Alternate Realities, Butterflies, and Killing Time

[Lord Garth]

Warning: Please skip to the last setence if you don't want to read about time travel and parallel universe theories. I'll understand if you do.

2nd Warning: I'm just doing this for fun. I don't need to rationalize anything. I love this movie, gave it 9/10, and I'm going to see it again. No Witch Hunts please. And no telling me I need to reconsile everything just to enjoy the movie because I don't. This is a good, fun movie, that made Star Trek cool again, as others have said.

Have I covered all the bases? Yeah, I think I have...

So, anyway, I don't think the differences in New Star Trek are necessarily the result of the Butterfly Effect.

Anything that can happen does happen in one reality or another. If I'm walking down a street and have to decide whether or not to take a left or a right, in one reality I go right and in another I go left. Different realities account for different decisions we make so there are several possible futures that could emerge from the present.

In this type of theory all futures branch out from a common past. The further we go into the future, the more realities diverge. The further we go into the past, the more realities converge. Prime Trek and New Trek both have ENT in common. If Prime Trek and New Trek have ENT in common, then ENT has at least two possible futures. 1986 has even more possible futures, so the crew in TVH were from one possible version of the 23rd Century while Star Trek (2009) is another version.

Where am I going with this?

I think Star Trek (2009) isn't just a different timeline where things were only changed becasue of Nero, I think it's a different timeline where things after 2233 unfolded differently in general. Chekov's parents have him sooner, the Enterprise is commissioned later, etc. The reason for Chekov's birth being sooner? They either met sooner or decided to have children sooner. The reason the Enterprise was commissioned later? The ship that would've been commissioned in 2245 was called something else instead and Pike was never in command of that ship or maybe he was and we didn't see it.

If I wanted to take it one step further, I could say that TOS is a possible 23rd Century projected from 1966 where there are Eugenics Wars. TNG is a possible 24th Century projected from 1987 where all 20th Century culture (except jazz somehow) vanishes over the course of the 21st and all we're left with is Classical. Star Trek (2009) is a 23rd Century projected from 2009 which was then altered. In "2009 Prime Trek", stardates were always Gregorian Dates but most everything else was the same. In "2009 New Trek", there's a divergence from "2009 Prime" beginning in 2233.

Agree? Disagree? Partially? Wholly?

Or we can all just say this was a reboot.

 

[T'Paul]

They should have just done a true reboot instead of going with the time travel nonsense / Old Spock route.

 

[Tikkun]

Warning: Please skip to the last setence if you don't want to read about time travel and parallel universe theories. I'll understand if you do.

2nd Warning: I'm just doing this for fun. I don't need to rationalize anything. I love this movie, gave it 9/10, and I'm going to see it again. No Witch Hunts please. And no telling me I need to reconsile everything just to enjoy the movie because I don't. This is a good, fun movie, that made Star Trek cool again, as others have said.

Have I covered all the bases? Yeah, I think I have...

So, anyway, I don't think the differences in New Star Trek are necessarily the result of the Butterfly Effect.

Anything that can happen does happen in one reality or another. If I'm walking down a street and have to decide whether or not to take a left or a right, in one reality I go right and in another I go left. Different realities account for different decisions we make so there are several possible futures that could emerge from the present.

In this type of theory all futures branch out from a common past. The further we go into the future, the more realities diverge. The further we go into the past, the more realities converge. Prime Trek and New Trek both have ENT in common. If Prime Trek and New Trek have ENT in common, then ENT has at least two possible futures. 1986 has even more possible futures, so the crew in TVH were from one possible version of the 23rd Century while Star Trek (2009) is another version.

Where am I going with this?

I think Star Trek (2009) isn't just a different timeline where things were only changed becasue of Nero, I think it's a different timeline where things after 2233 unfolded differently in general. Chekov's parents have him sooner, the Enterprise is commissioned later, etc. The reason for Chekov's birth being sooner? They either met sooner or decided to have children sooner. The reason the Enterprise was commissioned later? The ship that would've been commissioned in 2245 was called something else instead and Pike was never in command of that ship or maybe he was and we didn't see it.

If I wanted to take it one step further, I could say that TOS is a possible 23rd Century projected from 1966 where there are Eugenics Wars. TNG is a possible 24th Century projected from 1987 where all 20th Century culture (except jazz somehow) vanishes over the course of the 21st and all we're left with is Classical. Star Trek (2009) is a 23rd Century projected from 2009 which was then altered. In "2009 Prime Trek", stardates were always Gregorian Dates but most everything else was the same. In "2009 New Trek", there's a divergence from "2009 Prime" beginning in 2233.

Agree? Disagree? Partially? Wholly?

Or we can all just say this was a reboot.

Agreed - in fact, those probably make more sense than my theory of butterfly effect dating from the phasered wino in City.

Too many anomalies predate Nero - I prefer to believe in an AU/AT (alternate time line) that began earlier.

 

[Lord Garth]

I thought of something else too: if this is a 2009-project AU New Trek, then Humpback Whales might not have even gone extinct and there was no Voyager 6 launched in the late-20th Century.

So the black hole took Spock and Nero not just into the past but the past of a different reality.

In this case, Spock Prime can still come from a Star Trek that happened exactly as we'd seen it before and new Star Trek doesn't have to have any type of connection to it.

 

[T'Paul]

I thought of something else too: if this is a 2009-project AU New Trek, then Humpback Whales might not have even gone extinct and there was no Voyager 6 launched in the late-20th Century.

So the black hole took Spock and Nero not just into the past but the past of a different reality.

In this case, Spock Prime can still come from a Star Trek that happened exactly as we'd seen it before and new Star Trek doesn't have to have any type of connection to it.

I like that theory but I doubt the filmmakers had it in mind.