Maximum speed of the NuEnterprise

[C.E. Evans]

[I'm no more snarky than you're being. I didn't start the conversation off with [highlight]FAIL.[/highlight] and all sorts of other little provocative things. I just came down to your level.

Don't you DARE pull that stuff on me. You started all of this. You were rude, insulting, and condescending with every post. I let a lot of that slide, but I will NOT let you accuse of starting this. You set the tone for this conversation with this:

So try giving me one that can't be reasoned around creatively

Everything was civil until you posted this:

Try reasoning the one I gave you. All you did was ignore it and present your own less dramatic version.

[highlight]FAIL.[/highlight]

So, I'm sorry, but if you're going to drag it down to that level, that's where it's going to be.

Total rubbish. And hypocritical.

As I said, you started it with your initial snide remark of "So try giving me one that can't be reasoned around creatively". You set the tone. You placed it at that level from the start. I responded with FAIL in response to you. Don't cry foul now that your feelings got hurt.

And since we're no longer talking about the topic of Star Trek, I no longer have anything to say to you.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Don't you DARE pull that stuff on me. You started all of this. You were rude, insulting, and condescending with every post. I let a lot of that slide, but I will NOT let you accuse of starting this. You set the tone for this conversation with this:

So try giving me one that can't be reasoned around creatively

Holy shit, me asking you for an example is condescending and rude?

I meant no ill will, and honestly I can't see any problem whatsoever with that statement. It's a far cry from "NO U. FAIL." I was trying to gain insight into your thoughts and to show you mine by example, because examples are a good way to illustrate that.

It seems like you were just reading more into it than what was there because you were already upset for whatever reason. If it's any consolation, I'm sorry if you were offended as it was 100% not my intent to do so. I still don't get how that statement would offend anybody.

Don't cry foul now that your feelings got hurt.

Actually, I didn't bring it up, you did. You're the one talking about being more civil when that wasn't even the case. And my feelings weren't hurt. It would take a lot more than someone on the internet being rude to do that.

 

[Jon1701]

Same as it's been since the beginning of TOS: Plot Speed.

This is the only answer to this question.

The Turbolifts also run using a similar same power. Takes NuSpock less than five seconds to get from Engineering to the Bridge!

Turbolifts in Trek are as inconsistant as hell. Sometime seconds, sometimes minutes. Spookily, the turbolift ride is often the exact length of a conversation required to move the plot forward.

Funny, that.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Same as it's been since the beginning of TOS: Plot Speed.

This is the only answer to this question.

The Turbolifts also run using a similar same power. Takes NuSpock less than five seconds to get from Engineering to the Bridge!

Turbolifts in Trek are as inconsistant as hell. Sometime seconds, sometimes minutes. Spookily, the turbolift ride is often the exact length of a conversation required to move the plot forward.

Funny, that.

Another one is that conversations are always interrupted by something over the comm just at the right time. Often these are acceptable, but sometimes it's an annoying trope.

The turbolift is probably a touch easier to flub too, because there can be all sorts of variables involved with it that the viewer has no access to. And often times if the writers feel the turbolift conversation is too long, someone will halt the turbolift.

The difference with space travel, particularly with "Broken Bow", is that they gave us the variables. They shouldn't do this if the rule is the speed of plot. And they also don't have anything like pausing the turbolift because space travel is so ambiguous, but everyone knows what an elevator is like. Not many are the wiser if a space trip takes too long.

 

[Devon]

A problem I see with this is that while you're assuming the planet's matter is the only thing that makes up the black hole, that can't be true because they were able to form black holes in the middle of space. Whatever red matter is supposed to be, somehow it creates what's necessary for a black hole. Vulcan then is the black hole plus all the accumulated matter from the planet. So if something is able to implode the planet, any moon in orbit would definitely be affected.

If the amount of gravity stays the same then the moon will continue orbiting just as normal. Plus it would probably take a while before Delta Vegas was effected anyway, if it even was.

None of this really matters though since the writers hadn't the slightest clue what a black hole really is.

Of course they have a clue of what it is, but then no one has dis-proven their use of it in this movie yet. I wonder why?

 

[Ryan8bit]

If the amount of gravity stays the same then the moon will continue orbiting just as normal. Plus it would probably take a while before Delta Vegas was effected anyway, if it even was.

The amount of gravity does not stay the same though. Like I already said, the black holes were created in the middle of space. So whatever red matter does, it somehow harnesses enough mass on its own to make a black hole. So now there is the mass of Vulcan and a black hole.

Delta Vega would have been affected fairly quickly in so many ways.

Of course they have a clue of what it is, but then no one has dis-proven their use of it in this movie yet. I wonder why?

Ok, given that a black hole is a real thing with lots of scientific properties, does it make sense to have a movie use something named a black hole which doesn't act like one at all?

 

[Set Harth]

Delta Vega may not be as close as you think it is.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Ok, given that a black hole is a real thing with lots of scientific properties, does it make sense to have a movie use something named a black hole which doesn't act like one at all?

Strictly speaking, a "black hole" is any object whose Schwarzchild radius is greater than its physical radius. This happens to any object of sufficient density (a singularity, in other words). There are two ways this could work: one is if red matter creates a single point of near-infinite density near the core, the singularity pulls in mass nearby, gains mass, becomes denser and gains more gravity, which then pulls in more mass, increasing gravity, etc. The other is if red matter is some kind of gravitational catalyst that screws around with the laws of physics for a given area (sort of like warp drives, no?) expanding the Scharzchild radius of a given object by increasing its mass and gravitational pull. Since this is basically the opposite of what subspace fields do, this isn't all that far fetched in Trek science; red matter may be better known to Federation science as a "superspace field."

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Delta Vega may not be as close as you think it is.

It may not even be in the same system. You'll recall Spock being able to sense the destruction of the Intrepid across interstellar distances; his "witnessing" of the destruction of Vulcan was probably a telepathic experience and Nero dropped him off JUST close enough to sense the destruction of his home world without being able to do anything about it.

 

[Devon]

Delta Vega would have been affected fairly quickly in so many ways.

It wasn't.

Ok, given that a black hole is a real thing with lots of scientific properties, does it make sense to have a movie use something named a black hole which doesn't act like one at all?

Prove to us that a black hole can't act like how it did in the film based on your personal experiences with them. Perhaps scientists should cease all research and theories of black holes if we have a cut and dry explanation of how they act!

 

[Ryan8bit]

Prove to us that a black hole can't act like how it did in the film based on your personal experiences with them. Perhaps scientists should cease all research and theories of black holes if we have a cut and dry explanation of how they act!

First off, black holes in this movie were portrayed as somewhat two dimensional in appearance. The mouth of a wormhole might appear that way, but not a black hole. Then the ships proceed to move into the center of it. All scientific research says that the ship would undergo spaghettification, and all their atoms would be pulled apart, annihilated, and added to the mass of the black hole. This movie treats them as if they are a gateway or wormhole, and that's just not what physics tells us.

 

[JarodRussell]

Prove to us that a black hole can't act like how it did in the film based on your personal experiences with them.

That must seriously be the dumbest thing you ever said. Congratulations.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Black Holes and Space Travel

"One possibility is that black holes may allow us to travel to very remote places in the universe, or another universe entirely," said Burko in a telephone interview from his office in Salt Lake City. "It depends on the topology of the universe, which we do not know very well.... I'm not arguing it's a practical thing to do, but maybe in 1,000 years from now, maybe it would be simpler."

In Burko's scheme, black holes may be doorways to wormholes, theoretical constructs equivalent to tunnels, or shortcuts, between distant points of the universe, different points in time or even parallel universes.

But subsequent black hole studies have suggested it would be impossible to use them as wormhole portals. The interiors of black holes are so infinitely dense that they exert massively destructive, "tide-like" distortions on approaching objects, ripping them into their constituent subatomic particles.

In fact, this infinitely dense interior gives black holes their potential for space and time travel. Inside a black hole, the very fabric of the universe is collapsed into a point of infinite curvature -- known as a "space-time singularity," where the laws of physics no longer apply.

However, Burko, a 34-year-old physicist from Israel, has suggested that some black holes may not be as destructive as others. Under certain circumstances, black holes may have "Cauchy horizon singularities," which may not be destructive but still act as openings to a wormhole.

"At the moment, we don’t have compelling evidence that this kind of hyperspace travel is disallowed," said Burko. "It doesn't mean, of course, it is allowed, but we don’t have compelling evidence to the contrary."

Make of that what you will.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

That's very interesting.

 

[Jon1701]

Same as it's been since the beginning of TOS: Plot Speed.

This is the only answer to this question.

The Turbolifts also run using a similar same power. Takes NuSpock less than five seconds to get from Engineering to the Bridge!

Turbolifts in Trek are as inconsistant as hell. Sometime seconds, sometimes minutes. Spookily, the turbolift ride is often the exact length of a conversation required to move the plot forward.

Funny, that.

Another one is that conversations are always interrupted by something over the comm just at the right time. Often these are acceptable, but sometimes it's an annoying trope.

The turbolift is probably a touch easier to flub too, because there can be all sorts of variables involved with it that the viewer has no access to. And often times if the writers feel the turbolift conversation is too long, someone will halt the turbolift.

The difference with space travel, particularly with "Broken Bow", is that they gave us the variables. They shouldn't do this if the rule is the speed of plot. And they also don't have anything like pausing the turbolift because space travel is so ambiguous, but everyone knows what an elevator is like. Not many are the wiser if a space trip takes too long.

You know, another Star Trek conceit is a crewmember walking past in the coridoor every time a door pops open. Unless the ship is specifically empty for that particular episode.

Happen in TNG all the time. Watch for it. It will ruin the show

 

[Set Harth]

It may not even be in the same system. You'll recall Spock being able to sense the destruction of the Intrepid across interstellar distances; his "witnessing" of the destruction of Vulcan was probably a telepathic experience and Nero dropped him off JUST close enough to sense the destruction of his home world without being able to do anything about it.

That's what I meant. From page 6 of this thread:

From The Immunity Syndrome, we know that Spock has some kind of Obi-Wan-esque ability to sense the mass deaths of other Vulcans at interstellar distances. Add a bit of visual synaesthesia and you’re done.

 

[Ryan8bit]

I prefer to think of Delta Vega as being in close orbit (although it could be a moon), but nonetheless, we like to think of that sequence as impressionistic for a general audience. In other words, Nero could’ve beamed Spock prime down to Delta Vega with a telescope or some other type of measuring device to allow Spock to experience the pain of perceiving the destruction of his home world, but that simply isn’t very cinematic.

This makes it pretty clear that the writers didn't care about science, and that they feel that their general audience is unintelligent. It's not like it's the first time writers of Star Trek have ever done so. A very similar instance is Soran destroying the sun within seconds of launching the missile. Everything is for the sake of cinema regardless of if it's completely unrealistic. My position is that it needn't be that way with a bit more effort.

Also, if a telescope is such a bad thing, then in First Contact Cochrane should have just seen a giant Enterprise in the sky. Having a medium isn't such a bad thing.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

I prefer to think of Delta Vega as being in close orbit (although it could be a moon), but nonetheless, we like to think of that sequence as impressionistic for a general audience. In other words, Nero could’ve beamed Spock prime down to Delta Vega with a telescope or some other type of measuring device to allow Spock to experience the pain of perceiving the destruction of his home world, but that simply isn’t very cinematic.

This makes it pretty clear that the writers didn't care about science, and that they feel that their general audience is unintelligent. It's not like it's the first time writers of Star Trek have ever done so. A very similar instance is Soran destroying the sun within seconds of launching the missile. Everything is for the sake of cinema regardless of if it's completely unrealistic. My position is that it needn't be that way with a bit more effort.

Also, if a telescope is such a bad thing, then in First Contact Cochrane should have just seen a giant Enterprise in the sky. Having a medium isn't such a bad thing.

Man, I had totally forgotten about that quote from Orci. It seems funny that he "prefers" to think of Delta Vega as a planet in close proximity of Vulcan considering the fact that we know from WNMHGB that DV is on the outer edge of the galaxy. It's also funny that he actually says "although it could be a moon" considering the well known fact within the fictional Star Trek universe that Vulcan has no moon (Yeah, I remember the original version of TMP). And he claims to be a Trek fan.

 

[JarodRussell]

I prefer to think of Delta Vega as being in close orbit (although it could be a moon), but nonetheless, we like to think of that sequence as impressionistic for a general audience. In other words, Nero could’ve beamed Spock prime down to Delta Vega with a telescope or some other type of measuring device to allow Spock to experience the pain of perceiving the destruction of his home world, but that simply isn’t very cinematic.

This makes it pretty clear that the writers didn't care about science, and that they feel that their general audience is unintelligent. It's not like it's the first time writers of Star Trek have ever done so. A very similar instance is Soran destroying the sun within seconds of launching the missile. Everything is for the sake of cinema regardless of if it's completely unrealistic. My position is that it needn't be that way with a bit more effort.

Also, if a telescope is such a bad thing, then in First Contact Cochrane should have just seen a giant Enterprise in the sky. Having a medium isn't such a bad thing.

LOL, if Orci was serious about that.

"There you go, Spock, here's your telescope. Now watch some tiny point vanish in the sky." That's not only not cinematic, it's stupid.

 

[Devon]

Prove to us that a black hole can't act like how it did in the film based on your personal experiences with them.

That must seriously be the dumbest thing you ever said. Congratulations.

Hit a sore spot with you?

This makes it pretty clear that the writers didn't care about science, and that they feel that their general audience is unintelligent.

Not at all.

Also, if a telescope is such a bad thing, then in First Contact Cochrane should have just seen a giant Enterprise in the sky. Having a medium isn't such a bad thing.

No reason to have one in this case.

It's also funny that he actually says "although it could be a moon" considering the well known fact within the fictional Star Trek universe that Vulcan has no moon (Yeah, I remember the original version of TMP). And he claims to be a Trek fan.

He is a Trek fan. But even Trek fans need reference from to time. So your point is? He's human, right. Thanks.