integer Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Erm..you do know it's not real, right? Many of the plays of William Shakespeare are just stories he made up. It doesn't stop people from discussing them and the events therein. My daughter is currently studying William Goldman's "The Lord Of The Flies" at school. You know that isn't real, right? Can you give us a list of fictional stories and films that we are allowed to discuss or is it just Star Trek? Here, have my sense of humour. I obviously don't need it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Here, have my sense of humour. I obviously don't need it here. Whatever, my point stands. If we were discussing "The Tempest", "The Iliad" or "24" would you have been compelled to point out that it wasn't real? And that is a serious question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
integer Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Whatever, my point stands. If we were discussing "The Tempest", "The Iliad" or "24" would you have been compelled to point out that it wasn't real? And that is a serious question. I realise this may contravene Manxforums guidelines, but I'm not getting into a petty debate regarding whether it's appropiate or not to make an off the cuff quip about a fictional story. May I kindly refer you to my previous post, and that is a serious answer. Note smiley: indicates humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 A small black hole could easily eat the planet up (admittedly not as quickly as a 'conventional' black hole) whilst only being one or two percent of the mass of the planet. After the planet has been consumed you have a black hole which has a mass a fraction more than the planet had. Assuming the moon is far enough out, it should survive unscathed - if it was closer in, tidal forces would be problematical. I get you now. I also think it was a strange decision to kill off the vast majority of both the Vulcan and Romulan populations in one film. What is weird is by creating this time travel story everything else in Star Trek never really happened. It does create a paradox though. Maybe Starfleet in the distant future might fix it again, as they did in the Voyager episodes, they might to erase the movie though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 What I thought needed more explanation was how a single drop of that red matter was able to create a black hole like the one that consumed Vulcan, but a container the size of a small car full of the stuff didn't appear to create any noticeably bigger effect. They went to lengths to demonstrate the care that had to be taken with it, implying that a single drop was so powerful. I also think it was a strange decision to kill off the vast majority of both the Vulcan and Romulan populations in one film. No living long and prospering for them then............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I also think it was a strange decision to kill off the vast majority of both the Vulcan and Romulan populations in one film. surely Romulus has not yet been destroyed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Oh yeah. Fecking time travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 If I recall the various physics books that I have read correctly, the gravity gradient gets more horrible the smaller the black hole, so a planet-massed one would have quite serious spaghettification effects - but these would be close in. The consequence of a strong gradient is that it falls off quickly, so at a moon's distance it's likely to be, as has been said already, virtually the same gravitational effect as the original planet. However, this means that it's unlikely that the outer layers of the planet would be experiencing a strong enough gravitational effect to collapse into the growing black hole in the first place! However (2), invoking the McGuffin of red matter makes it all OK, including the slew of hard radiation that would have sterilised the moon... Regarding the big ball of red matter, presumably they reversed the polarity of the positron/tachyon emitter matrix in "the most advanced ship from which we ripped off the design and sound effects from Star Wars" to shield its effects. ...mine's the one with the point-to-point transporter key in the pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 However, this means that it's unlikely that the outer layers of the planet would be experiencing a strong enough gravitational effect to collapse into the growing black hole in the first place! Surely even if the gravitational strength near the surface was reduced the crust would still have collapsed downwards once the core had been consumed - if there's enough gravity to keepa moon in orbit, there's enough gravity to make a couple of billion tons of rock fall inwards. Another point - would future Spock (or as he is officially referred to, 'Spock Prime') have sat down with Starfleet to tell them what the next 100 years of history in his timeline went like? Starfleet would then know about all the threats that are waiting for them - the Borg, the probe from ST:IV, The Dominion, Q etc. - and would be able to make plans to head off all these. Also they would know about Khan and would not repeat that mistake. In addition all the adventures from ST:TOS would not happen again because all these unknown hazards - e.g. the Talosians, Tholians even Tribbles would also be known. So what could happen that hasn't already happened and been planned for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 That would breach the Temporal Prime Directive, the concept of which is only really mentioned in TNG but Kirk OS preserved the timeline in 'City on the edge of forever' and allowed the nurse (played I believe by Joan Collins ) to be knocked down and killed by that car and so preserved the timeline, so he ( Kirk ) must have been aware of the desirability/prinicples of a TPD even if it wasn't Starfleet policy in his time. Although the TPD is a part of the storyline in episodes of Voyager, Janeway and crew broke the rules on a number of occasions. Regarding the Borg, Q brought forward the first encounter by them by throwing the Enterprise across the galaxy, so introducing the Federation to the threat ahead of what would have naturally been the timescale of such a meeting had he not precipitated it. So it could be argued that the TPD ( although naturally the Q wouldn't adhere to it ) is not really a fixed principle - Kirk was always 'bending' the original Prime Directive anyway. A future Spock of all people would surely be aware of the consequences of deliberately altering a timeline. Hurrah - no red jumper for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 You could probably argue that the destruction of Vulcan has already altered the timeline to such an extent that nothing will happen the way it is supposed to happen anyway. Abrams has said all along that this is a restart of a franchise, not a prequel. They're not tied to future events when scripting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 You could probably argue that the destruction of Vulcan has already altered the timeline to such an extent that nothing will happen the way it is supposed to happen anyway. Abrams has said all along that this is a restart of a franchise, not a prequel. They're not tied to future events when scripting. Are they going to bring out another string of films or will there be a new series. I did suspect that the time travel story was a cop-out to good writing but you don't need to hold to any of the chronology but didn't realise it might be in preparation for regenerating the franchise for upcoming films, etc. I have to say I haven't been keeping up to track considering the quality of the last film and series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 All actors are contracted to three films. I can understand the Nemesis hate, although I didn't rate it down as the worst Star Trek film ever but I think those of you that didn't enjoy Enterprise are the ones who bailed before the 4th series. The 4th series, when Ronald D Moore came on board, was great and it's a real shame the show wasn't given another year to turn fans around. Speaking of Nemesis, this is hilarious http://www.stardestroyer.net/Nemesis/Pictorial-1.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 You could probably argue that the destruction of Vulcan has already altered the timeline to such an extent that nothing will happen the way it is supposed to happen anyway. Abrams has said all along that this is a restart of a franchise, not a prequel. They're not tied to future events when scripting. Fair enough, I suppose that with a franchise that's run since the sixties, a degree of latitude in consistency is only realistic. There are also a multitude of different realities as demonstrated in storylines in OS TNG, DS9 and Enterprise. The best thing is that the restart has demonstrably revived the whole concept which is a good thing. Gene must be smiling somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 All actors are contracted to three films. I can understand the Nemesis hate, although I didn't rate it down as the worst Star Trek film ever but I think those of you that didn't enjoy Enterprise are the ones who bailed before the 4th series. The 4th series, when Ronald D Moore came on board, was great and it's a real shame the show wasn't given another year to turn fans around. Speaking of Nemesis, this is hilarious http://www.stardestroyer.net/Nemesis/Pictorial-1.html Yeah that is funny and it sums it up for me, although I have more nitpicks and criticisms of that film. Which did you find the worst? Final Frontier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.