this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
166 points (98.8% liked)

Star Trek

10608 readers
72 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episodes, as well as previews for upcoming episodes. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-21 LD 5x06 "Of Gods and Angles"
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"
12-12 LD 5x09 "Fissue Quest"
12-19 LD 5x10 "The New Next Generation"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (2025)

Section 31 (2025-01-24)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)

In Development

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.


Allied Discord Server


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

LoglineLa’An travels back in time to twenty-first-century Earth to prevent an attack which will alter humanity’s future history—and bring her face to face with her own contentious legacy.


Written by David Reed

Directed by Amanda Row

Note: This is a second attempt, as technical difficulties were preventing people from seeing the original discussion post. Apologies to the people who were able to comment in the original.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] khaosworks@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This deserves a lot more looking into. Possibly a post in c/DaystromInstitute at some point, but, like Holmes, I cry out for more data before wanting to form a workable hypothesis. As a side note, I’m already gathering data for working out Una’s chronology. It’s filling out nicely.

We don’t disagree in broad terms. I just recoil from the easy (and potentially dismissive) answer if I don’t think it’s actually necessary for the most part, so I’ll stick to not futzing around with established dates until something really tells me otherwise. As someone who’s been playing around and figuring out Trek chronologies since the early 90s, this is where I’m most comfortable being.

A general observation: I think that this episode is consistent with the way time travel is seen to work in the Trek universe - that the timeline is overwritten rather than branched. The Kelvin Timeline remains the one sole example of a branched timeline that was created as the result of a temporal incursion. In all other cases, the timeline becomes (in my favorite comparison) like a palimpsest.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Our household has been coming at it from our understanding of physics, and have been since at least the 90s. It means that we’ve been watching through that lens for a very long time.

Without it, the episodes in Voyager where Harry Kim or Janeway came back to correct the timeline are meaningless. We would just assume that the unchanged timeline went forward offscreen.

This resilient river of time version offers a continuity where actions matter, and corrections to the timeline mean something more than just a shift in point of view.

As you note, multiple universes can exist but it takes something very large to do it. In Star Trek, we’re not in the infinite and ever expanding continuum of branching universes where every possible permutation of events exists. (And that version of the multiverse doesn’t stand up for hard scientists.)

So far we know that the Mirror Universe has different physics of light - something that’s so enormous that it’s hard to credit that it’s developed in any kind of parallel. It suggests some fixed events in the past development of the two universes that are extraordinarily resilient against branching.

The Romulan supernova is a major event but of a much lower order of magnitude than say the establishment of the physics of light. It seems like that would be a kind of lower bound for a branching trigger.

All to say that I agree that a Daystrom Institute deep dive would be worthwhile. In fact, it may be possible to go through onscreen canon and itemize the various events and inconsistencies that support this construct.

[–] khaosworks@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The Narada incursion had the benefit of three things - a black hole, a very intense ion storm, and the magical red matter. We can minimally accept that as a unique confluence of events that led to a branched rather than overwritten timeline, at least.

To support the resilient river of time model, when I was studying history in grad school I came up with this axiom: history isn’t inevitable, but it has momentum.

To put another way, any given historical event is the natural outcome of historical events before it, and therefore when changing history you’re not just trying to change the one thing, but dealing with the weight of everything before pushing the timeline in that direction. That’s why it’s so hard to change history, that - in Sera’s terms - it seems like Time itself is fighting you. Call it historical momentum, call it historical inertia, what you will. And so the more “momentous” the event, the harder it is to just change it - things will “want” to go back to the way it was.

I was considering your usage of ‘palimpsest’. It’s not a bad way of looking at what remains, net, after the incursions have taken place.

But the river, strong, advancing with force in its riverbed is a great analogy too. Its momentum is enormous, its course hemmed-in by some fixed geology. Only something near-catastrophic will cause it to divide or jump its course.

By the way, I have been thinking about the temporal accords and the prohibition against time travel in the 32nd century. This will mean that the far post-Burn era will be the only one where these kinds of perturbations shouldn’t be permitted. It would be interesting to hear more from Kovich on this.