I've been thinking about this recently, and I'm inclined to believe that in the new reality, Zefram Cochrane never met Picard and the Borg in 2063, and Quark never crashed in Roswell in 1947. Why? Because those two events were caused by events in the future, a future which will not take place in the Abramsverse, due to it being a parallel continuum (I personally have difficulty believing the "doubling" theory put forth by the film's writers, and think that the Abramsverse was already a different reality long before Nero turned up).
Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsverse?
- Thread starter EJA
- Start date
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
It depends totally on if you view Star Trek XI as being an alternate universe from the start or one that was created upon Nero's arrival. Either way, Nero changed stuff in both scenarios.
There is no official answer, but it won't stop people from swearing "yes" or "no" about it regardless, IMO.
It depends totally on if you view Star Trek XI as being an alternate universe from the start or one that was created upon Nero's arrival. Either way, Nero changed stuff in both scenarios.
There is no official answer, but it won't stop people from swearing "yes" or "no" about it regardless, IMO.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
If the timelines share a past, than yes, they did both happen.
From any point in time, everything afterwards is only a possibility. Star Trek: Enterprise is an equal prequel to both TOS and STXI - but two of the futures Archer visited ("Shockwave", "Azati Prime") were neither.
Also keep in mind that many of Trek's time travel stories are entirely nonsensical - just try and make sense of Vosk starting the Temporal Cold War from an alternate timeline that is created as a result of that war. What did Daniels say about it? "It's beyond your comprehension" (in "Shockwave") and something like "There will forever be unalterable paradoxes throughout history" (in part 2 of "Storm Front")
What I want to know is, how did STXI Spock survive his Kahs-wan?
If the timelines share a past, than yes, they did both happen.
From any point in time, everything afterwards is only a possibility. Star Trek: Enterprise is an equal prequel to both TOS and STXI - but two of the futures Archer visited ("Shockwave", "Azati Prime") were neither.
Also keep in mind that many of Trek's time travel stories are entirely nonsensical - just try and make sense of Vosk starting the Temporal Cold War from an alternate timeline that is created as a result of that war. What did Daniels say about it? "It's beyond your comprehension" (in "Shockwave") and something like "There will forever be unalterable paradoxes throughout history" (in part 2 of "Storm Front")
What I want to know is, how did STXI Spock survive his Kahs-wan?
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
I've difficulty believing that they as the creators can get it "wrong". If they say the split happens when Nero shows up, then it does. Since FC and LGM "happen" before the break they are set events. Fixed points in time, as a Doctor I know might say.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
It was certainly a different way to handle time travel in Trek. Nero didn't change the future, he created a new one. A blank slate. But, the timeline we're all familiar with didn't change at all in its past or present. It goes on. In fact in it, Spock is probably listed as missing and presumed dead after being sucked into the black hole.
I've difficulty believing that they as the creators can get it "wrong". If they say the split happens when Nero shows up, then it does. Since FC and LGM "happen" before the break they are set events. Fixed points in time, as a Doctor I know might say.
It was certainly a different way to handle time travel in Trek. Nero didn't change the future, he created a new one. A blank slate. But, the timeline we're all familiar with didn't change at all in its past or present. It goes on. In fact in it, Spock is probably listed as missing and presumed dead after being sucked into the black hole.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
You could stretch this idea even further. If Picard never met Cochrane, and Quark never crashed in Roswell, then it's unlikely that Spock ever manages to pilot the Jellyfish. And even if he did, his memories of Kirk should be different, yet they are not.
This illustrates that at the very least it's not just one timeline with an abundance of time loops.
If it was one timeline that could be overwritten or a multiverse, then whatever came first would remain. Every backwards time travel visit that happened before 2233 indeed happened.
You could stretch this idea even further. If Picard never met Cochrane, and Quark never crashed in Roswell, then it's unlikely that Spock ever manages to pilot the Jellyfish. And even if he did, his memories of Kirk should be different, yet they are not.
This illustrates that at the very least it's not just one timeline with an abundance of time loops.
If it was one timeline that could be overwritten or a multiverse, then whatever came first would remain. Every backwards time travel visit that happened before 2233 indeed happened.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
I still reckon something happened before Nero's arrival to make the Abramsverse an alternate timeline, something that had nothing to do with time travel. It just seems so much simpler that way IMO. Spock Prime and Nero are from the original timeline, but they crossed realities as well as went back in time. None of this doubling nonsense.
I still reckon something happened before Nero's arrival to make the Abramsverse an alternate timeline, something that had nothing to do with time travel. It just seems so much simpler that way IMO. Spock Prime and Nero are from the original timeline, but they crossed realities as well as went back in time. None of this doubling nonsense.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
I tend to think the creation of the Abramsverse created a blank slate in that Universes future AND changed that universes past. Perhaps not significantly, Archer still commanded the Enterprise NX-01 with a very similar crew, but without ever meeting future guy and without the temporal cold war happening and likely without Captain Picard visiting Earth circa First Contact. If the writers are clever they will actually exploit this possibility since it also free's them from ENT canon too.
I tend to think the creation of the Abramsverse created a blank slate in that Universes future AND changed that universes past. Perhaps not significantly, Archer still commanded the Enterprise NX-01 with a very similar crew, but without ever meeting future guy and without the temporal cold war happening and likely without Captain Picard visiting Earth circa First Contact. If the writers are clever they will actually exploit this possibility since it also free's them from ENT canon too.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
In practice, this is the way the writers will operate. It will never be based on some logical chain of events or history, it will be whatever they want it to be, just like the other mirror universe.
But there's no real indication one way or the other in the movie. That's why I just stick with what the writers say. Plus, if they really wanted it to be that separate, they should have just done a full-on reboot and not danced around continuity. But that's not what they did. They wanted to show the past of our actual characters and how they would react if circumstances changed, not just some mirror versions of them whose past is different before 2233.
I feel like they didn't walk this line well. They want to be free to tell whatever story, yet they made themselves slaves somewhat to continuity. They should have just picked one or the other.
In practice, this is the way the writers will operate. It will never be based on some logical chain of events or history, it will be whatever they want it to be, just like the other mirror universe.
But there's no real indication one way or the other in the movie. That's why I just stick with what the writers say. Plus, if they really wanted it to be that separate, they should have just done a full-on reboot and not danced around continuity. But that's not what they did. They wanted to show the past of our actual characters and how they would react if circumstances changed, not just some mirror versions of them whose past is different before 2233.
I feel like they didn't walk this line well. They want to be free to tell whatever story, yet they made themselves slaves somewhat to continuity. They should have just picked one or the other.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
The timeline didn't split in two in "The City on the Edge of Forever." It didn't split in two in "Yesterday's Enterprise." It didn't split in two in "Past Tense." It didn't split in two in First Contact. It was a single quantum reality that kept changing internally. If a character travels back in time and changes history, the future he/she came from will cease to exist. They themselves might still exist, but this could be due to the actual act of travelling through time; everything they knew could still be gone forever.
The timeline didn't split in two in "The City on the Edge of Forever." It didn't split in two in "Yesterday's Enterprise." It didn't split in two in "Past Tense." It didn't split in two in First Contact. It was a single quantum reality that kept changing internally. If a character travels back in time and changes history, the future he/she came from will cease to exist. They themselves might still exist, but this could be due to the actual act of travelling through time; everything they knew could still be gone forever.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
Considering that there's meant to be infinite billions of alternate universes for each possibility, all the timelines we've seen glimpses of over the years should exist by default.
Stardate 2233.04: In one possible universe, a ship emerges from the future and attacks the USS Kelvin. In another possibility, it doesn't. Therefore, by the logic of TNG's "Parallels", both timelines exist in the infinite multiverse.
To move between them, all you need is Geordi's visor, a shuttle and a subspace fissure.
Considering that there's meant to be infinite billions of alternate universes for each possibility, all the timelines we've seen glimpses of over the years should exist by default.
Stardate 2233.04: In one possible universe, a ship emerges from the future and attacks the USS Kelvin. In another possibility, it doesn't. Therefore, by the logic of TNG's "Parallels", both timelines exist in the infinite multiverse.
To move between them, all you need is Geordi's visor, a shuttle and a subspace fissure
.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
For the purposes of the story they were telling... yes every event that happened before 2387 in the prime timeline still 'occurred'.
The whole theory of branching timelines creates a mess in the Trek universe that just didn't exist before where time travel is concerned. If you go back in time once and set things straight... you set in motion events that will create an infinite number of identical universes.
Or did it? How would we or "they" know?
For the purposes of the story they were telling... yes every event that happened before 2387 in the prime timeline still 'occurred'.
The whole theory of branching timelines creates a mess in the Trek universe that just didn't exist before where time travel is concerned. If you go back in time once and set things straight... you set in motion events that will create an infinite number of identical universes.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
Er, yes, the timeline did split in every single one of those cases, and it doesnt require time travel for it to happen.
Case in point, when Worf creates the rift that brings in a million and one Enterprises, the one from the Borg universe is a direct result of failing to stop the Borg in Best of Both Worlds, whereas the timeline we followed was the opposite of that in which we did defeat them.
Time is relative. Remember that.
Er, yes, the timeline did split in every single one of those cases, and it doesnt require time travel for it to happen.
Case in point, when Worf creates the rift that brings in a million and one Enterprises, the one from the Borg universe is a direct result of failing to stop the Borg in Best of Both Worlds, whereas the timeline we followed was the opposite of that in which we did defeat them.
Time is relative. Remember that.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
There is no evidence to point to the fact that the timeline split in every time travel episode. To interpret it that way sucks everybit of drama from time travel episodes.
Why should I care if Nero goes back to the dawn of man and set himself up as King if it has no effect on the universe he comes from? Why care if he takes uber weapons back with him?
It doesn't mean that interesting drama can't come from the premise... but the thrust of Trek's drama has always been in restoring the timeline.
There is no evidence to point to the fact that the timeline split in every time travel episode. To interpret it that way sucks everybit of drama from time travel episodes.
Why should I care if Nero goes back to the dawn of man and set himself up as King if it has no effect on the universe he comes from? Why care if he takes uber weapons back with him?
It doesn't mean that interesting drama can't come from the premise... but the thrust of Trek's drama has always been in restoring the timeline.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
While most of these are probably right, the writers simply don't care. They're going to do things in their own way, whether or not it sucks the drama out of the situation. Fortunately, they won't be focusing on the time travel in any future movies.
At any rate, even though time travel events like First Contact and such more than likely still happened in this universe, they are totally irrelevant to the stories they're going to tell.
While most of these are probably right, the writers simply don't care. They're going to do things in their own way, whether or not it sucks the drama out of the situation. Fortunately, they won't be focusing on the time travel in any future movies.
At any rate, even though time travel events like First Contact and such more than likely still happened in this universe, they are totally irrelevant to the stories they're going to tell.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
Since the explicit ages of all the characters have changed, and events that were known to happen prior to TOS did not happen in the movie... well, they don't share a past.
And, let's face it, it's not like Abrams is going to revisit a lot of these concepts anyway.
Since the explicit ages of all the characters have changed, and events that were known to happen prior to TOS did not happen in the movie... well, they don't share a past.
And, let's face it, it's not like Abrams is going to revisit a lot of these concepts anyway.
Re: Do FIRST CONTACT & "Little Green Men" still happen in the Abramsve
I thought only Chekov's age had changed?
I thought only Chekov's age had changed?