ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Minor "oops" in the new movie...

God_in_an_Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4538

Report this Nov. 22 2009, 11:30 pm

That's topical evolution for ya.

captbates

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 12614

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 3:52 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Nov. 22 2009, 4:40 pm)
Quote (captbates @ Nov. 21 2009, 4:16 pm)
Quote (starbase63 @ Nov. 15 2009, 5:03 pm)
But despite the fact Federation starships are primarily ships of exploration, much of the crew is not scientific in nature.

Engineer Snuffy down monitoring the warp reaction chamber might not give a hoot about stargazing...or Ensign Schmuckatel from Security...

But we've gotten a bit away from the point. The question isn't if the ship should have windows/viewports at all, but if it's wise to have a four-metre wide viewwindow right in the front of the bridge...

:logical:

Perhaps the answer is that two feet of reinforced transparent aluminum, or whatever they use for a starship window, is stronger that the hull.

Not from what we saw late in the movie...the viewwindow started to crack.

:logical:

As someone else already said SB the crack went along the outer hull before getting to the window. (or at least appeared to)

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 3:58 pm

It was the interior walls of the bridge which started to crack and this may include some of the exterior hull then? The view window cracks after this which brings more suspense. Kirk orders the ejection of the warp core very quickly when this happens.

Vice_Adm_Baxter

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 0

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 4:06 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:55 pm)
Quote (captbates @ Nov. 23 2009, 3:52 pm)
Quote (starbase63 @ Nov. 22 2009, 4:40 pm)
Quote (captbates @ Nov. 21 2009, 4:16 pm)
Quote (starbase63 @ Nov. 15 2009, 5:03 pm)
But despite the fact Federation starships are primarily ships of exploration, much of the crew is not scientific in nature.

Engineer Snuffy down monitoring the warp reaction chamber might not give a hoot about stargazing...or Ensign Schmuckatel from Security...

But we've gotten a bit away from the point. The question isn't if the ship should have windows/viewports at all, but if it's wise to have a four-metre wide viewwindow right in the front of the bridge...

:logical:

Perhaps the answer is that two feet of reinforced transparent aluminum, or whatever they use for a starship window, is stronger that the hull.

Not from what we saw late in the movie...the viewwindow started to crack.

:logical:

As someone else already said SB the crack went along the outer hull before getting to the window. (or at least appeared to)

I didn't notice it outside, just inside...

I'll have to keep an eye out for that.

:logical:

With cracks as big as those they dar sure went to the outside of the hull!

captbates

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 12614

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 5:02 pm

> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (captbates @ Nov. 22 2009, 7:10 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Nov. 21 2009, 11:44 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (captbates @ Nov. 22 2009, 6:35 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Nov. 21 2009, 11:32 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (captbates @ Nov. 22 2009, 6:12 pm)> id="QUOTE">Your clutching at straws,
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Nov. 22 2009, 12:13 am)

And your denying the facts in front of you.

How bout you give me an alternate logicial explanation insteed of just denying things.

;)

True enough.

But what I've been trying to get across is that the evidence isint 100% conclusive in either of our cases.
Yeah, without actual proof it could go either way.

I don't want to get this going again, but I always thought that when they travelled back in time on Trek it was assumed that the "team" was protected against changes in the timeline until they returned to their own timeframe, other wise any changes made whatsoever would effect their every moment.

Eg. When you say that the ENT E was protected by the temporal wake, allowing them safe passage into the past when Earth was assimilated, and that they could survive in the past because First Contact had not been stopped yet, that makes perfect sense, however, by that logic if the Borg stopped First Contact and Earth and the Federation were gone, then in the future the Borg would never have came into contact with the Federation in the first place and would never have gone back in time to Montana to stop FC.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 6:08 pm

Quote (captbates @ Nov. 23 2009, 5:02 pm)
Yeah, without actual proof it could go either way.I don't want to get this going again, but I always thought that when they travelled back in time on Trek it was assumed that the "team" was protected against changes in the timeline until they returned to their own timeframe, other wise any changes made whatsoever would effect their every moment.

Thats an other possibility.....but its only possible if you except the possibility that a paradox can exsist.

The way I see it we have 4 options to consider when were talking about time travel events that alter history.

1] they are protected by some kind of radiation/energy caused by the method of time travel

this radiation/energy protection may be short lived or may last forever

2] they are protected up untill they reach the threshold of a pivotal point in history.

basicily there is a point of no return, like with Back to the future Marty having to ensure his parents kissed at the dance.

3] they exsist in spite of the paradox

they exsist even thou their history has been destroyed

4] quantum universe theory.

basicily the every act of changing history creates a parallel universe

Now the problem comes from the fact that in different Trek stories we have seen examples that can be described as of the top 3

And the new film may be an example of the 4th.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 6:17 pm

Quote (captbates @ Nov. 23 2009, 5:02 pm)
Eg. When you say that the ENT E was protected by the temporal wake, allowing them safe passage into the past when Earth was assimilated, and that they could survive in the past because First Contact had not been stopped yet, that makes perfect sense, however, by that logic if the Borg stopped First Contact and Earth and the Federation were gone, then in the future the Borg would never have came into contact with the Federation in the first place and would never have gone back in time to Montana to stop FC.

Which would be an other paradox.........if you believe that the events of First Contact were an example of a predestination paradox.

Which I'm not completely convinced of.

bwtowns

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Jul. 15 2010, 5:32 am

Why do we look for "mistakes"??? Why not just enjoy the fact that Star Trek is going strong after more than 40 years? I am an original Trekkie... I was a Trekkie before most knew what one was... I just enjoy the movies... not sit there and try to pick apart the movie by taking note of each and every mistake... to me, that would take the enjoyment from it.

QuantumSpectre

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10

Report this Dec. 13 2010, 8:18 am

 ... Wow, looking back at this topic, I'm surprised at the flurry of activity. The original topic was on a costume oversight, and from there it went to director's stylistic approaches to... time travel. I've always taken the viewpoint that time travel makes for good stories, but angry fans. Some of the best episodes, of ANY series, have involved time travel, but no matter how hard we fans try, we can never explain it. I'm just glad that First Contact could involve Zefram Cochrane, and that then new movie could involve Leonard Nimoy, and yet it could still KIND OF make sense. Honestly, I'm just happy 40 years later we can argue about this and both expect answers AND await a new movie or two.

Lieutenant_Jedi

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1728

Report this Dec. 13 2010, 8:25 am

Yes the constant floodlight effect did make me feel I was being interrogated.

But the movie was good overall.

"Can you detect midi - chlorians with a tricorder?"

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum