New stardates

[TrekGuide.com]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

I have many complaints about the movie. The stardate canon violation is one of them.

Since "Star Trek" canon is the collection of Paramount's episodes and movies, a movie being a "canon violation" is an oxymoron. Paramount can't violate canon, only add to it. (Like just about every episode of TOS, it can violate continuity or reality or common sense, but every episode and movie is equally a part of the canon.)

And technically speaking, "The Original Series" Stardates began around 1000.0 and ended at 6000.0 throughout the five-year mission, so, extrapolating backwards, before the five-year mission started the Stardates would be before Stardate 0001.0.

They could get away with using past Stardates on TNG, since its first season started with an arbitrarily large Stardate number, (but even then they often screwed it up), but with TOS Stardates, they pretty much started at 1 when the series began, so there's no way to retroactively create older Stardates using the same system.

The ".xx" could be in hundredths of the year (though several days would likely share one number) Or the first number after the point could represent a "tenth" of the year (each tenth equaling five weeks) and the second number representing a tenth of that

Um, pardon my math, but isn't that saying the same exact thing two different ways?

I have been working on a Stardate Calculator for several years. For anyone who's interested in calculating Stardates in a (somewhat) consistent manner, check out my Web site:
http://TrekGuide.com/Stardates.htm

 

[Kruge]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

maybe the first four digits aren't the year, ya know, just a thought, it wasn't stated that is the year

yes it was

Countdown takes place in 2387 (its stated in the comic, and also the Jellyfishs' onboard computer tells young Spock that it was built in 2387)... Spock Prime tells Kirk he is from 129 years in the future in the film, hence 2258, which matches with Kirks very funny half-assed stardate on Delta Vega ("Stardate 2258.42... four uh, whatever"), which makes 2233 make sense if Kirk were 25, which makes even more sense because 2258 is 8 years away from 2266, making Kirk 33 at the beginning of the five-year mission, and so forth

God I need a life

 

[Aetherus]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

I can just see it now in the JJTrek universe:

UFP president: Thank you for your application into the United Federation of Planets, Ambassador Q'tklsu of G'vrti. As the final procedure for your induction into the UFP, we must now ask you to abandon your current measurement of time and replace it with the Stardate notation.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Certainly. [It begins to go over the Stardate notation]. If I may inquire, what time measurements does this Stardate notation utilize? I am not familiar with its cadence to note the passage of time.

UFP president: Stadates utilize a variance of time intervals from a baseline time measurement. So currently, it is 2258 years since the birth of Christ.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Ok... so what is a year, and who is Christ?

UFP president: A year is one revolution of Earth around Sol, and Christ was a deity that a portion of our world worships.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Okee dokee. So why aren't you guys using date measurements which originate from the Big Bang, and time variances based from the rate of its expansion? Fourteen other applicant worlds use this same time measurement.

UFP president: Because the UFP is based from Earth.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Don't you think time measurements based on a planet's revolution around a single star among billions is kinda hokey? Not to mention a baseline based on a deity we've (and a hundred other worlds) never even heard of , let alone only a portion of your world worships?

UFP president: Uh, not really. We humans need something we can relate to.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Geez, no wonder the Klingons and Romulans never bothered to apply to the UFP! [Withdraws application]

 

[Trekker4747]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

The ".xx" could be in hundredths of the year (though several days would likely share one number) Or the first number after the point could represent a "tenth" of the year (each tenth equaling five weeks) and the second number representing a tenth of that

Um, pardon my math, but isn't that saying the same exact thing two different ways?

.... I guess it is.

I'm tired. What do you want from me?



(In my fan fiction I've simply made a spread sheet using the TNG style of Stardates and broken it down so I know what date corresponds to what day and what time in that day.)

 

[Kruge]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

I can just see it now in the JJTrek universe:

UFP president: Thank you for your application into the United Federation of Planets, Ambassador Q'tklsu of G'vrti. As the final procedure for your induction into the UFP, we must now ask you to abandon your current measurement of time and replace it with the Stardate notation.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Certainly. [It begins to go over the Stardate notation]. If I may inquire, what time measurements does this Stardate notation utilize? I am not familiar with its cadence to note the passage of time.

UFP president: Stadates utilize a variance of time intervals from a baseline time measurement. So currently, it is 2258 years since the birth of Christ.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Ok... so what is a year, and who is Christ?

UFP president: A year is one revolution of Earth around Sol, and Christ was a deity that a portion of our world worships.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Okee dokee. So why aren't you guys using date measurements which originate from the Big Bang, and time variances based from the rate of its expansion? Fourteen other applicant worlds use this same time measurement.

UFP president: Because the UFP is based from Earth.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Don't you think time measurements based on a planet's revolution around a single star among billions is kinda hokey? Not to mention a baseline based on a deity we've (and a hundred other worlds) never even heard of , let alone only a portion of your world worships?

UFP president: Uh, not really. We humans need something we can relate to.

Ambassador Q'tklsu: Geez, no wonder the Klingons and Romulans never bothered to apply to the UFP! [Withdraws application]

Haha good point

but still, that system would make it the year 13,700,000,000 or so wouldn't it??

That would be one long ass stardate!

I'm not a particularly religious Christian, so I don't really care what our calendar is based on, but I think that unless some other major event comes up in our history, we probably will use this calendar for a bit longer

Plus Jews, Hindus, Muslims will probably use their own calendars well into the 23rd Century as well...and don't start with the "There are no Jews, Hindus, Muslims in the 23rd Century", because that's been contradicted a few times...

Now, dating it after First Contact may make some sense, but then this film would take place in 195 A.F.C., and that might confuse some of the newbies

Plus that would once again be something that "humans can relate to"...for the Vulcans, April 5, 2063 may be a date they'd rather forget

 

[Brent]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

They could reset the year to the date the UFP formed?

I believe that is how they did it in the Andromeda TV series, Earth adopted the Systems Commonwealth calander when they became a member, which I believe started when the Commonwealth was created. They used CY blablabla for Commonwealth Year. That system always made a lot of sense to me.

So start with UFP 1 as the year when the UFP was formed, and go from there. All UFP planets would adopt the UFP calander.

 

[Kruge]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

A.C. - After Cochrane?

Or just keep it A.D., but "After Drunky"?

 

[Captain_Amasov]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

Stardates were originally made to confuse what century Trek was taking place. To put it easily even Gene didn't know when Star Trek was talking place. Just look at some of the episodes it's 150 years, 200, 300, even up to something like 900 years into the future depending of the episode. Gene finally decided on the 23rd century after the show was canceled and it wasn't shown on screen till the start of the TWOK.

Another thing that I've always wondered is why every other species other than humans also use the 23rd and/or 24th century as a reference for the current time frame?

 

[CaptainJon]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

Yes, I love the new stardate system! I understood the TNG era where the second digit would change with each season, but the rest of the numbers never made any sense at all. At last, a stardate system that makes sense!

 

[Cronos6939]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

It never bothered me terribly that TOS stardates were random numbers.

I thought the TNG style worked well enough at first, though it failed once we got to stardate 50000 and when it referenced earlier points in time. Had it only been TNG and not DS9 and VOY, it would have been fine. (Not to say that I'm sorry we had 2 more series, just that it thwarted that stardate system).

Now, I do think reinventing the system was a good idea, and it definitely helped everyone understand what year it was, but I don't think it was quite good enough. We are guessing that 2233.4 means April of 2233, and that's fine. But how useful is it to have one date represent an entire month? You would have thirty (or more) log entries filed under a single number. However, adding more digits to represent each day would make the whole stardate cumbersome and not as friendly to a casual audience.

So yes, I do think it was a good idea, and it does work well enough for the casual audience. I just don't think that the new system is quite as developed as it needs to be.

 

[Psion]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

I found myself stumbling over the stardates in my first viewing because I kept thinking, "Why do they keep saying the current Earth year instead of the stardate?"

 

[T'Paul]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

He never had an "official" birthday.

Well he must have been born sometime. He's been shown on-screen outside the womb, so it's canon.

 

[npsf3000]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

True confession: I've written ten STAR TREK books and I've never understood stardates . . . .

Wow, Cool - i've actually got one of yours (the black shore)...


Anyway, i'm much of the same boat - i've never understood the star date thing.

For Example (out of above book...) "Captain's log, stardate 491750.0"

 

[Myasishchev]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

To answer the OP: hell yes.

 

[Aetherus]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

but still, that system would make it the year 13,700,000,000 or so wouldn't it??

So start with UFP 1 as the year when the UFP was formed, and go from there. All UFP planets would adopt the UFP calander.

This can't be done, since you are still measuring time (the year) based on a Sol-centric time base. For anyone from outside the Sol system, the concept of the second, minute, hour, year, decade, century, millennium, etc. is foreign to them, because these time concepts are based on the rotation of Earth and it's rotation around Sol. Not every planet is the exact same distance from its star as the Earth's. Not every planet's rotation is the same as the Earth's.

In the world of Star Trek, time needs to be measured based on a concept that is common to the universe, not based on the Earth. It's called a Stardate, not a Soldate.

 

[Psion]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

In the world of Star Trek, time needs to be measured based on a concept that is common to the universe, not based on the Earth. It's called a Stardate, not a Soldate.

I disagree. Time needs to be measured by an agreed-upon means -- whether scientific or not. Stardates could be measured by the standardized interval between a sehlat's farts for all a bureaucrat cares. While I agree it's silly to measure the date from the birth of Christ, it's less silly to measure a full year by Earth's. It's likely that many planets in the UFP have a similar solar year to Earth's since the habitable zone of other stars will be similar. Maybe a hundred days longer or shorter at most, but certainly not too far off. And the average of those *might* even converge on about 365 days.

If the Vulcans condescendingly agreed to use Earth years and maybe even 24-hour-days as a standard in the early days before the founding of the UFP, and that standard isn't appreciably different from that shared by other founding members, then it's likely that Earth standards for telling time might become accepted as well.

For day-to-day purposes on each member world, routine time and calendar functions might be maintained in the local style, but Starfleet could easily maintain conversion constants for these into that used by UFP citizens.

 

[MvRojo]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

I don't have a problem with the new stardate. It's a standardized system which the Federation uses to measure time. It's like how all the planets in the UFP agreed on the ship design that was started by Earth. It's to create consistency.

 

[Aetherus]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

It's likely that many planets in the UFP have a similar solar year to Earth's since the habitable zone of other stars will be similar. Maybe a hundred days longer or shorter at most, but certainly not too far off. And the average of those *might* even converge on about 365 days.

I disagree. The "habitable" zone of other stars can't be similar to Earth's, because not every star is yellow and the same age. If I'm not mistaken, a red star would fry a planet that was at same distance as the Earth is to Sol.

 

[Psion]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

It's likely that many planets in the UFP have a similar solar year to Earth's since the habitable zone of other stars will be similar. Maybe a hundred days longer or shorter at most, but certainly not too far off. And the average of those *might* even converge on about 365 days.

I disagree. The "habitable" zone of other stars can't be similar to Earth's, because not every star is yellow and the same age. If I'm not mistaken, a red star would fry a planet that was at same distance as the Earth is to Sol.

A red star is cooler than a yellow one. Some star types automatically exclude evolved life on any of their worlds because they burn through fuel too quickly for life to evolve. Others put out lots more harmful radiation or are less stable. F, G, and K stars are most likely to have life similar to what we know. M stars -- the red ones -- are cool and dim (and very common), with a habitable zone very close to the star. This tends to be dangerous to anything living there because coronal mass ejections will be much closer.

Class A stars would have a habitable zone farther out and might be habitable ... indeed, in Trek Vega and Deneb are inhabited, but these might be colonizations of worlds that didn't support life otherwise. B stars burn a lot of fuel and likely aren't old enough to support life. Rigel and possibly Spica are inhabited in the franchise, but the habitable zone would have to be much farther out and won't last long (in cosmological terms). These are certainly colonies on dangerous worlds. Class O stars are ruled out because it appears they prevent planets from forming due to photoevaporation. Even in Trek, I don't believe there are inhabited worlds around O stars.

 

[Aetherus]

Re: Did you like the new Stardate system?

with a habitable zone very close to the star

And what is that distance from that red star? 93 million miles, like the Earth's?

what about multiple star systems (such as where Vulcan is located)? Would the habitable zone of a multiple star system be similar distance (or orbit) to Earth's? I doubt it.