Other side of the sister?
I Thought Vulcan Had No Moon
- Thread starter USS Excelsior
- Start date
The moon, or whatever it is, seen near Vulcan in TMP and in this episode might be something else.
Vulcan could be part of a binary planetary system. They can exist theoretically. The Earth-Luna system is almost binary, and Pluto-Charon (planetary status notwithstanding) come's even closer to doubles. Obviously there went be two plantary sized bodies the exact same size , but if the ratio gets close to 1 that's more or less a double planet.
That might explain Spock's statement. He was being, as he often is, extremely precise.
Vulcan could be part of a binary planetary system. They can exist theoretically. The Earth-Luna system is almost binary, and Pluto-Charon (planetary status notwithstanding) come's even closer to doubles. Obviously there went be two plantary sized bodies the exact same size , but if the ratio gets close to 1 that's more or less a double planet.
That might explain Spock's statement. He was being, as he often is, extremely precise.
It wouldn't explain why we can't see any companion bodies in any space shots before "Unification III", though.
Also, if the monster planet is geostationary over Shi'Kahr in "Yesteryear", it's probably worse news for Vulcan than the scenario where the monster would just be whizzing by, at a speed that nicely coincides with geostationary.
The idea that the celestial visitations would only happen every now and then also works in favor of the 2009 movie. There, Nero's drill penetrates fairly deep into Vulcan, leaving a shaft that does not immediately collapse - and heavily suggesting that Vulcan is volcanically dead as a dodo. Quite possibly the volcanoes only start erupting when this companion planet rumbles past, then, and the 2009 movie wasn't one of those days.
Timo Saloniemi
Also, if the monster planet is geostationary over Shi'Kahr in "Yesteryear", it's probably worse news for Vulcan than the scenario where the monster would just be whizzing by, at a speed that nicely coincides with geostationary.
The idea that the celestial visitations would only happen every now and then also works in favor of the 2009 movie. There, Nero's drill penetrates fairly deep into Vulcan, leaving a shaft that does not immediately collapse - and heavily suggesting that Vulcan is volcanically dead as a dodo. Quite possibly the volcanoes only start erupting when this companion planet rumbles past, then, and the 2009 movie wasn't one of those days.
Timo Saloniemi
I believe DC Fontana, the High Mistress of Vulcan Lore and OG Trek staffer, said Vulcan was a binary planetary system.
Okay. I can go with that. Then TMP was just realizing something DC Fontana said.
Indeed.My head canon has decided:
Vulcan/Ni'Var: The larger world in the planetary binary
T'Khut/Delta Vega: The sister world. T'khut is a Vulcan word for sister.
Vulcanis: The moon orbiting T'Khut.
Would have made a great Romulan^
TKhut has any monns, canonically?
It was always there. Just on the other side of the planet 
Far be it from me to contradict the great Ramses II, but there's one thing TMP, "Yesteryear", "Lethe" and "Unification III" agree with: the thing on the Vulcan/Ni'VVari sky is so big that it would need a medium-sized nebula to hide behind.
Indeed, from the looks of it, the companion rock is likely to be about ten times the size of Spock's ancestral home, unless it actually brushes on said home's upper cloud layers. Nothing wrong with close companions like that as such: Andor appears to have one, say. But space shots of Andor necessarily reveal this companion, while those of Vulcan sometimes don't.
Two possibilities there, really:
1) The companion comes and goes.
2) The ENT, TOS and TNG visits to the place happened to position the cameraman so that his back was always towards the companion.
I'm fine with both. But more intrigued by the first one.
Timo Saloniemi
Indeed, from the looks of it, the companion rock is likely to be about ten times the size of Spock's ancestral home, unless it actually brushes on said home's upper cloud layers. Nothing wrong with close companions like that as such: Andor appears to have one, say. But space shots of Andor necessarily reveal this companion, while those of Vulcan sometimes don't.
Two possibilities there, really:
1) The companion comes and goes.
2) The ENT, TOS and TNG visits to the place happened to position the cameraman so that his back was always towards the companion.
I'm fine with both. But more intrigued by the first one.
Timo Saloniemi
The official answer finally arrived earlier this year in SNW episode 2.05.
https://twitter.com/timothypeel1/status/1680632707116675074
I forgot to discuss this point when the episode streamed months ago; Vulcan's sister planet T'Khut is finally canon!
I hope a future SNW story will finally explain the tacky name 'Delta Vega' from the 2009 movie as an obscure and unpopular alternative designation for T'Khut's moon, T'Rukhemai.
It has been a long road of 50 years to canonically resolve the sky discrepancy in "Yesteryear" et al.
I thought Annorax zapped it with his temporal gun. Well not really but I did think there was something to a tongue in cheek story about some villain going around with his R.E.T cannon wiping out stuff and sending it to the realm of Discontinuity, like an anti-universe or something. If anyone ever read Alan Moore's Supreme comics it would be like the Supremacy.
Spock isn't Vulcan.
As I said, Vulcanian.
Also, this line comes from the man himself. Feel he should know.
"Spock are you lying?" "No I'm standing up."
Similar threads
