Let's Scientifically Nitpick the Movies

[Cryogenic]

Here's one: stars. Why are they always so visible? In exterior shots, the lighted hull of the ship should necessitate small exposure times, not allowing the comparatively dim light of the stars to register on the film plate. This implausible scenario of stars being so obvious only applies ten-fold to very bright shots inside a ship, when, if anything, stars are often brighter still through the ship windows! Then again, maybe we're meant to imagine this as all having been documented by some as-yet-unknown technology that automatically compensates for differing light levels according to intelligent object recognition, and what the documenteur desires to be shown.

 

[Cyke101]

That's simple, because the Borg have shields and will probably be able to adapt to bullets, too.

They might not even need shields eventually. Maybe the Borg have other means of adapting, like simply applying bullet-proof alloys under the Borg shell, too. They were certainly tough enough to toss around a few humans, maybe superstrength was previous form of adaptation.

It always seemed odd to me that Data doesn't flinch when getting shot, but it did just fine on some Drones. Then again, had there been more drones, Picard might probably find his tommy gun to be all but useless.

 

[JarodRussell]

4.) Being on the same plane. For example, when the Enterprise is nose to nose with a Romulan warbird, or in a battle when all the ships are more or less on the same level.
What about a scene where a ship races up and shoots another ship from below? Never seen that in any show.

Aside from the examples mentioned (TUC, All Good Things...), here's another one from Caretaker.

Nemesis also had quite a few shots like that. And in the battle of First Contact the ships are pretty much coming from everywhere.

 

[Christopher]

^Yeah, Nemesis was pretty good with 3D battle tactics, with Shinzon targeting the E-E's dorsal and ventral shields, closing from above, that sort of thing.

 

[Maurice]

This is true of the series as well as the movies, but telepathy working instantaneously over interstellar distances. Spock can sense V'ger light years away? FTL brainwaves, and the receptors to sense them?

 

[Shazam!]

 

[Christopher]

This is true of the series as well as the movies, but telepathy working instantaneously over interstellar distances. Spock can sense V'ger light years away? FTL brainwaves, and the receptors to sense them?

I've suggested in a couple of my Trek novels that telepathy is a nonlocal quantum-entanglement effect and thus not bound by the speed of light. A handwave, of course, but at least there's some scientific basis to it.

 

[SeerSGB]

This is true of the series as well as the movies, but telepathy working instantaneously over interstellar distances. Spock can sense V'ger light years away? FTL brainwaves, and the receptors to sense them?

For some reason-- and I've no clue where I got the idea-- I always assumed that V'ger as screaming away on "all channels" telepathically and Spock was likely not the only one that head the call/plea. Spock just happened to be one of those that understood the feeling V'ger was broadcasting plus being in a position to do something about it.

Not so much being a special receptor, but more of being someone that heard another person screaming in a bullhorn.

 

[Maurice]

This is true of the series as well as the movies, but telepathy working instantaneously over interstellar distances. Spock can sense V'ger light years away? FTL brainwaves, and the receptors to sense them?

I've suggested in a couple of my Trek novels that telepathy is a nonlocal quantum-entanglement effect and thus not bound by the speed of light. A handwave, of course, but at least there's some scientific basis to it.

You mean technobabble.

 

[Christopher]

^No, I do not. If I'd meant "technobabble," I would've said it. First of all, the term "technobabble" didn't exist until the 1980s; "handwaving" is a concept that's been around longer and has broader applications. Second, I think of "technobabble" as meaning gibberish that sounds technical but really doesn't mean anything. My explanations may require bending the laws of physics, but at least they're grounded in real scientific concepts like nonlocal quantum effects rather than invented nonsense like "tetryons" and "isolytic fields" and whatnot. Therefore, I don't consider them technobabble.

 

[Timo]

I want to know why the vast majority of episode-worthy adventures and crises happen in the day shift and not the night shift!

Why not? Surely our heroes would schedule their arrival at points of interest so that their ship would be at its most alert.

It's very seldom that something truly catches our heroes unawares at a random moment. Generally, if there's an emergency they are responding to, it has already been announced before the episode begins, and our heroes have had plenty of time to wake up, get dressed, and start a "hero shift" where all the important people are active and tackling the crisis.

How many episodes did we have where the Enterprise is just cruising along, heading towards it's next destination, and Picard, Riker and Troi are sitting around making small talk on the bridge?

Dunno. Two?

There are many episodes where Riker is doing the small talk thing, but I can't really recall eps where both the skipper and the XO would be "idly" present in the teaser.

Except that we fairly plainly see the planet forming on the viewing screen.

Hmh? We only see an already nicely spheroid planet surrounded by orange swirls. Quite possibly, it's Regula I being converted on the surface by the Genesis effect...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Brutal Strudel]

^No, I do not. If I'd meant "technobabble," I would've said it. First of all, the term "technobabble" didn't exist until the 1980s; "handwaving" is a concept that's been around longer and has broader applications. Second, I think of "technobabble" as meaning gibberish that sounds technical but really doesn't mean anything. My explanations may require bending the laws of physics, but at least they're grounded in real scientific concepts like nonlocal quantum effects rather than invented nonsense like "tetryons" and "isolytic fields" and whatnot. Therefore, I don't consider them technobabble.

It's a fine distinction but an important one. Besides, many scientists already posit that consciousness arises from quantum weirdness so, as far as handwaves go, it's a rather skillful one.

 

[Christopher]

^Except that where reality is concerned, I'm very skeptical of the "quantum consciousness" claims, which strike me as little more than an attempt to subvert quantum theory to rationalize supernatural beliefs. However, given that telepathy is an established phenomenon within the fictional context of the Trek universe, it at least provides an excuse that makes it sound like something other than magic.

 

[JarodRussell]

^No, I do not. If I'd meant "technobabble," I would've said it. First of all, the term "technobabble" didn't exist until the 1980s; "handwaving" is a concept that's been around longer and has broader applications. Second, I think of "technobabble" as meaning gibberish that sounds technical but really doesn't mean anything. My explanations may require bending the laws of physics, but at least they're grounded in real scientific concepts like nonlocal quantum effects rather than invented nonsense like "tetryons" and "isolytic fields" and whatnot. Therefore, I don't consider them technobabble.

I still can't see a difference to "technobabble". To me, a "nonlocal quantum-entanglement effect" to explain telepathy is just as much gibberish as "chronoton particles causing a variance in the annular confinement beam" to explain time travel with a transporter.

 

[Christopher]

^The difference is, if you research the terms I use, you'll find there's real meaning behind them and will learn something about the real universe from the effort. Science fiction can be an effective teaching tool. Even a fanciful concept that's grounded in real science can introduce the curious reader or viewer to ideas that can enrich their understanding of the universe. Technobabble, by contrast, is fake science that has no connection to reality and at worst can actually mislead the viewer or reader. To the audience member who chooses to remain passive, there may appear to be no difference. But to those who are curious and motivated to engage actively with the text, to explore the concepts underlying it, the former offers rewards the latter cannot.

 

[Myasishchev]

This is true of the series as well as the movies, but telepathy working instantaneously over interstellar distances. Spock can sense V'ger light years away? FTL brainwaves, and the receptors to sense them?

I've suggested in a couple of my Trek novels that telepathy is a nonlocal quantum-entanglement effect and thus not bound by the speed of light. A handwave, of course, but at least there's some scientific basis to it.

My understanding of entanglement has the handwave make more sense in the context of, say, the Intrepid disaster than with V'Ger. The particles at some point have to be in contact at some point in order to entangle themselves, if I'm not mistaken.

I sometimes think of telepathy as relying on gravitation, which demonstrably propagates FTL in the Trek universe. (Of course, according to Generations, light does too! ) Quantum entanglement's a good explanation for FTL telepathy as any, however. I wish they'd kept telepathy STL, so that it could be explained as nothing more supernatural than the transmission of information by electromagnetic radiation (fundamentally, a cell phone in the brain ). I also really wish they'd apply some real brakes to telepathy--the transmission control protocols used by one telepathic species should be even harder to crack than a culture's spoken language, not the other way around.

 

[Christopher]

My understanding of entanglement has the handwave make more sense in the context of, say, the Intrepid disaster than with V'Ger. The particles at some point have to be in contact at some point in order to entangle themselves, if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, which is why it's a handwave. Even hard SF generally requires fudging the physics at least a little for the sake of the story, and this requires a larger fudge than that, because "telepathy" and "psionics" and whatnot are really just magic and mysticism with sciencey-sounding Greek/Latin names retconned onto them to make them sound less oogy-boogy. So any attempt to rationalize such nonsense in physical terms is going to require a lot of stretching, fudging, and handwaving. The key is to ground it in enough real science that it at least sounds plausible and facilitates suspension of disbelief.

However, entanglement doesn't invariably require physical contact. It's possible to entangle two things with each other using a laser beam. So if remote entanglement is possible by an exchange of light, then in a fictional universe where psionic energy exists, it could possibly create such entanglements as well.

I sometimes think of telepathy as relying on gravitation, which demonstrably propagates FTL in the Trek universe.

I prefer to think that gravitation in Trek works the same way in normal space as it does in reality, but can propagate FTL through subspace and thereby have an FTL effect on things connected to subspace, such as warp-capable starships. After all, there's a real basis for this; string theory suggests that gravitons are unbound to the 3-brane of our universe and can radiate out into the other, "curled-up" dimensions. And those other dimensions actually can be called a subspace (i.e. a dimensional subset of 11-dimensional spacetime). It's actually possible to make Trek physics fairly plausible by applying string theory.

(Of course, according to Generations, light does too! )

I just take that as poetic license and assume the film editor cut out the several minutes of waiting for the supernova's effects to arrive at the planet.

I also really wish they'd apply some real brakes to telepathy--the transmission control protocols used by one telepathic species should be even harder to crack than a culture's spoken language, not the other way around.

But one of the main uses of telepathy as a story device is as a convenience for getting around language barriers. That's generally the role psi powers serve in fiction: an excuse for things that should be impossible.

 

[JarodRussell]

I think telepathy would be easier to understand, because it works with images, thoughts, not words.

 

[Kegg]

Yes, which is why it's a handwave. Even hard SF generally requires fudging the physics at least a little for the sake of the story, and this requires a larger fudge than that, because "telepathy" and "psionics" and whatnot are really just magic and mysticism with sciencey-sounding Greek/Latin names retconned onto them to make them sound less oogy-boogy.

'Replaced' would be a better word here than 'retconned'. It's not retroactive continuity in, say, Babylon 5 to suggest that telepathy always existed as a scientifically explainable force, any more than godlike aliens are retconned gods.

 

[Maurice]

Except that we fairly plainly see the planet forming on the viewing screen.

Hmh? We only see an already nicely spheroid planet surrounded by orange swirls. Quite possibly, it's Regula I being converted on the surface by the Genesis effect...

You see a sphere with stuff being drawn INTO it, with the implication that it is forming. If they'd meant to show the planetoid Regula being transformed, I suspect they'd have shown the Genesis Wave hitting it.

The script isn't 100% clear as saying "the nebula becomes the planet", but it implies that.

EXT. MUTARA NEBULA - MASTER EFFECT

As Reliant goes, so goes the nebula. The "Genesis
Effect" WE SAW in its earliest experiments, now
seems familiar on a gigantic, cosmic scale.

The blinding flash at first, followed by the same
tumbling turbulence of the miniature test. It is
awesome.

...

ON SCREEN and INTERCUT -- GENESIS TUMBLES and starts
evolving. A moment in history.
​

No mention of Regula. The nebula "goes" and then Genesis tumbles into existence.