About this one bridge in the episode "Parallels."

[Crewman6]

Since the Kelvin movies, this bridge always reminded me on the one of the NCC-1701 of that universe

In retrospect, did Worf have possibly visited the Kelvin universe in this episode and was this possibly the first appearance of the KT??

No, it didn't exist yet. Also, Worf never went to any stupid universes.

 

[Oddish]

He went to universes where he married Deanna Troi.

 

[Crewman6]

He went to universes where he married Deanna Troi.

Those are the best universes!

 

[F. King Daniel]

What I love about that bridge is how little space there is behind the horseshoe railing, so that holographic glass renders the seats for the rear consoles useless

They should have put a couple more random consoles middle-front for Troi and Worf, like the ones on the USS Kelvin.

 

[Unimatrix Q]

No, it didn't exist yet.

With timey wimey stuff like this, it's possible that it *always* existed. Even before it was caused

So it might have been the Kelvin Universe.

 

[Crewman6]

With timey wimey stuff like this, it's possible that it *always* existed. Even before it was caused

So it might have been the Kelvin Universe.

Well, the Kelvin-verse breaks/changes the rules of Trek time travel has had been firmly established across a couple of dozen or more episodes through the years.

But, prior to that, in all of Trek's prior instances of time travel, time incursions/alt timelines most certainly did not exist before they were created. There was definitely an "original" history which was modified.

 

[Takeru]

Well, the Kelvin-verse breaks/changes the rules of Trek time travel has had been firmly established across a couple of dozen or more episodes through the years.

But, prior to that, in all of Trek's prior instances of time travel, time incursions/alt timelines most certainly did not exist before they were created. There was definitely an "original" history which was modified.

In a Mirror Darkly uses time travel like the kelvin movies, the Defiant from TOS travelled into the past and into another universe that existed before the ship's arrival.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Sorry for the bad quality of the pic! I screenied it from YouTube.

So for this alternate reality bridge, with no seats on either side of the captain's chair, are we supposed to believe that Worf and Troi just stand there next to Riker all the time?

If so, I can't imagine how awkward that'd be for all three involved (especially Riker)!

There were originally three seats there, but Riker decided he needed more leg-swinging room for when he mounts his chair from behind, so away they went, and Worf and Troi just had to try and find some rickity folding chairs to sit on.

 

[Kor]

Here are some hi-def screencaps at Trekcore, showing this bridge: https://tng.trekcore.com/hd/thumbnails.php?album=176&page=10
This one in particular is from the same shot as in the original post: https://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/season-7/7x11/parallels-hd-291.jpg

That's all, I didn't really have any thoughts to add on this.

Kor

 

[dupersuper]

Well, the Kelvin-verse breaks/changes the rules of Trek time travel has had been firmly established across a couple of dozen or more episodes through the years.

Since when has Trek had consistent time travel rules?

 

[Crewman6]

Since when has Trek had consistent time travel rules?

Always. Up until Kelvin. (though someone pointed out that "Mirror, Darkly" is different, but I haven't seen it.)

 

[Mudd]

Sorry for the bad quality of the pic! I screenied it from YouTube.

So for this alternate reality bridge, with no seats on either side of the captain's chair, are we supposed to believe that Worf and Troi just stand there next to Riker all the time?

Spock and McCoy seemed to.

 

[Mudd]

Always. Up until Kelvin. (though someone pointed out that "Mirror, Darkly" is different, but I haven't seen it.)

Not really.

 

[dupersuper]

Always. Up until Kelvin.

What? Sometimes the timeline changes (City on the Edge of Forever, Yesterday's Enterprise, First Contact...), sometimes alternate timelines branch off (Kelvin movies, mirror universe episodes, Parallels...), sometimes history is practically unchangeable (Time's Arrow), sometimes the transporter can full on beam some one into their alternate timeline erasing their memories (Time for Yesterday)...

 

[F. King Daniel]

Always. Up until Kelvin. (though someone pointed out that "Mirror, Darkly" is different, but I haven't seen it.)

"In a Mirror, Darkly" refers to Prime as an "alternate reality", exactly as the Kelvin timeline does. There was an episode pitched but never made which would have shown the inception of the mirror universe, involving time travel and transporters. And of course "Parallels" explains it perfectly. In one universe, Nero appears in 2233 and wreaks havoc, but in another he does not.

I'm guessing you've never watched "Tomorrow is Yesterday", "Yesteryear", "Time Squared" or any of the other Trek episodes where time travel plays by entirely different rules?

They've been making it up as they go along for 55 years now and not once checking what their predecessors did.

 

[Crewman6]

What? Sometimes the timeline changes (City on the Edge of Forever, Yesterday's Enterprise, First Contact...), sometimes alternate timelines branch off (Kelvin movies, mirror universe episodes, Parallels...), sometimes history is practically unchangeable (Time's Arrow), sometimes the transporter can full on beam some one into their alternate timeline erasing their memories (Time for Yesterday)...

"In a Mirror, Darkly" refers to Prime as an "alternate reality", exactly as the Kelvin timeline does. There was an episode pitched but never made which would have shown the inception of the mirror universe, involving time travel and transporters. And of course "Parallels" explains it perfectly. In one universe, Nero appears in 2233 and wreaks havoc, but in another he does not.

I'm guessing you've never watched "Tomorrow is Yesterday", "Yesteryear", "Time Squared" or any of the other Trek episodes where time travel plays by entirely different rules?

They've been making it up as they go along for 55 years now and not once checking what their predecessors did.

As I said, I never saw "In a Mirror Darkly," but I understand now that it basically plays by the same rules as Trek 2009, which is that time travel causes branching timelines.

In NO OTHER instance of Star Trek does that happen. In those other instances where time travel occurs and timelines are derailed, it's all about characters "fixing" the ONLY existing timeline to restore the imperiled future of our characters. It's "Back to the Future" rules - someone messed up the timeline, our future is in danger, now we have to fix it.

That happens in "City on the Edge of Forever", "ST: First Contact", "Past Tense", "Trials and Tribble-ations", "Yesterday's Enterprise" and more.

The point is that the timeline has been "broken" by time travel and the stories involve our characters trying to fix it by various means to "set things right" and restore the prime/sole/only timeline.

That even happens in your "Tomorrow Is Yesterday" example, where the crew monkeys around so that their time incursion into the 20th Century never happens (and the air force officer doesn't remember it.)

Time Squared is not a relevant example. Neither is "Parallels", which doesn't involve time travel at all.

Only in Trek 2009 (and Mirror, Darkly, apparently), do the characters say, "Well, we're in an alt timeline now and there's no 'fixing' anything, so we just have to live with it."

In Every. Other. Instance. The characters work to fix the broken past to save the future and get time "back on track." Because there's just the one timeline and the changes in the past have imperiled our characters' own future.

 

[Mudd]

In those other instances where time travel occurs and timelines are derailed, it's all about characters "fixing" the ONLY existing timeline to restore the imperiled future of our characters.

In other words, those stories restrict themselves to the concerns of a single set of characters who know nothing about other timelines. That may simply be for simplicity's sake on the part of the writers.

Then some later stories introduced the idea that timelines had branched. Nothing in the earlier stories precludes that from being true of those situations as well, so there's no contradiction.

 

[DonIago]

I love the assumption that time travel episodes only occur within a single timeline. Because really, unless they get into quantum signatures and all (which I believe is only brought up in "Parallels"), how do we know that the timeline at the end of the episode is really the timeline shown at the beginning of the episode versus a timeline that's simply similar enough to (at least at first) pass muster?

We make assumptions based on authorial intent, but we should remember that in the end they are assumptions.

 

[Crewman6]

I love the assumption that time travel episodes only occur within a single timeline. Because really, unless they get into quantum signatures and all (which I believe is only brought up in "Parallels"), how do we know that the timeline at the end of the episode is really the timeline shown at the beginning of the episode versus a timeline that's simply similar enough to (at least at first) pass muster?

We make assumptions based on authorial intent, but we should remember that in the end they are assumptions.

In other words, those stories restrict themselves to the concerns of a single set of characters who know nothing about other timelines. That may simply be for simplicity's sake on the part of the writers.

Then some later stories introduced the idea that timelines had branched. Nothing in the earlier stories precludes that from being true of those situations as well, so there's no contradiction.

In those stories, the objective fact is that there are no branching timelines since the characters return to their own present and it is "fixed."

There's no "branching" "yesterday's enterprise" timeline. The alt-timeline is destroyed at the end of the episode and things return to "normal." Same in "First Contact", "City on the Edge", etc. etc. Period. There's no ambiguity at all.

If you want to come up with wild, utterly speculative nonsense that "those timelines exist, but we're restricted only to our characters POV", then you can literally come up with ANY utterly unjustified, unsupported fan theory and claim it as equally valid. But you must acknowledge that it is completely in your mind(s) with ZERO support from the text or "authorial intent."

 

[DonIago]

How does one know that the characters return to their original timelines versus ones that merely appear similar?

For instance, we know that after "Yesterday's Enterprise" Sela existed. We have no way of knowing whether she existed in the timeline that we were witnessing prior to that episode. It's reasonable to speculate that she did, but we don't know that.