To answer the original question, the NuEnterprise is capable of Ludicrous Speed.
In order to get to Vulcan that fast, they went straight to plaid.
In order to get to Vulcan that fast, they went straight to plaid.
Maximum speed of the NuEnterprise
- Thread starter EJA
- Start date
Saquist
Commodore
You are seriously reaching now.
Yeah we need to scrap the, 'A wizard did it' excuse and replace it with, 'An idiot wrote it.'
I'll go with that.
Since I and others have already explained to you how the existing terms "singularity" and "black hole" are broad enough concepts to include what was depicted in the film, your complaint is now thoroughly moot.
But light can't pass through it. This is directly implied both visually and in dialog.
It's EXACTLY what an event horizon is: a region or distance where light cannot pass. Relativistically speaking, that doesn't mean OTHER objects can't pass through it, only that photons cannot cross that barrier on the way out.
Quite the contrary, no matter what the event horizon actually looks like, we cannot see it, nor would we "probably" know anything about its visual properties, because such an object is too small to image properly at this distance. We cannot even get an image of the accretion disk surrounding it, and the same is largely true of much closer black holes like V404 and X1.
And since those theories are subject to occasional modification, AND since those theories have little or no empirical data to support them, my statement stands: we have no idea what black holes actually look like because nobody has ever seen one up close.
I'm sure he did have "a radio" with him of some sort. Your guesses, however, do not amount to evidence that he MUST have had a working long-range transmitter.
I doubt he requested it, considering he was apparently waiting for it upwards of six months.
It's not ludicrous at all, it's just damned convenient (or inconvenient, in Scotty's case). That's hardly unprecedented for Star Trek; we've given a pass to far more bizarre coincidences in the past.
Assuming that Scotty and Keenser arrived on that shuttle, which is not necessarily the case.
For all plot purposes, it is. This is mainly implied by the fact that everyone previously known to have served on a starship called "Enterprise" somehow ends up on the crew of THIS Enterprise.
And I already explained to you how it has been CANONICALLY established that people can be beamed to a location without sensors OR a transmitter, as in ENT "Daedalus." It's the same working principle, applied with better knowledge of transporter technology (which Spock has and Emory, obviously, did not).
And even then I'm not saying the application in this case logically follows from anything in Trek precedent. I'm saying it in no way VIOLATES that precedent, since something similar has been done before.
But it WASN'T fully explained in canon. That's the thing about Voyager technobabble: it sounds like an explanation, but it conveys no useful information about what is actually going on.
In this case, "we can match the warp core frequency" is logically identical to "we can use the equation for transwarp beaming." The terms "core frequency" and "equation for beaming" are both logical elements that provide a certain function to the statement; since they don't actually know what those elements contain, they might as well be saying "We can use the magical chaos emeralds" without changing anything about the situation. The only reason ANY explanation may be preferred is because it relies on something the characters/scenery already possesses; in this case, it's Scotty's beaming equation (which was established three minutes earlier). In Voyager's case, it was the Maquis warp core frequency thing (which was established thirty seconds earlier).
Which is irrelevant, since even if Spock was using the same method depicted in Voyager, he obviously knows more about it than the Voyager crew to be able to plug in the equation from memory.
On the other hand, Spock immediately reacts to Scotty by recognizing him as "You are the Mister Scotty who postulated the theory on transwarp beaming?" At this point the question rears its ugly head again: how sure are you that this IS the Spock from the prime universe?
Because the interference itself is a theory of yours you have yet to support. We don't actually know what caused the seismic disturbances that prompted the Vulcans to call for help, the only thing we know is that they didn't mention they were under attack. This means either they didn't know that Nero was causing them (which forces you to come up with an explanation for why they weren't aware of this instead of whining about how they should have) or it means that something else was responsible for it (and there are plenty of candidates for what this "something else" could have been).
But the thread of thought your proposing boils down to: "Nero's drill caused it, AND the Vulcans knew about it, AND the Vulcans failed to mention it, AND the Vulcans found a way to transmit past the drill, AND despite this still failed to mention they were under attack, AND still failed to send a warning to Starfleet before Vulcan was destroyed, AND still failed to warn Earth after Vulcan was destroyed." That's alot of unsupported (and in some ways, contradictory) assumptions for one theory, and not all of them can be true. If Nero's drill didn't cause it, then none of them are necessary.
Were the Vulcans nerds to begin with?
There's such a thing as too broad though. Black hole, as a general term, refers to a very dense mass from which light cannot escape at a certain distance. Anything else needs to be elaborated upon, and that elaboration doesn't require much. Otherwise it's like calling a tangerine an orange, when they both have distinct differences. Same goes for wormholes and black holes. There's a difference in terminology for a reason.
And that's why it makes zero sense. If light can't pass through, but a shuttle moving at impulse can, then that's terrible science.
No, that's too simplified a definition, otherwise the wall behind my computer is an event horizon.
And given that light is the fastest thing we really know of, everything else slower than it can also not escape once inside.
But you say that as if we have absolutely no idea, when our theorized ideas are probably pretty good given our knowledge of physics. At least, they're much better than how this movie portrays it.
^Speed of Plot was my answer as soon as I saw the Thread Title.
I'm not up on my Trek tech but if the transporter does indeed use a 'subspace carrier wave' wouldn't it use the same transmitter as the subspace communications system, which also uses a subspace carrier wave? Perhaps anybody who has read any of the TOS tech manuals could specify.
Maybe you gave them a pass. I just had a good laugh. Two wrongs don't make a right. Unless you're Kirk.
I'll give you this one. Although it adds insult to injury to idiocy to suggest that the Federation would dump officers on a planet with no communications, minimal supplies, AND no way at all to seek help if needed. Even Kirk's life pod must have some kind of limited a long range transmitter to send its distress signal (we can assume this otherwise sitting in a sub-light pod with a limited air supply and limited food and water would be a death sentence in most cases).
But citing the plot itself as a defence for your stance is self-defeating. The point of the argument is that it is the plot itself that is flawed. We're trying to jusftify those plot hole using Trek logic. The ship is larger, faster, and most significantly, the engineering systems look nothing like the original. It MAY have the EXACTLY the same warp signature (even assuming that a ship's signature stays the same throughout its entire career) but your argument that Spock would ASSUME that the frequency is the same is making an already dangerous procedure more and more dangerous by having him guess variables that could kill them if even slightly wrong. That makes the plot seem dafter, not more sensible. They could have overcome this by making Scotty a nerd who knew everything about the specifics of the Enterprise but he actually seems quite bewildered when he eventually makes it to the ship.
This isn't strictly true. I don't recall the precise details of the episode but my understanding is that in Daedalus Emory was using a new type of 'sub-atomic' transporter that has never been shown to be in use since. Scotty is using a standard (and according to your evidence, knackered) shuttle transporter. The canon evidence doesn't support use of one of those without sensors or a transmitter.
I'm not convinced. Scotty's equation is general. The warp core frequency is specific.
I'm not. And in fact, the plot can make more sense if it isn't!
Not at all. The interference is a fact. You originally seemed to claim that the drill was not proven to be the cause of the seismic disturbance. The communication interference itself is a separate issue. The film establishes this as being a result of the drill.
Once again you're changing the subject and attempting to put words in my mouth. I never said anything about their awareness of Nero's attack, or anything about "should". I merely explained how the signal could have gotten out.
I never said that.
It is indeed true that the above is an "unsupported assumption"; the problem is that I didn't make it. You're the one assuming that these erroneous conclusions follow from the drill causing the seismic disturbance.
Yes. They are supposedly scientific types.
You are seriously reaching now.
Yeah we need to scrap the, 'A wizard did it' excuse and replace it with, 'An idiot wrote it.'
I'll go with that.
Works for me.
No, that's a singularity.
"Black hole" is a colloquialism to describe the appearance of such objects. It is a common enough phrase to be familiar to audiences yet still accurate in the context of the scene without bogging us down in technical details.
Sure: a wormhole is something that can (generally, ONLY) form at the center of a black hole. A singularity is something that generates a black hole, therefore, a singularity is also something that generates wormholes (firmly established by Trek science, mind you, since all known Trek wormholes form around some type of singularity).
But that's just being pedantic; in terms of trek logic, how exactly would you explain Spock's (actually, Chekov's knowledge) that the thing that was eating Vulcan was actually a wormhole, NOT a black hole? Especially when the relevant properties--immense gravitational pull--are identical in both?
Right, because shuttlecraft in general and impulse engines in particular have ALWAYS been internally (let alone scientifically) consistent.
It's not, because other forms of radiation (and for that matter, information) can pass through the wall.
Really, it's as simple as this: in Star Trek, since space ships (and subspace radio waves, btw) can travel faster than light, they can easily travel fast enough to leave an event horizon. Light, however, cannot travel faster than itself.
No, starships are the fastest thing we know of. THEY have problem leaving event horizons. Shuttlecraft apparently don't have this problem either.
"Probably pretty good idea" does not equal "knowledge." And especially since hollywood has never strived for that level of theoretical realism even in HARD sci-fi, it's just plain asinine to expect it from the softer variety that Star Trek has always been.
Explicitly, no. The TNG transporters as originally conceived required massive transporter beam emitters that were clearly referred to as a different component from the communications gear. Besides which, the (normally) limited range of transporter beams rules out that sort of commonality to begin with, otherwise Starfleet could send replacement officers all the way from Earth via email.
But the movie doesn't suggest this, it just flat out SAYS this. It's not "idiocy" so much as it is a huge plot convenience (or from Scotty's point of view, a huge inconvenience).
Besides, I'm not at all certain that Starfleet outposts NORMALLY have long range communications capability. Local capability, sure, enough to send a general distress signal that might be heard by a passing ship named Enterprise. But considering the overall vastness of space it's highly unlikely every half-assed temporary outpost in the galaxy has a 700GW transmitter with a direct line to Starfleet headquarters (if they were planning on giving Scotty that kind of infrastructure, they would have at least given him sandwiches).
It IS a death sentence in most cases. Why do think the Kelvin crew took the trouble to evacuate in shuttlecraft? Especially when they surely had plenty of perfectly good escape pods, thruster suits, possibly even inflatable rescue pods all over the ship?
Which I did. It's the same Enterprise, it just looks different. Sort of like the transformed (and thoroughly militarized) Enteprise-D in "Yesterday's Enterprise".
Pretty much, yeah. Remember, he does this eighty five years after making a similar (and much riskier) guess in TVH, during the bird of prey's return trajectory around the sun. In this case, it's a safe guess to make, since obviously history has played out in such a way that Spock and James Kirk AND Christopher Pike are both assigned to the Enterprise, it's safe to assume that it is, in fact, the same Enterprise.
Some type of "quantum transporter," the specifics of which are unimportant because they are mindless technobabble. The CIRCUMSTANCES of Quinn's disappearance/reappearance, however, establish precedence for the use in STXI. After all, Enterprise was able to beam him back using its own (conventional) transporter
The transmitter is irrelevant, given portable transporters depicted in Nemesis and The First Duty. Sensors also appear to be irrelevant, considering a confinement beam can be bounced to random locations and the transported object rematerialized somewhere unintentionally, even without the transporter chief knowing it (Geordi and Ro in "The Next Phase," and Tom Riker in "Second Chances.") Sensors allow you to choose a specific target, but they aren't required for transport to succeed, hence the way Enterprise is sometimes able to transport people to pre-determined coordinates while explicitly forbidden from using their sensors (as in "The Mark of Gideon"). Likewise, there's also Kirk accidentally beaming his security detail into deep space in "And the Children Shall Lead," having performed the transport without bothering to check whether the Enterprise was even still in orbit.
Since we don't know the frequency, it too is general. Furthermore, since we don't know what the hell "warp core frequency" even means, it is actually VERY general.
Generally, yes. BUT NOT AT THE TIME OF THE DISTRESS SIGNAL. The fact that the signal was sent implies the drill was NOT active then, which rules it out as a cause of the seismic disturbances.
You are free to speculate on what could have caused the seismic disturbances, but understand that any of those additional suspects have one less negative datapoint than the drill (the fact that a signal was able to be sent at all counts against it).
The film establishes nothing of the kind: we do not see the drill being used until AFTER the distress signal had already been sent. Amanda's reaction strongly suggests it had only been activated in the past few minutes, if not the past few seconds.
That's what we call a "generalization," especially since "they" are nothing of the sort. Spock is the scientific type. T'pol is a newly scientific type who used to be an intelligence operative. To a limited extent, Tuvok was (at times) the scientific type, but he is--in point of fact--Voyager's TACTICAL officer.
Then there was Sakonna, a terrorist and a smuggler. T'pring was a terrorist, a revolutionary and a politician. V'las was a militaristic dictator. Soval was a dedicated bureaucrat. Sarek was an ambassador and a politician. And Chu'lak was a serial killer.
Vulcans embrace logic as a matter of course, but that makes them "nerds" only insofar as non-Vulcans tend to find them smug and obtuse. But to say that all Vulcans are scientists is almost as bizzare as saying that all humans are explorers.
Generally, I agree with this article: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/inconsistencies-trekxi.htm
I think the problem with your position on predicting the warp core frequency is that it is going to depend on the particular speed of the ship as well as the design. Without sensors Spock would have no way of knowing the key variables.
"When this substance is energized, it causes the energy frequencies in the plasma to shift into subspace, creating warp fields... The open-close cycle can vary between 25 and 50 nanoseconds; low warp factors require the injectors to be fired at low frequencies, remaining open for short periods, higher warp speeds require higher frenquencies and longer openings. The longest safe cycle for which an injector can be open is 53 nanoseconds."
"PROPULSION SYSTEMS" - JUNE 2000 ISSUE 14 STAR TREK: THE MAGAZINE COPYRIGHT OF PARAMOUNT PICTURES.
Lol - don't be silly. Starships don't have enough shuttles to evacuate all their personnel. The TMP Enterprise had what, 4 - 6 shuttles plus a dozen travel pods? The Kelvin has twice as many crew as the Enterprise and we know that of those some 800 survived. Even assuming you could squeeze 30 people onto each shuttle, you'd need roughly 27 shuttles and all your 800 crew would have to file down to the shuttle bay and escape in the shuttles a few at a time.
Last edited:
While it technically could be a singularity, not every singularity is defined as having an event horizon from which light can't escape. That's where the term black hole comes in. That's why there's a difference in terms.
Black hole is most certainly not a colloquialism.
And if you think it's accurately portrayed in this movie, then I'm just awestruck.
There's no need to get bogged down in technical details either, so I don't know why you keep coming up with that straw man.
For starters, I probably wouldn't call it a wormhole. I'd make something up just like they did with red matter.
Also, a wormhole, especially artificial in origin, needn't have an immense gravitational pull if it were balanced out with something like exotic matter. That's why the terminology is different, because while every black hole might be a wormhole, not every wormhole is a black hole.
That's totally beside the point. Answer how a moving object can go through something, but light cannot, yet it still is an event horizon.Right, because shuttlecraft in general and impulse engines in particular have ALWAYS been internally (let alone scientifically) consistent.
That's better. At least now you're not simplifying it so much. So now tell me why radiation or light can't pass through an event horizon, but a physical sub-light object can.
They don't actually travel faster than light, they just warp space to give the appearance of doing so.Really, it's as simple as this: in Star Trek, since space ships (and subspace radio waves, btw) can travel faster than light, they can easily travel fast enough to leave an event horizon. Light, however, cannot travel faster than itself.
Also, this is irrelevant because they didn't warp into or out of the wormhole.
In science, it does. Science has a standard where everything we know could be wrong, so we go with our best knowledge of things to base theories and equations on. Yeah, there's a chance we could be wrong about how a black hole might physically look, but in that case science is simply revised. Until then, the theories are our best shot. So for a movie to come along and claim that it's different without science to show otherwise, then it's just pseudoscience with no basis.
It is not asinine to expect established science to make sense on a TV show or movie. It's asinine to completely ignore it or let it slide. That just encourages more negligent writing.
The simple solution: Don't use established science for your fantastical plot whims that contradict said science. If necessary, make something purely fictional like red matter, and then there's far fewer worries.
That's two assumptions in one sentence, neither of which is supported. Besides which, you forget the whole "core frequency match" in the first place is itself a matter of plot contrivance: it's just a means to an end to accomplish what the characters wanted to accomplish. Even assuming Spock used the same method in this case--and there is exactly ZERO reason to think he did--we know little enough about that technique to say anything concrete about its theoretical limits, especially when Spock--the MASTER of the theoretical--is at the controls.
They do now. I should say it's something Star Trek finally got right after all these years.
I'm confused... isn't this EXACTLY what we see in the film?
Nor is every human being defined as breathing air and walking on two feet, yet those traits follow the normal properties of what a human is.
Besides which, if Chekov was describing one of those special (and incredibly rare) cases, he would have said so explicitly. The general case covers what was described, though.
Yes it is. The technical terms for such concepts are somewhat varied; "collapsar" is one of the older ones.
How is it a strawman if you yourself are complaining about their not fully describing the object in question?
Exactly my point. We know nothing about red matter except what it does: it creates black holes. We know more or less what black holes are without having to be told all that much (despite what you may think, MOST modern audiences know what a black hole is), so this closes the explanatory loop.
On the other hand, if you introduce red matter as a substance that creates "subspace quantum gravitational fissures," you've invented a new magic phenomenon that has exactly the properties you want it to have, constructed out of wholecloth. Congratulations, you've appeased 5% of all pedantic nitpickers; meanwhile, the rest of the audience is thinking "Subspace quant... whatever."
Incorrect. According to the theory, exotic matter is only used to "wedge open" the Einstein-Rosen bridge, allowing passage through a "tunnel" of space to another position in space-time (popularly thought of as simply another location, but the actual theory maintains this would usually be another universe altogether). Such exotic matter doesn't change the singularity's gravitational field, only the distribution thereof.
Ergo, every wormhole IS a black hole. Which is kind of irrelevant either way since you can never know for sure which one you're looking at until you fly into it and find out. Since theoretically, wormholes would open into another universe altogether, NOBODY else will ever know which one it is, because you'll never come back.
The moving object is moving faster than light. DUH!
And warping your way out of an event horizon changes this how?
Evidently they did, given the effect INSIDE the wormhole while they were crossing it (both in the Barzan case and the Bajoran wormhole). Them impulse engines are mighty powerful.
No, in science it does not. Facts and data can be called knowledge, sure. For example, we KNOW that black holes emit x-rays and polar jets. We KNOW the location of some black holes, and we KNOW some of their masses and orbits. The details beyond that are largely theoretical; in point of fact, scientists do not even know for sure that the identified objects ARE black holes, only that a strong correlation exists between gamma ray sources and a large (otherwise unseen) gravitational source. The theory--there's a black hole there--is consistent with what astronomers know from their observations. But since the object itself is not observed, there's no data on it, only second-hand extrapolation.
But science doesn't tell us how black holes physically look. It has a theory about how EVENT HORIZONS might look based solely on its gravitational profile and their understanding of the physics. That is, again, a theory, not actual data.
To illustrate in more detail: scientists have a very good idea what Proxima Centauri looks like. It has a low temperature--around 2000K--and main-sequence density so it's almost certainly smaller than the sun and not nearly as bright. However, beyond color and size this doesn't tell us anything about what it looks like, especially up close. For alot of the details, they'd have to fill in visual elements using our sun as a datapoint: prominences, flares, sunspots, a luminous corona (maybe), convection patterns on the surface, plasma streamers following lines of magnetic flux. All these contribute to visual elements, the sum of "what it looks like."
In the case of black holes, the general features--polar jets and an accretion disk--are predicted by the theory and somewhat confirmed by observations. They are not, however, DESCRIBED in any detail, and since we have no solid data to fall back on we have NO IDEA what they really look like.
This is where ARTISTS come in, because "we don't know what T-rex looked like" doesn't sell as many magazines as "artist's depiction of what T-rex looked like." At least in the field of paleontology alot of that finer detail--even that which comes from scientists--is literally made up on the spot just to give journalists something more substantial than "data, fossils, more data, reaction" to publish. Doubly so in astronomy, where even professional science writers for some reason have a hard time believing that astronomers can't literally see the majority of the things their telescopes are showing them.
The science works just fine. You're objecting to the way it looks. Sad to say, you're going to have to take that complaint up with the entire pantheon of film producers for the past hundred years.
Writers do not control special effects.
Nero's presence and actions altered the timeline, speeding up Starfleet's tech development. This led to the differences in ship style and technology we see in the altered timeline. Starfleet ends up inventing slipstream drive in the 23rd century and installing it as standard issue on all their ships. Slipstream would allow a 16 light year trip from Earth to Vulcan to be completed in mere minutes. They call it "warp" as a colloquialism. So, yeah, the STXI ships are using slipstream drives.
I know its complete bull but it works for me.
I know its complete bull but it works for me.
Neither of which is supported? I did quote the article from the official Star Trek Magazine in support of my suggestion. The article specified that travelling at different speeds requires different frequencies. How can Spock key in frequencies from memory if he doesn't know what of the variables (i.e. the ship's speed)?
Do you mean neither of which is supported by evidence we see on screen? Again that's a self-defeating argument since the discussion is about whether what we actually see on screen is flawed because it contradicts pre-existing Trek.
Your defence of 'plot contrivance' is unsatisfying to many because it is an 'out of universe' defence that is being used to justify things that make little sense 'in universe' or at least that could have made more sense with a bit more effort.
Similarly, putting forward a defence that your theory should be preferred because there was no evidence on screen to contradict it is also unsatisfying for me as a lawyer, especially when there is other evidence in pre-existing Trek to contradict it. Trek tech articles elsewhere support different theories such as my own, even though that means that the plot as seen on screen makes less sense 'in universe'.
Not exactly. People have commented that we don't see anywhere near enough shuttles to support 800 people and Kirk crashes the ship very soon after the evacuation is sounded. Personally I have no idea how they managed to get 800 people out and the only shuttle interior we see has far fewer than 30 people inside.
Similar threads
