is q squared a good book?

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Quite.

Also I highly doubt Lwaxana's lines would have sounded quite the same with de Lancie trying to imitate Majel's voice...

 

[tomswift2002]

S&S Audioworks license didn't actually allow for what they did with Q-in-Law.

Explain?

It has nothing to do with main stars versus guest stars (there were Star Trek audio books read by non-Star Trek actors)

"Q-In-Law" was (aside from the Peter Pan Records of the 70's) the first S&S Audiowork book to feature guest stars or anyone else who was not a main star, having been published in April 1992 (Bibi Besch would be the next in June 1992 with "Faces Of Fire").

 

[Therin of Andor]

S&S Audioworks' license didn't cover audio dramas, and this would have been borderline.

Yep. It was definitely a separate license. IIRC, a company actually had an option at one point, but didn't exercise it, or was in negotiations?

 

[Allyn Gibson]

S&S Audioworks' license didn't cover audio dramas, and this would have been borderline.

Yep. It was definitely a separate license. IIRC, a company actually had an option at one point, but didn't exercise it, or was in negotiations?

In the late 90s, John Ordover said the BBC had the rights when he was asked about it. (If I remember correctly, the question was about the Sulu audios and why they were audio books without a book instead of audio dramas.) I don't know about you, but I never heard a Star Trek audio drama from the Beeb.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I don't know about you, but I never heard a Star Trek audio drama from the Beeb.

No, they never released any, although they may have been sitting on the rights for a time.

 

[GaryH]

Reading this at the moment. It is reminding me why I loved Peter David's Trek books so much. His New Frontier ebooks were only so-so to me as I didn't like the wrap up of year long plot lines or the Indiana Jones Uber-Hero Calhoun has become. I would really like to see him do a new standalone novel though in any Trek era, even New Frontier focusing on some of the other characters.

 

[borgboy]

Q Squared is one of my favorites. There's a lot going on, Peter David makes the most of getting to explore alternate timelines and Q vs Trelane with an assortment of Enterprises caught in the middle makes for a really fun read. One of the best books for Beverly and Picard fans too.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

There's only a couple of problems I have with this book:

Spoiler: Q-Squared

In an infinite multiverse, there's only ONE where Jack Crusher survives? SERIOUSLY?

Trelane must have been bullshitting Jack all the way.

And why would Jack go off the rails when he found out Picard and Beverly were hooking up? Jack and Beverly were already divorced anyway!

 

[Avro Arrow]

There's only a couple of problems I have with this book:

Spoiler: Q-Squared

In an infinite multiverse, there's only ONE where Jack Crusher survives? SERIOUSLY?

Trelane must have been bullshitting Jack all the way.

But...

Spoiler: Voyager Relaunch

Isn't the main novel timeline/universe/quantum reality the only one where Janeway lives? And before Q shenanigans, didn't she die in *all* of them? Maybe this type of thing is not as unusual as we might think. Haven't I read here before that MWI doesn't necessarily mean that every possible combination of events happens somewhere?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ I have no idea, I haven't read any of the VOY relaunch.

 

[Christopher]

Haven't I read here before that MWI doesn't necessarily mean that every possible combination of events happens somewhere?

Yeah... As I understand it (though this is secondhand), it doesn't require all possible outcomes, it merely says that the overall quantum state of the universe (or whatever part of it is relevant to one's considerations) is a superposition of multiple alternate quantum states. At the very least, there'd be far more timelines tending toward the most probable outcomes than toward the least probable ones. (And strictly speaking, it would only apply to events whose outcomes are determined by quantum-level phenomena like the decay of a radioactive atom or the tunneling of an electron, not to classical-scale events like human decision-making or the interaction of macroscopic objects. Although fiction tends to ignore that because stories about human decisions and interactions are more dramatic than stories about the changing states of subatomic particles.)

 

[Stoek]

Yeah... As I understand it (though this is secondhand), it doesn't require all possible outcomes, it merely says that the overall quantum state of the universe (or whatever part of it is relevant to one's considerations) is a superposition of multiple alternate quantum states. At the very least, there'd be far more timelines tending toward the most probable outcomes than toward the least probable ones. (And strictly speaking, it would only apply to events whose outcomes are determined by quantum-level phenomena like the decay of a radioactive atom or the tunneling of an electron, not to classical-scale events like human decision-making or the interaction of macroscopic objects. Although fiction tends to ignore that because stories about human decisions and interactions are more dramatic than stories about the changing states of subatomic particles.)

Thanks Christopher. Now I've gone cross eyed.

 

[Reanok]

I have the book and have read it a couple of times. It's one of my favorite books by this author. Q in law with Lxwana is good. too.

 

[JD]

Yeah... As I understand it (though this is secondhand), it doesn't require all possible outcomes, it merely says that the overall quantum state of the universe (or whatever part of it is relevant to one's considerations) is a superposition of multiple alternate quantum states. At the very least, there'd be far more timelines tending toward the most probable outcomes than toward the least probable ones. (And strictly speaking, it would only apply to events whose outcomes are determined by quantum-level phenomena like the decay of a radioactive atom or the tunneling of an electron, not to classical-scale events like human decision-making or the interaction of macroscopic objects. Although fiction tends to ignore that because stories about human decisions and interactions are more dramatic than stories about the changing states of subatomic particles.)

I'm not meaning this as an argument, more as a clarification. Aren't there some theories that some of our decision making and consciousness is a quantum level phonomon, so couldn't those things also affect what we decide to do, and thus change outcomes and possibly create alternate realities?

 

[Idran]

I'm not meaning this as an argument, more as a clarification. Aren't there some theories that some of our decision making and consciousness is a quantum level phonomon, so couldn't those things also affect what we decide to do, and thus change outcomes and possibly create alternate realities?

It's better to say that there are some hypotheses towards that end. Daniel Dennett is the major promoter of such ideas if you want to investigate further, but there's no actual evidence to suggest so. Granted, there's no evidence yet against it either, but burden of truth and parsimony and all that. (Dennett claims that the involvement of nanolevel structures in the brain implies a quantum basis for consciousness, if I remember correctly, but that's just supposition on his part.)

Even if it were true, though, I'll suggest the thing that moved me off of that as a resolution: if a person's selection of an action is based on a random flip of a coin or roll of a die somewhere at the submolecular level in their head rather than based on personal preferences or experiences and a weighted consideration of the options and their consequences, can you really consider that to have been them "making a decision"?

 

[Christopher]

What Idran said. More to the point, even if there are quantum-level structures involved in neuron activity, it still takes a whole bunch of different ones working together to produce a given brain state or change thereof. And when you get a bunch of different quantum-level entities interacting in an ensemble, you know what we call that? Classical physics.

 

[Starbreaker]

There's only a couple of problems I have with this book:

Spoiler: Q-Squared

In an infinite multiverse, there's only ONE where Jack Crusher survives? SERIOUSLY?

Trelane must have been bullshitting Jack all the way.

And why would Jack go off the rails when he found out Picard and Beverly were hooking up? Jack and Beverly were already divorced anyway!

Nobody wants their best friend hooking up with their wife or ex-wife. You have to be some kind of ridiculously understanding person.

 

[Newspaper Taxi]

This is still my favorite Q-story of all time.

Spoiler

"That's right, Trelane," he said. "I'm playing with you."

 

[Csalem]

I really enjoyed this book. One of those novels I have reread many times. It was really interesting to see the alternative Enterprise with Jack Crusher. Also loved the teases as the timelines started to crossover with each other.

 

[Greg Cox]

I can only imagine what kind of flow charts Peter must have used to keep track of all the overlapping time lines and alternate realities!