Starship Museums: why?
- Thread starter Admiral Jean-Luc Picard
- Start date
Yes, because I live in reality and Star Trek is fiction. I like science-fiction to do its best to line up with the real world. Like most, I can also overlook things that are necessary due to storytelling, budget, pacing, and just getting on with it. An example of this would be gravity, it's never explained, it never fails, but it's necessary, because budget.
Then your kinda missing the point of science-fiction.
The emphasis is on science, not fiction. If you want fiction, go watch Peter Pan and The Lord of the Rings. I generally prefer science-driven science-fiction.
Star Trek was always (1966-2005) been written by people who took science, technology, engineering very seriously and tried to aim for realism. The bullshit science and bullshit tech had to at the very least be believable at the time of the episode's broadcast or film's release.Then why are you watching Star Trek.
Since 2009, all of that got jettisoned.
Bullshit. Star Trek has never been remotely scientific. It is largely written by TV writers who would take the science parts and write "technobabble" in the scripts.
Roddenberry knew the story came first.
Everyone's got their own breaking point when it comes to suspension of disbelief and that's true for science-fiction and fantasy as well.
Moving Spacedock does seem like a real feat, so it does raise the question of how exactly they pulled that off. But I still think it's within Starfleet's abilities if they want it to happen badly enough. Most starbases stay put for their whole existence, unless they need to go visit a wormhole or they're secretly a jellyfish, but moving giant objects faster than light without them cracking open is a solved problem in the 24th century, at least at these scales.
Moving Spacedock does seem like a real feat, so it does raise the question of how exactly they pulled that off. But I still think it's within Starfleet's abilities if they want it to happen badly enough. Most starbases stay put for their whole existence, unless they need to go visit a wormhole or they're secretly a jellyfish, but moving giant objects faster than light without them cracking open is a solved problem in the 24th century, at least at these scales.
Honestly, we don't have any real proof of this. Starfleet could be moving starbases around all the time, for all we know.
***
For anyone interested, Star Trek: Picard does have a science advisor.
Erin Macdonald (science adviser)
Dr. Erin Macdonald is an astrophysicist, aerospace engineer, and science fiction consultant. She has served as the science adviser for the Star Trek franchise since 2019, and worked in this capacity on the third through fifth seasons of Star Trek: Discovery, the second and third seasons of Star...
memory-alpha.fandom.com
Fair enough, that was a total assumption.
Have you ever actually watched Star Trek?
I would absolutely love to know what has come about since 2009 that's so outlandishly unbelievable when compared to stuff from the previous years?
Have you ever actually watched Star Trek?
I would absolutely love to know what has come about since 2009 that's so outlandishly unbelievable when compared to stuff from the previous years?
We all know that the Genesis Device and Spock’s resurrection were totally scientific!
Maurice Hurley would disagree with you. There's an interview with him on TNG's 2nd season Blu-ray (might be S3) where he talks about his time working with Gene Roddenberry and how he knew what the Enterprise-D could and could not do and what everything did as if it were real and how episodes were written with this in mind.
Don't forget that flying around the sun really fast can cause time travel.
Apparently Mo Hurley is a pretty vile person, not sure I’d be leaning on him.
We've only seen a starbase moved once: DS9 via thrusters from Bajor to the wormhole. It simply moved across the solar system. The original purposes of the thrusters were to keep it from falling out of orbit, so they were pushed to the limits.
In PIC S3, there was no plot reason to move Spacedock. It could have just been another spacedock-style space station. It was a just because move.
What's that got to do with television production?Apparently Mo Hurley is a pretty vile person, not sure I’d be leaning on him.
What's that got to do with television production?
Ask Gates McFadden…
Dude, you need to warn people before posting such graphic content.
Have you ever actually watched Star Trek?
I would absolutely love to know what has come about since 2009 that's so outlandishly unbelievable when compared to stuff from the previous years?
Similar threads
