Orci on Start Trek, timelines, canon and everything (SPOILERS)

[3D Master]

For example, in TNG's "Yesterday's Enterprise," it depicted the original timeline where the Federation was at war with the Klingons; Picard's decision to send the Enterprise-C back in time to save a Klingon outpost created the alternate timeline that we see in every other TNG episode, where Worf serves in Starfleet and the Klingons are allies.

No, it depicted the original timeline being the timeline where the Klingons are at peace with the Federation, and time travel event of the Enterprise-C coming to the future at a critical moment CHANGING that timeline into a timeline where the Federation and Klingons are at war with one another. They then send the Enterprise-C back in time to COMPLETE what it originally was going to do, which CHANGED the timeline BACK to its original peaceful self.

It however, did NOT create a parallel universe.

You are thinking in terms of chronology rather than causality.

Causality does not matter; a cause of something, can lie in the future.

The "original" timeline is defined as what would happen if the past is NOT changed

Something WAS changed the moment the Enterprise-C came through that rift. You can SEE the change happen in the beginning of the episode. There's the timeline that we've been following for 2 seasons where there is peace between the Klingons and the Federation. THAT timeline got CHANGED, the moment the rift formed and the Enterprise-C came through. You see, if there was no change, if the Enterprise-C always went through that rift, the cause of it lying in the past, then for 2 seasons we would have been following a show where the Federation is at war with the Klingons, and at the beginning of this episode we would have seen NOTHING of the timeline where the Federation is at peace and are allies with the Klingons, we would have seen ONLY the war timeline.

-- i.e., events in the past cause events in the present, which cause events in the future.

Don't forget that events in the future can cause events in the present, which could cause events both in the future and further in the past.

In Star Trek, the anti-time rift for example. And Voyager's little run in with themselves trapped in a singularity.

And in real life the possibility of: positrons - anti-matter. Yes, if you look at positrons and anti-matter in a certain way, and follow the math, it would seem they are nothing but their matter counterparts moving backward through time.

Thus, the event that caused a positron to be created, the cause, lies in the FUTURE, the effect is that a positron is present now, and it disappears back in the past anihilating in the event that created its accompanying electron and only SEEMED to have created the positron.

Causality therefor, is a moot point, unless you know EXACTLY ALL the causal relationships, which gets us to below.

In "Yesterday's Enterprise," the battle with the Romulans caused photon torpedoes to be fired. The explosion of the torpedoes caused a spatial rift to form. The rift caused the Enterprise-C to disappear. This is the only possible chain of causality in the "original" timeline.

No, it is NOT the only possible chain of causality, in fact the fact that there was a timeline where there was peace between the Klingons and the Federation that got erased because the E-C traveled to the future tells us for a certain fact that that is NOT the chain of causality.

Indeed; when has the detonation of photon torpedoes before or since against enemy shields caused a temperal rift? It seems more than likely that something ELSE was in the mix than just torpedoes and their detonation. Something, like particles moving backward through time, that has its origin, its cause in the FUTURE; namely the peaceful time future. These things colliding with the energies of detonating photon torpedoes; which caused a rift, which caused the E-C to be taken to the future, while it NEVER DID in the original timeline.

(Of course, this is not the only explanation, there are fanfics out there, where the E-C rift was created by 30th century Temperal Cold War, as another attempt to wipe out the Federation.)

Anyway; as I said, unless you KNOW the exact causal relationships, every exact detail, you cannot talk about what came first or didn't, and IT DOESN'T MATTER. The only thing that matters, is that there was a peaceful timeline where the E-C got destroyed, this got changed because the E-C ended up in the future - there was time travel, and the time line got changed. We don't need to know any more.

The timeline is changed when the Enterprise-C, with Lt. Yar aboard, comes back from the future and saves the Klingon outpost. There was NO "original" timeline where the Enterprise-C DIDN'T disappear into the rift.

Yes, there WAS, because if there was NOT, we would not have been following that time line for 2 seasons, and the beginning of the episode wouldn't have been able to show that timeline getting changed.

<snip> Repeat that's already been explained.

 

[BillJ]

No, it depicted the original timeline being the timeline where the Klingons are at peace with the Federation, and time travel event of the Enterprise-C coming to the future at a critical moment CHANGING that timeline into a timeline where the Federation and Klingons are at war with one another. They then send the Enterprise-C back in time to COMPLETE what it originally was going to do, which CHANGED the timeline BACK to its original peaceful self.

It however, did NOT create a parallel universe.

You are thinking in terms of chronology rather than causality.

Causality does not matter; a cause of something, can lie in the future.



Something WAS changed the moment the Enterprise-C came through that rift. You can SEE the change happen in the beginning of the episode. There's the timeline that we've been following for 2 seasons where there is peace between the Klingons and the Federation. THAT timeline got CHANGED, the moment the rift formed and the Enterprise-C came through. You see, if there was no change, if the Enterprise-C always went through that rift, the cause of it lying in the past, then for 2 seasons we would have been following a show where the Federation is at war with the Klingons, and at the beginning of this episode we would have seen NOTHING of the timeline where the Federation is at peace and are allies with the Klingons, we would have seen ONLY the war timeline.



Don't forget that events in the future can cause events in the present, which could cause events both in the future and further in the past.

In Star Trek, the anti-time rift for example. And Voyager's little run in with themselves trapped in a singularity.

And in real life the possibility of: positrons - anti-matter. Yes, if you look at positrons and anti-matter in a certain way, and follow the math, it would seem they are nothing but their matter counterparts moving backward through time.

Thus, the event that caused a positron to be created, the cause, lies in the FUTURE, the effect is that a positron is present now, and it disappears back in the past anihilating in the event that created its accompanying electron and only SEEMED to have created the positron.

Causality therefor, is a moot point, unless you know EXACTLY ALL the causal relationships, which gets us to below.

In "Yesterday's Enterprise," the battle with the Romulans caused photon torpedoes to be fired. The explosion of the torpedoes caused a spatial rift to form. The rift caused the Enterprise-C to disappear. This is the only possible chain of causality in the "original" timeline.

No, it is NOT the only possible chain of causality, in fact the fact that there was a timeline where there was peace between the Klingons and the Federation that got erased because the E-C traveled to the future tells us for a certain fact that that is NOT the chain of causality.

Indeed; when has the detonation of photon torpedoes before or since against enemy shields caused a temperal rift? It seems more than likely that something ELSE was in the mix than just torpedoes and their detonation. Something, like particles moving backward through time, that has its origin, its cause in the FUTURE; namely the peaceful time future. These things colliding with the energies of detonating photon torpedoes; which caused a rift, which caused the E-C to be taken to the future, while it NEVER DID in the original timeline.

(Of course, this is not the only explanation, there are fanfics out there, where the E-C rift was created by 30th century Temperal Cold War, as another attempt to wipe out the Federation.)

Anyway; as I said, unless you KNOW the exact causal relationships, every exact detail, you cannot talk about what came first or didn't, and IT DOESN'T MATTER. The only thing that matters, is that there was a peaceful timeline where the E-C got destroyed, this got changed because the E-C ended up in the future - there was time travel, and the time line got changed. We don't need to know any more.

The timeline is changed when the Enterprise-C, with Lt. Yar aboard, comes back from the future and saves the Klingon outpost. There was NO "original" timeline where the Enterprise-C DIDN'T disappear into the rift.

Yes, there WAS, because if there was NOT, we would not have been following that time line for 2 seasons, and the beginning of the episode wouldn't have been able to show that timeline getting changed.

<snip> Repeat that's already been explained.

You said it with much greater clarity than I could.

 

[trekkerguy]

Oh I can't wait till someone with more patience to write up a response on all this wakes up...

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

These long posts are interesting from an esoteric-quantum-theory-causality paradox standpoint (seriously, I usually love this kind of stuff).

However, we are digging too deeply into the details of the on-screen scince fiction when it comes to this film. Yeah -- I know, the science fiction we see on screen should have some basis in fact -- and I agree with that -- SOME basis. I think what Orci has said so far does have SOME basis in known scientific theories.

But digging too deeply into the details of alternate realities to try and reconcile every detail of this plot point this with actual scientific theories will fail, just like trying to reconcile every detail of Star Trek's version of transporters and warp drive with science fact will also fail.

 

[Qonos]

The transporters were always the one thing that kept me grounded in the fact that this was just a tv show. I mean how do your break down memories and the soul and transpor them and put them back together. How do you not kill a living being by converting them to energy.

Remember the Transporter was invented as a means for the Crew to get planet side because they didn't have the budget for a shuttle set, initially...

 

[trekkerguy]

The transporters were always the one thing that kept me grounded in the fact that this was just a tv show. I mean how do your break down memories and the soul and transpor them and put them back together. How do you not kill a living being by converting them to energy.

Remember the Transporter was invented as a means for the Crew to get planet side because they didn't have the budget for a shuttle set, initially...

I don't think they were considering the soul(in whatever format you believe it to exist) and memories aren't TOO far fetched as they are essentialy patterns recorded in our brains I am sure those are accounted for when they scan your pattern into the buffer.

Just a thought.

In any case, my Trek would involve alot more Shuttlecraft simply cause they're kewler.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

^
^^ ...at the risk of turning this into a transporter tech thread, which is NOT my intention..

I never really had a problem with the transporter tech...the "soul and memory" stuff doesn't bother me since if I am totally recreated atom by atom, I would think I would still have the same memories (since memories are just chemical reactions and brain cells -- if you recreate the chemicals and cells, you recreate my memories)

But how in the hell would I -- IN REALITY -- ever be recreated someplace else atom-by-atom...THAT'S the big issue. Star Trek can't really explain that adequately, just like I don't think all of this talk of alternate universes could EVER be reconciled with the current theories on quantum mechanics and alternate universes.

...and they don't need to be. It's just a movie. If there is just a little basis in sciece fact, that's enough.

 

[Qonos]

The transporters were always the one thing that kept me grounded in the fact that this was just a tv show. I mean how do your break down memories and the soul and transpor them and put them back together. How do you not kill a living being by converting them to energy.

Remember the Transporter was invented as a means for the Crew to get planet side because they didn't have the budget for a shuttle set, initially...

I don't think they were considering the soul(in whatever format you believe it to exist) and memories aren't TOO far fetched as they are essentialy patterns recorded in our brains I am sure those are accounted for when they scan your pattern into the buffer.

Just a thought.

In any case, my Trek would involve alot more Shuttlecraft simply cause they're kewler.

Well the thing is though the fact that it's so far fetched I think is one of the reasons they have people working on how it COULD work

 

[trekkerguy]

Well the thing is though the fact that it's so far fetched I think is one of the reasons they have people working on how it COULD work

Another example of Trek Tech inspiring real scientific work.

 

[3D Master]

We can already do it with light - photons. It's only a matter of time before we can do it with matter particles.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

We can already do it with light - photons. It's only a matter of time before we can do it with matter particles.

Yes, there is some science fact to back up the fiction...


and to wrap this talk of transporters all up with the topic of this thread:

Since Star Trek's version of transporter tech cannot be completely explained now, but has some basis in science, why can't we just accept that the alternate timelines in this film, as long as it has some basis in science, even if their are problems with reconciling the details of the fiction with science.

 

[3D Master]

Because I have no interest in looking at an alternate timeline or quantum reality. There was no need for it, so I have no interest in it.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

^
^^ and that's fine.

It just seemed to me that some people had problems with the "alternate timeline" plot device from a scientific standpoint rather than from a dramatic standpoint.

(or even using the science to try to invalidate the dramatic plot point)

 

[Qonos]

Because I have no interest in looking at an alternate timeline or quantum reality. There was no need for it, so I have no interest in it.

Fair enough

 

[Captain X]

Yes.



Because that diminishes it. We're reduced now to just any old comic that gets rewritten every time an author comes along who think he knows better.

Star Trek used to be something grander, something more, something practically majestic. Something better than all the other rebooted, crisis-changed, retconned whatnots.



This new one, isn't recognizable as that, new diminishing story or not.



Not THE best thing, but it's one of them, yes.

All opinion, no fact.

Nothing new here.

And the same can be said for any of you. If that doesn't just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, there's nothing that will, unless of course you eat a kitten.

 

[xortex]

If they're gonna reference TOS like crazy in this film why was it too hard to keep the characters consistant.

 

[xortex]

Also TOS doesn't need Orci to keep it's cannon alive. It's doing very nicely, thank you very much. I believe it's on every sunday night where I'm at for 40 years now.

 

[number6]

All opinion, no fact.

Nothing new here.

And the same can be said for any of you. If that doesn't just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, there's nothing that will, unless of course you eat a kitten.

I'm not the one writing paragraphs on what the film "should" be. I don't eat kittens, I eat puppies. More fiber.

 

[Captain X]

No, you write short guttoral responses as to why anyone criticizing the movie isn't really a Star Trek fan.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

^
^^ maybe that's what got Scotty in trouble