Vulcan was destroyed by a Red Matter induced Black Hole and once Vulcan was consumed the Black Hole collapsed posing no threat to Delta Vega.
We don't know that the black hole collapsed. From what I've read there was no dialogue to that effect.
EVEN if it did. The moment the black hole came into existence with enough mass to eat Vulcan from the inside out (a bit of scientific contradiction) then Delta Vega should have been "instantly" warped (vulcan facing side) and the surface crumbled but the addition of a mass attractor of that power and magnitude.
Actually, it's not necessarily true that the black hole collapsed, what is true is that it posed no threat to any other planet in the system because the black hole whould have the same mass as Vulcan. . .
http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/blackholes/teacher/sciencebackground.html #5
~FS
That's not right either.
Vulcan DIDN"T become a COLLAPSAR it was destroyed by a collapsar. That singularity already had mass of it's own.
"The more massive a black hole is, the more space it takes up.... A black hole with a mass equal to that of the Sun would have a radius of 3 kilometers. "
That's really small. A black hole can only destroy what's in it's event horizon everything else gets sent into spiraling accretion disk. That didn't happen with Vulcan. It was as though the entire planet was caught in the Event Horizon and immediately collapsed onto the singularity. What ever it was...it was MASSIVE. It was like a mini Sagittarius A or properly known as an Intermediate-mass black hole with tens of solar masses but not up to the level of supermassive.
Saquist, regarding my earlier post, first you disagreed with my summary of two points, evidently by declaring my assertion
Negative I disagreed with your equating known forces to an unknown plot device (the Genesis Device doesn't equate to a supernova or black hole.) We don't know what a real Genesis Device would do we do know what black holes and nova's do.
As for the second point you seemed to concede that if they had thrown just a few more adjectives on the technobabble, all would have been forgivable.
Indeed.
Sounds like you are indeed conceding that the the Vulcan implosion and the destruction of Romulus aren't necessarily plot holes [in the sense that the plot depends upon the occurrence of impossible events], but rather that a reasonable position is that the problem, if any, lies in the construction of the technobabbly explanations of these events, which is what I said to begin with.
Either or...it doesn't matter.
The plot hinges on these impossible events (supernova) as we know them to exist naturally so we're given no indication they are anything other than naturally occurring phenomenon (singularity aside)
The Singularity situation by your enabling theory through the use of Red Matter could explain why the blackholes behaved the way they did. But it's iffy. One the one hand they call them Black holes and singularities, they attracted objects but on the other hand they have a much larger attraction field than their invisible radius would imply.
As to the issue of shock waves in space,
I'm afraid you are scientifically mistaken. Space is not a perfect vacuum.
driving a shock wave[3] into the surrounding interstellar medium. This shock wave sweeps up an expanding shell of gas and dust called a supernova remnant.
You're right. I'm being lazy with my explanations. The shockwave as depicted could not have happened with out a considerable amount of material (more than a moon) and nor could have exceeded light speed.
I know this not from reading the article, but I remember from college that shock waves from supernovae traveling through the interstellar medium are one of the theorized triggers for the formation of solar systems. Indeed, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formation_and_evolution_of_the_Solar_System#Pre-solar_nebula:
Yes, Earth's magnetic field encounters those waves of energetic particles all the time but it's far from a shockwave....shockwaves move through some sort of medium. Space isn't that "think" with particles to allow shock waves. What we do see is concentrations of particles from exploded stars that have thrown off their shell. We call it a shockwave but the star is litterally creating the energy AND the medium at the same time.
Granted the term "subspace shock wave" addresses most of the issues you indicated, but not the first one.
You know, I'm sympathetic to a few of the points you are making, as far as they go. But, it's just that these issues don't rise to the level of being plot holes. The issues here reside entirely within the selection of the technobabble.
Like King Daniel pointed out these are technicalities with a ridgid use of the plot hole definition. Scientific nitpicks that just happen to cross with the plot. Another one is at the end when the ejected warp cores reach the blackhole first when anyone who knows how gravity works understands that it works equally on all objects. So the Enterprise and the cores really should have gotten there at the same time.
If you were to say, "Hey, they need to write better technobabble in Star Trek 12," hey, OK I won't really argue it.
Hmmm. It really doesn't have to be lengthy as most people are afraid of. I think they kept it properly short...just didn't use the technobble they did use right.
