions.

Also Star Trek at the time didn't have the same level of general audience and critic respect of the anthology science fiction/fantasy shows like the Twilight Zone or even One Step Beyond.

During it's Network run, TOS was near the bottom of the ratings and was NEVER considered anything near 'hard' science fiction.

Still (unlike TNG and it definitely shows as TNG was often more 1980ies style drama... just IN SPACE...) TOS did occasionally get a script from an actual literary science fiction author (like Theodore Sturgeon) - but again, no it wasn't anywhere near hard science fiction or very scientifically accurate.

You sound like someone who believes the BS Gene Roddenberry liked to spread about all Star Trek's firsts (that really weren't firsts but fans like yourself who want to believe Star Trek and it's fans are special/unique).

Now I have enjoyed Star Trek for 50+ years, but in the end, it's not some super special philosophy, nor scientifically accurate. It's primarily entertainment, with occasionally decent writing.

 

[Harpsichord]

Come on, wasn't one of the first Trek scripts ever written about how traveling through the galactic barrier(?) amplifies latent ESP(??) in a couple crew members and they become gods(???)

Maybe they hadn't hired the science advisors yet

 

[fireproof78]

Now I have enjoyed Star Trek for 50+ years, but in the end, it's not some super special philosophy, nor scientifically accurate. It's primarily entertainment, with occasionally decent writing.

Yup. It's entertainment...I heard that from someone, somewhere. Something in a writer's bible about entertaining so many people weekly...can't place my finger on it...

 

[WarpFactorZ]

Not going to parse 42 pages of posts, but I'm curious if someone has posted screen caps of Pike's Delta radiation accident and his beep-beep chair?

 

[fireproof78]

Not going to parse 42 pages of posts, but I'm curious if someone has posted screen caps of Pike's Delta radiation accident and his beep-beep chair?

https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/sta...alley-of-shadows.299085/page-35#post-12885496

 

[rahullak]

I'm beginning to wonder if this discussion is going to last until the next episode airs.

That's the general idea.

 

[Gov Kodos]

That's the general idea.

At least till the next series airs when Discovery will have been sanctified.

 

[SolarisOne]

At least till the next series airs when Discovery will have been sanctified.

 

[cooleddie74]

I'm beginning to wonder if this discussion is going to last until the next episode airs.

There wouldn't be a TrekBBS if that sort of thing didn't happen.

 

[Nerys Myk]

People are still posting last two episodes. threads

 

[cooleddie74]

Some people still necro threads about episodes and films from years ago.

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

So, when Worf visited Boreth between Generations and Way of the Warrior for awhile... was Alexander with him?
Maybe Klingons don‘t normally mature from 7 to 18+ within 1-2 years after all.

Would also explain, why old Alexander from the future knew how to time travel...

 

[Cyrus]

Not going to parse 42 pages of posts, but I'm curious if someone has posted screen caps of Pike's Delta radiation accident and his beep-beep chair?

https://scifanatic-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/dsc-212-pikechair.jpg

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Very little improvement in terms of 'science' in science fiction TV has been applied over the past 50 years. Most 'real' science continues to be molded to what fits with whatever story is being written not the other way around, just as Trek always has done. The last TV series I saw that actual adhered to hard science was Star Cops in 1987. Even The Expanse doesn't actually pay more lipservice than Babylon 5 did 25 years ago and offers up its on "magic molecule" to move the plot along.

Any real improvements science fiction TV of late is on the fiction end of things, not in their overall improved adherence to current science of the day. Every science fiction series today fudges their science to serve their stories.

Yes, absolutely, because this is fiction, and telling an entertaining story is the top priority. Everything else is less important, whether we like it or not. I for one don't care too much about bad science as long as the story makes sense and entertains me and as long as I can empathise with the characters. That doesn't mean that writers shouldn't do research or just make shit up all the time. It does mean that sometimes, reality gets in the way of storytelling.