The Romulan Supernova: The final, canon word

[Noname Given]

As I said before, in its day, Star Trek was closer to "hard" SF than anything else on TV. Everything else was pure fantasy and often painfully science-illiterate. Star Trek actually consulted with real scientists and engineers, and though they often chose to ignore the scientists' advice in favor of a more fanciful approach, it was always an informed choice rather than the lazy ignorance of its contemporaries and successors. I doubt you can find anything in 1960s, 1970s, or 1980s SFTV that's anywhere near as credible as Star Trek was at the time. Well, maybe the 1988 series Probe, which was co-created by Isaac Asimov, but that lasted all of 8 episodes.

Part of the reason Star Trek was so compelling to so many people when other SFTV shows fell by the wayside is that it was the only SF future on TV that felt even remotely close to plausible. So when people today dismiss it as being just as fanciful as its contemporaries, or even worse, they're misunderstanding why it was so important and special for its time. The only reason today's shows have surpassed it is because they built on the foundations it laid. In its day, nothing else even came close to its level of believability, even with all the liberties it took.

I'm going to disagree with you a bit here as sorry, I know a lot of fans like to think (and I too used to think) STAR TREK was the first and only 'mature' science fiction show out there (and when you compare it to the other really popular Irwin Allan series like Lost In Space, The Time Tunnel Land of the Giants and occasionally Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea although Voyage was more an action/adventure show when it started); you'd be right.

But, when you consider what original The Twilight Zone did when it occasionally branched onto a Science Fiction story; as well as the original The Outer Limits, which honestly had a number of fantastical, but seemingly plausible stories like The Galaxy Being, or The Architects of Fear.

And if you want something from the 1980ies in the U.S. - the very first V (1983) miniseries (not any of the later mini series or other stuff after).

But yeah, while Star Trek was good (hell TOS is my favorite Star Trek series to this day); and yes, it did occasionally ground itself in 'hard' science. The examples I give above also often rose to the same level as Star Trek in terms of more mature sophisticated (for TV) science fiction as well. TOS owes A LOT to The Twilight Zone as many of the same writers had crafted stores for BOTH shows.

 

[Christopher]

Heh ... technically, PICARD must be "Fan Fiction" also, since it was written by a HUGE Trek Fan ... Michael Chabon.

Lots of professional Trek writers are fans, but when we're writing contracted, paid work for hire, we're not writing it as fans, we're writing it as professionals. "Fan fiction" means something written purely out of fandom, something done as a recreational activity. If a fan gets hired and contracted and paid to write fiction in a franchise they're a fan of, then it's not fan fiction anymore, it's professional work. Lots of people are fans of the things they do professionally, but it's still an actual job.

I'm going to disagree with you a bit here as sorry, I know a lot of fans like to think (and I too used to think) STAR TREK was the first and only 'mature' science fiction show out there...

But, when you consider what original The Twilight Zone did when it occasionally branched onto a Science Fiction story; as well as the original The Outer Limits, which honestly had a number of fantastical, but seemingly plausible stories like The Galaxy Being, or The Architects of Fear.

This is a total non sequitur. The question isn't the maturity of the show, purely its scientific credibility. TTZ and TOL were both quite fanciful, even in their science fiction episodes.

And if you want something from the 1980ies in the U.S. - the very first V (1983) miniseries (not any of the later mini series or other stuff after).

Are you kidding me? The science in V was atrocious. Humanoid lizard aliens that can look human by wearing Mission: Impossible masks. Coming from Sirius, a star way too young and hot to support life-bearing planets. Needing to come to Earth to steal our water, even though they could've easily gotten vastly more water from the cometary cloud of their own system, let alone ours. V was an effective allegory for fascism, but its scientific literacy was in the basement, even before we got to the inanities of the sequels.

 

[fireproof78]

The side canon was that it was the Hobus star went nova. It was so massive that it breached subspace and traveled through that. Hence why it was able to reach Romulus in a shorter time. It was also said to be a threat to the whole galaxy.

More interesting that way, but a nova is a nova. I can live with either one.

I just prefer the comic to Picard's explanation.

It just didn't make sense to me. I'm no astrophysicist, but the idea of another star in the galaxy going supernova and being an immediate threat to destroy a nearby starsystem is ridiculous, which is how it is portrayed. The idea that the supernova could threaten all life in the galaxy is also crazy.

Now, is it as crazy as lamp entities having love with Dr. Crusher or Warp 10 salamanders? Perhaps....perhaps not. But it's definitely wonky.

Now...again....to be clear- I don't care. Star Trek is my favorite franchise, and as such, I am tolerant of a lot of stupid stuff that makes no sense. The use of the supernova doesn't detract from my enjoyment at all. But I do roll my eyes at it.

Yeah, it doesn't even breach my top 10 list of wonky stuff in Trek.

 

[Noname Given]

This is a total non sequitur. The question isn't the maturity of the show, purely its scientific credibility. TTZ and TOL were both quite fanciful, even in their science fiction episodes.

Oh please they were no more 'fanciful' than A LOT of TOS episodes.

Are you kidding me? The science in V was atrocious. Humanoid lizard aliens that can look human by wearing Mission: Impossible masks. Coming from Sirius, a star way too young and hot to support life-bearing planets. Needing to come to Earth to steal our water, even though they could've easily gotten vastly more water from the cometary cloud of their own system, let alone ours. V was an effective allegory for fascism, but its scientific literacy was in the basement, even before we got to the inanities of the sequels.

Again, if you want top argue the various scientific implausibilities and ridiculous elements in many a Star Trek (TOS) episode; we could be here the next year. Overall, the way first contact was conducted by the U.N. and other elements were very plausible.

 

[Longinus]

I just prefer the comic to Picard's explanation.

You prefer ludicrous bollocks to scientific realism? Well, not a surprise really...

 

[fireproof78]

You prefer ludicrous bollocks to scientific realism? Well, not a surprise really...

Scientific realism? ESP, omnipotent god like beings, planet building technology, thought as the basis of reality and soul transfer.

I work with scientific realism daily. I don't need it in my entertainment to. Can we save the sniping please?

 

[Longinus]

Scientific realism? ESP, omnipotent god like beings, planet building technology, thought as the basis of reality and soul transfer.

I work with scientific realism daily. I don't need it in my entertainment to. Can we save the sniping please?

I meant the supernova. Scifi needs a certain amount of fanciful elements sure, and Star Trek has its fair share of them. But more than is necessary shouldn't be added. Real stellar phenomena are actually fascinating, and I'm sure now that Betelgeuse's possible demise has been in news, even more people than normally are interested in supernovae. It is just stupid to make up some ludicrous nonsense when a real phenomenon suffices just fine for plot purposes. Using real phenomena grounds the fantastic to the reality. That is the difference between science fiction and pure fantasy.

 

[Cake]

Even if they had 100,000 ships that could hold 1,000 each thats only 100 million. When you have a population in the billions its just not possible.

I don't think you need so many ships. The ships could do numerous trips in the years the Romulans must have known of the sun's fate to get people out of the danger zone. A natural supernova doesn't occur without a long forewarning. And they still haven't said anything about foul play, that the supernova happened suddenly.

Not to mention I am not so sure if Romulus really had a huge population like Earth. I mean they are descendants of a group of Vulcans who left that planet in the 4th century so about 2000 years before and we have no sign that Romulans breed like rabbits. They are a long lived species and don't seem to get a huge amount of children per woman. And they were never particular peaceful people, too, so must have lost people to war over the years. The 900 million they mentioned in PIC might have been the number of the whole population living on Romulus. Maybe only Romulans who had already lived on colony worlds before survived in the end.

Hopefully we will get more information in upcoming episodes about how many Romulans died and what the population of their home planet was. And also about how many Romulans are still alive somewhere. Are they an endangered species now like they said about Vulcans in the Kelvin timeline or is their population so high that they will easily recover with time.

 

[fireproof78]

I meant the supernova. Scifi needs a certain amount of fanciful elements sure, and Star Trek has its fair share of them. But more than is necessary shouldn't be added. Real stellar phenomena are actually fascinating, and I'm sure now that Betelgeuse's possible demise has been in news, even more people than normally are interested in supernovae. It is just stupid to make up some ludicrous nonsense when a real phenomenon suffices just fine for plot purposes. Using real phenomena grounds the fantastic to the reality. That is the difference between science fiction and pure fantasy.

Fair enough. I enjoy the more fanciful elements, but supernova are fascinating in their own right. If they actually portrayed it then it might be more interesting, but since I can get the real world science from my news feed I like a mix of fanciful elements.

And, I just like the idea of a hypernova exploding through subspace. Its interesting to me.

 

[Christopher]

More interesting that way, but a nova is a nova.

A supernova is not a nova, though. It's a misnomer from before it was understood that novae and supernovae are different phenomena. A nova is a periodic flareup on a binary star -- pretty much exactly what was shown in TNG: "Evolution" (one of the best examples of good science in Trek -- their depiction of a periodic nova star was so good you could use it in a science class). A supernova is the destruction of a star. The only connection is that a Type I supernova is what happens when a binary nova star finally blows up so big that there's nothing left. But a Type II supernova, the kind that a single star would have, is a completely unrelated process.

Again, if you want top argue the various scientific implausibilities and ridiculous elements in many a Star Trek (TOS) episode; we could be here the next year.

The point is that it's relative. Yes, TOS got a lot of science wrong. But it was just about the only show in its day that even tried to get anything right. It wasn't great, but everything else was much, much worse.

I was a kid in the '70s and '80s who loved science and hard science fiction. And Star Trek was pretty much the only sci-fi show on TV back then that didn't make me wince with its utter stupidity and ignorance. It got enough science right that I could forgive the parts it fudged or got wrong. Nothing else got anything right at all. Hell, ST was practically the only show that even understood there was such a thing as the speed of light, that you needed some kind of special drive to travel between stars instead of just using a rocket or drifting there on the Moon. It was the only show that understood that different galaxies were a huge distance apart, rather than right next to each other like crossing a state line. Even that minimum level of literacy was exceptional for its day.

On a scale of 1 to 10, if 10 is the hardest hard-SF ever (so The Expanse is something like an 8.5) and 1 is pure fantasy, then TOS may have been maybe a 4 and TNG a 5 at its best, but pretty much all their contemporaries were way down around 1.

 

[fireproof78]

A supernova is not a nova, though. It's a misnomer from before it was understood that novae and supernovae are different phenomena. A nova is a periodic flareup on a binary star -- pretty much exactly what was shown in TNG: "Evolution" (one of the best examples of good science in Trek -- their depiction of a periodic nova star was so good you could use it in a science class). A supernova is the destruction of a star. The only connection is that a Type I supernova is what happens when a binary nova star finally blows up so big that there's nothing left. But a Type II supernova, the kind that a single star would have, is a completely unrelated process.

And this is why I love Christopher.

 

[Longinus]

A nova is a periodic flareup on a binary star -- pretty much exactly what was shown in TNG: "Evolution" (one of the best examples of good science in Trek -- their depiction of a periodic nova star was so good you could use it in a science class).

And this is the sort of thing I love and I want to see more. Real astrophysics are actually hella cool, and they should use that whenever possible.

 

[fireproof78]

And this is the sort of thing I love and I want to see more. Real astrophysics are actually hella cool, and they should use that whenever possible.

Perhaps you are right...

 

[Noname Given]

The point is that it's relative. Yes, TOS got a lot of science wrong. But it was just about the only show in its day that even tried to get anything right. It wasn't great, but everything else was much, much worse.

^^^
Except that's a load of crap TOS rarely got all the science right and ignored a lot of science of a regular basis (such as zero relativistic effects on anyone when not at warp but near C) - and I GAVE example of various original Outer Limits episodes that show this, but I'm going to end here because there's no discussing anything with you because you're 'always right' in your mind. (Which is why I won't bother with Twilight Zone Examples because why waste the time.)

 

[Christopher]

Except that's a load of crap TOS rarely got all the science right

I never said "all." I thought I made that extremely clear. You're becoming insulting and abusive for no reason, and I have no interest in continuing this.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Good point. The Picard producers didn't think this through.

Or perhaps they didn't overthink it.

I've seen it mentioned that the Attack on Mars is supposed to happen 2 years before the Supernova. That would put it in 2385.

Is this canon and how was it established?

Children of Mars?

 

[fireproof78]

Or perhaps they didn't overthink it.

No. They don't have the time to agonize over every screen like we do.

 

[yenny]

In the script of Star Trek 09 and the book base on it, doesn't mention the name of the star that went supernova.
The book mention that the Federation was mining in vicinity of a nearby star unexpectedly went supernova. Meaning the star already went supernova.
Spock promised the Romulans he will save their planet.
Then he returned to Vulcan and asked the science academy and the Federation to take immediate action.
Later with the new ship and the red matter, he was in route to the supernova, when the rate of propagation from the supernova accelerated at a speed that had never been recorded before for that type of star, destroying the Romulus star system.

 

[Vyrsace]

"Remembrance" establishes that it was the Romulan sun itself that went supernova, with no mention of Hobus, or a chain reaction, or it expanding faster-than-light as the original Countdown comic or Star Trek Online: The Needs of the Many previously established. Picard left the Enterprise to head up a rescue mission that would save 900,000 Romulans but it all fell apart after the Synths destroy Mars.

900,000? More like 900,000,000

 

[dinzy]

While, I doubt the writers intended Spock's "threaten the galaxy" to mean political destabilization, it looks like we can 'retcon' it to mean just that. It really makes no sense that a supernova could destroy multiple systems, unless they were extremely close. If the radiation is the cause, that would take years to reach other planets and could conceivably be blocked by some kind of starfleet magic or everyone could evacuate.