The Prime Universe....no more.

[startrekwatcher]

Parallel universe, alternate reality and alternate timeline for all intents and purposes in XI are the same thing.

(Incidentally, it's kind of funny how Parallels was written by none other than Brannon Braga! And I think that episode was one of the inspirations behind the new film's writers' and director's decision to create a whole new timeline, as well as their whole rationalization behind it. It's really true: All roads do indeed lead back to Brannon Braga! So if you don't like the new film, here's yet something else to lay at the poor guy's feet! )

Yes, for all the crap Brannon takes he actually has done some good episodes that other sci-fi series have copied. X-Files, SG-1 and Supernatural copied his "Cause and Effect". Lindelof and Cuse freely admit that "All Good Things..." inspired them with season five. Also I'd point out that the Xindi arc on ENT was one of, if not the first, tv shows that adopted the puzzle approach style of shows like Lost and Heroes. Brannon was also the first to attempt a season long arc where time travel was heavily at play something we saw with Lost and Heroes season one and T:SCC.

 

[seniorsleuth]

There is NO evidence that Spock Prime has developed new memories. He clearly advises both young Kirk and young Spock based on his original memories. If he developed new memories, so would Nero, and young Spock clearly makes the point that Nero will be unable to predict or know what's going to happen because of the altered timeline.

Besides, Spock Prime is proof that the original timeline exists. He lived it. As long as stories can still be told within that timeline, it exists as much as it ever did.

 

[anothertrekfan]

You forced my hand:

LINK

Very nice, but what about when the Voyager crew and the DS9 crew and the original crew in ST IV and..... I have a headache now.

 

[Peter the Younger]

You forced my hand:

LINK

Very nice, but what about when the Voyager crew and the DS9 crew and the original crew in ST IV and..... I have a headache now.

Simple. They didn't understand how time travel really works. No violation.

 

[Jayson]

This is not a parallel universe. They went back in time and changed it to where the future has been altered. You fail to realize that Abrams did not want to go into that direction and just made it that simple "Nero from the future, goes back in time and alters the future". It is that simple. The Prime Universe has been destroyed.

There is a difference between a parrallal universe a divergent universe. A divergent universe doesn't become a parrallal universe until something creates it to diverge. That is why Spock is acurate in saying he changed the past. The difference is in this case a divergent timline was created as oposed to a altered timeline. It's only altered in a sense that this new alternate universe won't play out like the universe in which it was created from. The example i keep using that people should look at is Riker and Thomas Riker. They were one and the same until the transporter accident. They then became seperate individuals. The Abramsverse and the Primeverw3 were one and the same until Nero and Spock showed up and split it into two different halves. I will say that movie could have been more clear on this but I can understand how casual fans wouldn't understand this type of logic. The divergent timeline theory still hasn't become something most people think about when it comes to time travel.

Jason

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Taking Trek backwards was not the way to go.

$284,000,0000 worldwide box office in less than three weeks says that you're as wrong as you could get.

You can now take your Trek DVDs and box them in the attic...

That would be stupid, as I just watched a couple of TOS episodes last week. The attic would be very inconvenient.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

You forced my hand:

LINK

Very nice, but what about when the Voyager crew and the DS9 crew and the original crew in ST IV and..... I have a headache now.

Simple. They didn't understand how time travel really works. No violation.

Basically every time timetravel took place we started watching it from the point of view of each new universe. So technically Trek XI isn't the first time we've seen a new universe, we've seen countless throughout Trek. For example Janeway going back in time to bring voyager home early created a new universe but the one she came from still exists.
Another point I should make is that when the Ent-E helped cochrane and then went back to the future they once again created a new timeline. I missed that part off my graph thingy just to make it easier to understand.

 

[Ptrope]

Please!! I have heard this "make it accessible to a new audience" line way to long. Star Trek has been on TV for 40 years. A total of 10 movies and 5 series. It has been broadcasted daily around the world. People today buy DVDs of entire TV shows. They have access to the internet etc. I am sorry but if someone wanted to get into Trek it is pretty easy to do.

Abrams has wiped away all of TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY.

The idea that you still "owne it on DVD" is silly. All that you now know of Trek is now gone. For those that say the writers had too many "obsticles" I say "Manny Coto" didn't have a problem with it for the last season of ENT (which was the best of that series). So for all the people that followed Trek, you just got kicked in the stomach. You will never see another story/movie about previous Trek again. To sit back and say "we can see Khan again" in the next movie or something from the TOS series is pretty limited thinking. I mean is that it? Is Trek done? Now we just rehash the last 40 years again with minor changes? The idea of "new adventures" is basically over.

As for "Marvel and DC". Sorry but that is not a valid example. It is two different companies which have set up their own stories/characters. Just as you do not hear "Darth Vader" say "damn you Kirk".

I'd say you've got an abnormally limited view of 'alternate reality' for someone frequenting a sci-fi related board. Why so adamant that everything has been wiped away (unless you've got real-world proof, in which case you're either going to be fabulously wealthy or quickly killed to steal/silence your secrets )?

The Trek we 'know' no longer exists in the timeline shown in the film - that doesn't in any way establish that an alternate reality doesn't exist in which it does, one in which Nero either never came back or in which his actions were always part of the normal flow of the timeline (maybe he didn't attack Kelvin, or maybe it was as simple as George Kirk not being on it at the time, Kelvin destroyed Narada, no one ever knew it was Romulan, and we're right back to J.T. on the bridge of a Jefferies-designed Enterprise).

Although reading many fans' suggestions for ideas to move AbramsTrek forward, not to mention all the wishlists for ENT that entailed "let's see how [insert Trek Encyclopedia entry here] came about!" I tend to agree that the idea of "new adventures" is basically over; all the better reason to not listen to the fans, frankly.

I'm sure you're completely and absolutely wrong about there being no more stories in the original Trek universe, however; CBS/Paramount/Pocket Books have a reasonably lucrative print franchise going, and it's unlikely that will change - they'll add stories in the AbramsTrek universe, but the classic stuff with Trek, New Frontiers, etc. will still be published as long as people are buying. And as long as new stories are being written, that original 'reality' exists. Not to mention all the semi-pro fan productions that are built on the foundations of Star Trek - I don't see New Voyages becoming New New Voyages.

The postulated concepts of alternate realities, including ones created as time travel causes branch points, argue pretty strongly that you're wrong; there's plenty of room in all the universes/realities for the different versions to coexist and even continue to grow.

 

[anothertrekfan]

Very nice, but what about when the Voyager crew and the DS9 crew and the original crew in ST IV and..... I have a headache now.

Simple. They didn't understand how time travel really works. No violation.

Basically every time timetravel took place we started watching it from the point of view of each new universe. So technically Trek XI isn't the first time we've seen a new universe, we've seen countless throughout Trek. For example Janeway going back in time to bring voyager home early created a new universe but the one she came from still exists.

I understand this theory and I could actually get on board with it, but what about episodes like "City on the Edge of Forever"? The timeline shouldn't have changed around them if this theory held true. They simply would have witnessed McCoy disappear but nothing would have changed.

 

[Jeyl]

Alternate reality, different timeline. Doesn't matter. NuKirk is still a jerk and he's going to be crammed down our eye sockets till we declare him a worser character than Neelix.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Simple. They didn't understand how time travel really works. No violation.

Basically every time timetravel took place we started watching it from the point of view of each new universe. So technically Trek XI isn't the first time we've seen a new universe, we've seen countless throughout Trek. For example Janeway going back in time to bring voyager home early created a new universe but the one she came from still exists.

I understand this theory and I could actually get on board with it, but what about episodes like "City on the Edge of Forever"? The timeline shouldn't have changed around them if this theory held true. They simply would have witnessed McCoy disappear but nothing would have changed.

Something to do with the Guardian of Forever I would imagine. Had special abilities, we couldn't possibly fathom it's capabiltities with our puny human minds. I imagine the Guardian of Forever exists in all universes as one entity simultaneously and that had something to do with it.
I'd have to watch the episode again but i'm sure I could come up with a viable explanation

 

[Dar70]

Very nice, but what about when the Voyager crew and the DS9 crew and the original crew in ST IV and..... I have a headache now.

Simple. They didn't understand how time travel really works. No violation.

Basically every time timetravel took place we started watching it from the point of view of each new universe. So technically Trek XI isn't the first time we've seen a new universe, we've seen countless throughout Trek. For example Janeway going back in time to bring voyager home early created a new universe but the one she came from still exists.
Another point I should make is that when the Ent-E helped cochrane and then went back to the future they once again created a new timeline. I missed that part off my graph thingy just to make it easier to understand.

BS. This is NOT what the writers originally intended, It was always assumed and implied in the episodes that we were watching the same people after they fixed the events in the timeline. Yes the past had altered events now but the flow was still one timeline. Everyone now is saying we have watched branched off timelines all this time because Abrahms movie does this. I dont buy it. Whats the fricking point of watching a tv show if we have followed different sets of characters all this time. That means we have seen at least 3 diffrent TOS crews, 3 or 4 tng crews and a few Voyager crews and god knows how many enterprise crews.

This whole timeline mess that Abrahms has put us in is why I refuse to watch anymore nuT He has screwed it up for everyone. He should have just restarted the whole thing. I would have gone for that. But nooooooooo he had to tie it in to the original Treks. This is the biggest headache since the klingon Bump/smoothy debate. To me Trek is now only the series and movies before nuT. nuT is watered down Trek.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

BS. This is NOT what the writers originally intended, It was always assumed and implied in the episodes that we were watching the same people after they fixed the events in the timeline. Yes the past had altered events now but the flow was still one timeline. Everyone now is saying we have watched branched off timelines all this time because Abrahms movie does this. I dont buy it. Whats the fricking point of watching a tv show if we have followed different sets of characters all this time. That means we have seen at least 3 diffrent TOS crews, 3 or 4 tng crews and a few Voyuager crews and god knows how many enterprise crews.

Altering the way time travel works in Trek really doesn't cause any problems, you just have to change the way you look at it and it still works out fine.

 

[anothertrekfan]

Basically every time timetravel took place we started watching it from the point of view of each new universe. So technically Trek XI isn't the first time we've seen a new universe, we've seen countless throughout Trek. For example Janeway going back in time to bring voyager home early created a new universe but the one she came from still exists.

I understand this theory and I could actually get on board with it, but what about episodes like "City on the Edge of Forever"? The timeline shouldn't have changed around them if this theory held true. They simply would have witnessed McCoy disappear but nothing would have changed.

Something to do with the Guardian of Forever I would imagine. Had special abilities, we couldn't possibly fathom it's capabiltities with our puny human minds.

I think I see what you're saying... In this particular instance the device itself erased history in the prime universe instead of creating a new universe and so the same could be said in other various episodes that the way the crew traveled back in time would determine whether or not it created an alternate reality. Interesting. I may need to think about rewriting my signature... I have a migraine now.

 

[Dar70]

BS. This is NOT what the writers originally intended, It was always assumed and implied in the episodes that we were watching the same people after they fixed the events in the timeline. Yes the past had altered events now but the flow was still one timeline. Everyone now is saying we have watched branched off timelines all this time because Abrahms movie does this. I dont buy it. Whats the fricking point of watching a tv show if we have followed different sets of characters all this time. That means we have seen at least 3 diffrent TOS crews, 3 or 4 tng crews and a few Voyuager crews and god knows how many enterprise crews.

Altering the way time travel works in Trek really doesn't cause any problems, you just have to change the way you look at it and it still works out fine.

I understand that. But I dont want to think of it as all different branched timelines. This is what Abrahms Trek is trying to do. Its trying to rewrite the way many of the time travel stories in Trek have worked. Yes Trek hasnt always been consistant in the ways timetravel has worked. BUT to me anyways its always implied we have been watching the same crews all these years.(Ok except for the episode of voyager when the crew was split in two.)

 

[anothertrekfan]

BS. This is NOT what the writers originally intended, It was always assumed and implied in the episodes that we were watching the same people after they fixed the events in the timeline. Yes the past had altered events now but the flow was still one timeline. Everyone now is saying we have watched branched off timelines all this time because Abrahms movie does this. I dont buy it. Whats the fricking point of watching a tv show if we have followed different sets of characters all this time. That means we have seen at least 3 diffrent TOS crews, 3 or 4 tng crews and a few Voyuager crews and god knows how many enterprise crews.

Altering the way time travel works in Trek really doesn't cause any problems, you just have to change the way you look at it and it still works out fine.

I understand that. But I dont want to think of it as all different branched timelines. This is what Abrahms Trek is trying to do. Its trying to rewrite the way many of the time travel stories in Trek have worked. Yes Trek hasnt always been consistant in the ways timetravel has worked. BUT to me anyways its always implied we have been watching the same crews all these years.(Ok except for the episode of voyager when the crew was split in two.)

That episode really made my head spin!

 

[All Seeing Eye]

BUT to me anyways its always implied we have been watching the same crews all these years

Whether time travel creates a new universe or just over writes the existing one it's still going to be the same crew and a different crew at the same time because even if the same timeline is written over like you believe it should be, the changes have technically created a new crew because how the timeline originally panned out has now ceased to exist and a new one has been put in its place.

So it makes no difference. Rather than have the original re-written over each time they time travelled just have it seperated.
It'd be like writing out a CV (universe) and saving it, then you make some changes, rather than save it over your old save just save it as a new file, either way it's a new document (crew).

 

[Jerikka Dawn]

The only person who can make a distinction between an "altered timeline" and an "alternate universe" is someone who has physically moved to an alternate timeline due to changes made to the one he or she is used to living in and witnessing those changes.

As far as Spock and Nero are concerned --- yes the timeline has been "altered" -- from their point of view, because their point of view is that of someone who existed in the original timeline and is now existing in a different timeline. From the point of view of those of us on the outside (which happens to be the only objective vantage point), it is an alternate reality.

The semantics arguments over "timeline" "universe" and "reality" are nonsensical because within the context of time travel, they mean the same thing.

Yes, in First Contact, the Borg "altered" history, but only because Picard and crew were protected by the temporal wake and able to witness the "change". What actually happened was that they crossed over to this "alternate timeline" by virtue of that protection.

The only real reason to go back and "fix the timeline" is, in reality, to get yourself back to your own timeline or a close approximation of it.

The "Prime" timeline is not destroyed. We've simply changed our vantage point just like in every other time travel episode.

Incidentally, for proof that Bermanverse Trek really didn't make any sense about time travel most of the time, one only needs to watch the Voyager episode "Relativity" ... really --- collecting all of the Captain Braxton's and "reintegrating" them? Come on.

I think it's a safe bet to go with the JJVerse interpretation of how time travel works since it, in fact, makes the most sense within both the context of the storyline and with current theories of time travel in the real world.

As far as I'm concerned, every time in the original show when someone said "correct the timeline", they were really saying, "go back and change things so that we ourselves can move ourselves back to a timeline that we're more comfortable with." There's no difference from the perspective of the character.

The episode "Parallels" and Data's explanation in that episode, while not being a "time travel" episode, did a great deal to clarify how time travel actually works because it specifically addressed the concept of multiple branching realities based on decisions, choices, and outcomes. Going back in time and changing history is inextricably linked to this concept.

Ergo :
Since an alternate reality is created every time you make a choice, then the simple act of appearing in the past has created an alternate timeline. You cannot get around this without declaring "Parallels" non-canon.

 

[Cdr MacDuff]

The writers have been pretty clear. The nuTrek is an alternate parallel timeline.

 

[Cyke101]

I feel like we could have the 25th Century versions of TNG/DS9/VOY casts hop over to meet Pine and company, a fully detailed explanation about how there are two timelines, that Vulcan is still alive and well in the Prime universe...

...and someone would still bring up this debate, sheesh.

I love this stubbornness that says there's no more prime universe, despite the fact that the writers, the director, the company, and Spock himself say there is.