Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

[Set Harth]

If we assume Nero arrived in the past of his own reality and created a completely distinct universe starting from 2233, then the question becomes: how did OldSpock cross over to that one, rather than arriving in the past of the same reality he left from?

Because he went through the same anomaly, and that's apparently how Red Matter Black Holes work.

Spock Prime and Nero are constantly being referred to as being "from the future" either by themselves or by other characters within the movie.

That isn't an argument for so-called "linear time". It's just how a character in that position would refer to the situation. Time travel to the past can be expected to produce some changes which would ensure that the future will be at least slightly different, so it's not 100% precise wording in any case ( unless interpreted to mean that Spock Prime is actually from the Abramsverse future, which would be a loop ).

 

[lawman]

I like this idea!!!! It allows me to know that original Trek continues on and that this movie doesn't branch off from the original Trek universe and it always was a parallel universe to begin with!! Freaking brilliant! This way the story makes sense as a linear time travel story and it's not that original Trek is being erased over it is that this paralell universes history that is being written over.

Yep, that's it in a nutshell!

 

[Gojira]

Spock Prime and Nero are constantly being referred to as being "from the future" either by themselves or by other characters within the movie.

That isn't an argument for so-called "linear time". It's just how a character in that position would refer to the situation. Time travel to the past can be expected to produce some changes which would ensure that the future will be at least slightly different, so it's not 100% precise wording in any case ( unless interpreted to mean that Spock Prime is actually from the Abramsverse future, which would be a loop ).

My major complaint about the time travel in this movie is that in my opinion, from start to finish, all the characters in the movie and in all the dialog we hear it plays like a linear time travel movie. Except for one vague statement by Uhura "alternate reality" which can be (and is being) interpreted many different ways there is real no indication that this movie takes places in a parallel universe which branches off from the original Star Trek universe.

I like Lawman's description and I will view that this movie takes place in its own universe from start to finish, separate from the original Trek.

 

[DonIago]

Hey, unless and until it's made canonically clear exactly what did happen timeline-wise, we're just debating over interpretation anyway. People are confusing evidence with proof.

 

[Gojira]

Hey, unless and until it's made canonically clear exactly what did happen timeline-wise, we're just debating over interpretation anyway. People are confusing evidence with proof.

I completely agree and hope the next movie clarifies this debate. But if it doesn't then I guess there will be nothing wrong with each of us having our own theories and explanations.

 

[stonester1]

It will. It won't. I don't think "clarifiying" this is really important. And I only hope they "clarify" if it has any relevance to the next story.

I'm thinking that's not likely.

 

[Gojira]

It will. It won't. I don't think "clarifiying" this is really important. And I only hope they "clarify" if it has any relevance to the next story.

I'm thinking that's not likely.

If the next movie is going to be made so that it also has an appeal to a more general audience then I suspect you're right that no clarification will be given.

I just hope they carry on with this new time line/universe as an entity all of its own and they try not to tie it in too much with old Trek. That way all of us can hold onto what ever pet theory we adhere to without any chance of it being contradicted.

 

[stonester1]

I think they'll do whatever they see fit to tell a good story and not worry about whatever "pet theories" those who must set up flow charts in their heads have going on.

All that stuff, that's going to be up to you, to those inclined.

As there being no further nods to TOS, I wouldn't count on that at all. They probably are going to have nods of all sorts, many easter eggs here and there. And occasionally, a big one.

This is Star Trek. This is an alt look at the TOS era. Better be ready to deal with that and all that could bring.

 

[Gojira]

I think they'll do whatever they see fit to tell a good story and not worry about whatever "pet theories" those who must set up flow charts in their heads have going on.

All that stuff, that's going to be up to you, to those inclined.

As there being no further nods to TOS, I wouldn't count on that at all. They probably are going to have nods of all sorts, many easter eggs here and there. And occasionally, a big one.

This is Star Trek. This is an alt look at the TOS era. Better be ready to deal with that and all that could bring.

I pretty much am agreeing with you and I do want nods to the original Star Trek just like they did in the new movie. I just don't want a "cross over" story where individuals from the original Trek universe come into this new Trek universe.

 

[stonester1]

I think they'll do whatever they see fit to tell a good story and not worry about whatever "pet theories" those who must set up flow charts in their heads have going on.

All that stuff, that's going to be up to you, to those inclined.

As there being no further nods to TOS, I wouldn't count on that at all. They probably are going to have nods of all sorts, many easter eggs here and there. And occasionally, a big one.

This is Star Trek. This is an alt look at the TOS era. Better be ready to deal with that and all that could bring.

I pretty much am agreeing with you and I do want nods to the original Star Trek just like they did in the new movie. I just don't want a "cross over" story where individuals from the original Trek universe come into this new Trek universe.

Ah...I see. Well...to be honest, considering that such brings in complications that frankly are beyond the scope of a two hour movie, probably won't have that, I'm guessing.

Now...if a TV series comes about from the AbramsTrekU...all bets are probably off at that point.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

I haven't read it for a while, but if I'm reading this right, Star Trek (2009) would be, in your eyes, not that different in concept to the Mirror Universe.

Or any of the realities seen in "Parallels." Bingo. It was a parallel reality all along, even before it got its past changed.

(I figure this is pretty much exactly what everyone who cares would have assumed anyway had the PTB just done a clean reboot.)

That's what I've been saying since about April of 2009! Clickety

 

[Tyberius]

If MWI had "always" been the rule for Trek time-travel, then there would be no "prime" timeline. Instead, our characters would have unwittingly shifted among literally dozens of alternate universes. And there are quite a few episodes, including widely recognized classics like "City," that would quite simply be reduced to incoherence by such an assumption. Clear enough?

Wow, you do actually get it don't you? I was beginning to think that you were obtuse, but you are just stubborn.

There is no prime timeline. There really isn't time either. There are different universes for each decision that a sentient being makes.

However, the other time travel episodes would not be reduced to incoherence. Our characters would still get the outcome that they desired - a reality that pleased them.

The writers of this movie have (some) control over the presentation of this movie. They have no business making a "change in presentation" of any past Trek, nor any need to do so.

Ha! Writer's have been doing that since day one. Human psychics and time-warp.

I've never argued that the MWI approach to this story is impossible. I've just argued that it's unnecessary and undesirable, and moreover that even if we accept it for the sake of argument, it doesn't actually explain Spock's motivations as questioned in this thread.

It absolutely does. If Spock discovered that the many worlds interpretation was fact, there would be absolutely no reason to time travel, as you split the universe anyway.

Spock settled in this universe because this universe was as good as it was going to get for the old man. Here he could do something that could help.

 

[lawman]

I think they'll do whatever they see fit to tell a good story...

Why should they start now? That would take a lot more effort than they put into this movie.

Wow, you do actually get it don't you? I was beginning to think that you were obtuse, but you are just stubborn.

Whereas you're just rude and condescending. Did I ever post anything suggesting I didn't understand the MWI? On the contrary, I've not only discussed the science but explained at length why I think it's not dramatically appropriate for the Trek universe.

I've never argued that the MWI approach to this story is impossible. I've just argued that it's unnecessary and undesirable, and moreover that even if we accept it for the sake of argument, it doesn't actually explain Spock's motivations as questioned in this thread.

It absolutely does. If Spock discovered that the many worlds interpretation was fact, there would be absolutely no reason to time travel, as you split the universe anyway.

And did Spock make that "discovery" somewhere in this movie? Did he have a single line of dialogue to that effect? Perhaps when I was out getting popcorn? No? No. Then how exactly do you see anything being "explained"? All you have is sheer speculation, just like everyone else in this thread.

 

[DonIago]

^Including yourself.

You've still failed to suggest a viable way in which Spock could "repair" the timeline without risking severe disruption of it in other ways. Until you can do so, the entire discussion seems to be moot.

Frankly, I'd find discussing this far more entertaining than the interminable and ultimately most likely irrelevant conversation about which version of time travel theory is occurring in the film. Interminable because at this point people seem to largely just be restating their arguments, irrelevant because a) I doubt sequel films will address the question and b) does anyone who's spoken here -really- seem likely to change their current opinions on the subject? If not, what's the point in continuing to hammer at each other? Let's move on already.

 

[stonester1]

Why should they start now? That would take a lot more effort than they put into this movie.

Doing what they see fit? I assure you, sir, that's just what they did. And I assure you they will do that again. Seems to have worked the first time. And if you choose not to vote with your own ducats, I think they'll be ok.

 

[JBElliott]

Spock Prime doubtless knows of a number of ways to travel back in time and prevent Nero from embarking on his rampage resulting in the destruction of Vulcan (e.g. slingshot around a star, Guardian of Forever, etc). So why doesn't he do this?

Because even if he did, all he'd be doing was creating another timeline where Vulcan wasn't destroyed (and that's if he's even successful...who's to say the Vulcans would even believe him?). But Vulcan will still remain destroyed in the Abramsverse, and Romulus will still be destroyed in the prime universe. Since he's stuck in this timeline and he can't go back to his original timeline, what's the point? He might as well make himself useful where he is, which is exactly what he did.

In all other Star Trek shows and movies, time travel was shown as affecting the universe of the time traveller and not creating a new universe.

In the latest movie, the time travel didn't do that. So there must be something different about the time travel in the previous incarnations of Star Trek and the one in the movie. Perhaps it was the red matter and super nova that shunted Spock' and Nero not just back in time, but to a different universe. Perhaps the red matter and super nova created a new universe when Nero and Spock' finished their time trip.

In any event, unless the red matter and super nova altered the laws of (Star Trek) physics in the new universe, Spock' could have time travelled in methods used in previous incarnations of Star Trek (sling shot, Guardian) and travelled back in time to save Vulcan and alter the future of the new universe. Apparently Spock' chose not to do that.

 

[stonester1]

He's participated in time travel and has seen how screwed up it can get. Further, this is not his timeline. He probably didn't believe he had the right. IMO, he felt it would be a better bet to help the Vulcan race and culture survive post this event.

 

[Tyberius]

Wow, you do actually get it don't you? I was beginning to think that you were obtuse, but you are just stubborn.

Whereas you're just rude and condescending. Did I ever post anything suggesting I didn't understand the MWI? On the contrary, I've not only discussed the science but explained at length why I think it's not dramatically appropriate for the Trek universe.

Well, interweaving modern physics into a 1970s TV show can do all sorts of things. MWI should be the least of your concerns. Also, drama is automatically lost when one knows the outcome of the episode already - viewing each episode with the hindsight of MWI is actually quite refreshing. IDIC.

I've never argued that the MWI approach to this story is impossible. I've just argued that it's unnecessary and undesirable, and moreover that even if we accept it for the sake of argument, it doesn't actually explain Spock's motivations as questioned in this thread.

It absolutely does. If Spock discovered that the many worlds interpretation was fact, there would be absolutely no reason to time travel, as you split the universe anyway.

And did Spock make that "discovery" somewhere in this movie? Did he have a single line of dialogue to that effect? Perhaps when I was out getting popcorn? No? No. Then how exactly do you see anything being "explained"? All you have is sheer speculation, just like everyone else in this thread.

Yes, it occurred while you were out getting popcorn.

 

[JBElliott]

He's participated in time travel and has seen how screwed up it can get. Further, this is not his timeline. He probably didn't believe he had the right. IMO, he felt it would be a better bet to help the Vulcan race and culture survive post this event.

I'm not sure those rules apply when genocide and the lives of six billion (or however many billion) Vulcans are in question. Spock' isn't above "cowboy diplomacy." It's certainly something Kirk' would have done.

 

[stonester1]

He's participated in time travel and has seen how screwed up it can get. Further, this is not his timeline. He probably didn't believe he had the right. IMO, he felt it would be a better bet to help the Vulcan race and culture survive post this event.

I'm not sure those rules apply when genocide and the lives of six billion (or however many billion) Vulcans are in question. Spock' isn't above "cowboy diplomacy." It's certainly something Kirk' would have done.

Not a question of cowboy diplomacy. This simply isn't his timeline. It would be similar to him using his future knowledge to warn everyone about the potential bad stuff coming down in this alternate timeline. It's up to them to deal with. He'll help the best he can.

It's not about "cowboy diplomacy". It's letting things take their natural course in a timeline not his own.