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

STXI getting a bum wrap?

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 9:31 am

Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 6:58 am)
I posted this in another thread, but thought it warranted discussion in it's own thread.

We've all seen the comments on how time travel through a black hole and Red matter creating a black hole is just "bad science".

Sci-Trek: Breaking Time

I watched it last night. They specifically spoke of using black holes to travel back in time.

So... I don't think that "plot hole" is any bigger a stretch than transporters, replicators or Warp travel?

I also did a little looking around about "Red Matter" (more correctly "RED" Matter)

R-Reverse E-Energy D-Distribution or Red Matter. This is String Theory in reverse. Take numerous Zero Points and serially align them; you then have changed a one dimensional universe into a two dimensional universe. Apply energy to the string of zero points and the string begins to vibrate, adding a third dimension, The vibration of the string requires the string to be in multiple locations, thus you have a temporal horizon or 4th dimension. Reverse the applied energy distributed to the string of zero points, and the 3rd and 4th dimensions will collapse. The dimensional collapse of both 3rd and 4th dimensions will allow both worm holes and black holes to theoretically occur, much like a whirlwind or tornado will arise in the reverse of wind direction in a thunderstorm. Although red matter is a great tool for the movie Star Trek's plot, it is also a new discussion in the world of quantum physics along with the Higgs Boson.
Source(s):
Fred Allen Wolf, Parallel Universes; Stephen Hawking's discussion, String Theory's affect on Energy and Time.


Now, my head just blew up but if it's good enough for Steven Hawking's to talk about, it's good enough for a Star Trek movie.

Has the "science" of STXI been unfairly criticized?

I think it has been a bit more "unfairly criticized" than some bad science in some of the other Trek films (don't get me started on the Genesis Wave, protomatter, slingshot effects, traveling to the Galactic Center in hours, and "subspace shockwaves" for example).

I still think XI has some HIGHLY questionable science in it...but no more than many of the other well-loved Trek films.

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 10:48 am

Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 6:58 am)
I posted this in another thread, but thought it warranted discussion in it's own thread.

We've all seen the comments on how time travel through a black hole and Red matter creating a black hole is just "bad science".

Sci-Trek: Breaking Time

I watched it last night. They specifically spoke of using black holes to travel back in time.

So... I don't think that "plot hole" is any bigger a stretch than transporters, replicators or Warp travel?

I also did a little looking around about "Red Matter" (more correctly "RED" Matter)

R-Reverse E-Energy D-Distribution or Red Matter. This is String Theory in reverse. Take numerous Zero Points and serially align them; you then have changed a one dimensional universe into a two dimensional universe. Apply energy to the string of zero points and the string begins to vibrate, adding a third dimension, The vibration of the string requires the string to be in multiple locations, thus you have a temporal horizon or 4th dimension. Reverse the applied energy distributed to the string of zero points, and the 3rd and 4th dimensions will collapse. The dimensional collapse of both 3rd and 4th dimensions will allow both worm holes and black holes to theoretically occur, much like a whirlwind or tornado will arise in the reverse of wind direction in a thunderstorm. Although red matter is a great tool for the movie Star Trek's plot, it is also a new discussion in the world of quantum physics along with the Higgs Boson.
Source(s):
Fred Allen Wolf, Parallel Universes; Stephen Hawking's discussion, String Theory's affect on Energy and Time.


Now, my head just blew up but if it's good enough for Steven Hawking's to talk about, it's good enough for a Star Trek movie.

Has the "science" of STXI been unfairly criticized?

:logical:  :logical:  :logical:  :cool:

Thank you for sharing Yanks!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 10:51 am

Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ April 21 2010, 10:02 am)
Quote (Vger23 @ April 21 2010, 6:31 am)
Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 6:58 am)
I posted this in another thread, but thought it warranted discussion in it's own thread.

We've all seen the comments on how time travel through a black hole and Red matter creating a black hole is just "bad science".

Sci-Trek: Breaking Time

I watched it last night. They specifically spoke of using black holes to travel back in time.

So... I don't think that "plot hole" is any bigger a stretch than transporters, replicators or Warp travel?

I also did a little looking around about "Red Matter" (more correctly "RED" Matter)

R-Reverse E-Energy D-Distribution or Red Matter. This is String Theory in reverse. Take numerous Zero Points and serially align them; you then have changed a one dimensional universe into a two dimensional universe. Apply energy to the string of zero points and the string begins to vibrate, adding a third dimension, The vibration of the string requires the string to be in multiple locations, thus you have a temporal horizon or 4th dimension. Reverse the applied energy distributed to the string of zero points, and the 3rd and 4th dimensions will collapse. The dimensional collapse of both 3rd and 4th dimensions will allow both worm holes and black holes to theoretically occur, much like a whirlwind or tornado will arise in the reverse of wind direction in a thunderstorm. Although red matter is a great tool for the movie Star Trek's plot, it is also a new discussion in the world of quantum physics along with the Higgs Boson.
Source(s):
Fred Allen Wolf, Parallel Universes; Stephen Hawking's discussion, String Theory's affect on Energy and Time.


Now, my head just blew up but if it's good enough for Steven Hawking's to talk about, it's good enough for a Star Trek movie.

Has the "science" of STXI been unfairly criticized?

I think it has been a bit more "unfairly criticized" than some bad science in some of the other Trek films (don't get me started on the Genesis Wave, protomatter, slingshot effects, traveling to the Galactic Center in hours, and "subspace shockwaves" for example).

I still think XI has some HIGHLY questionable science in it...but no more than many of the other well-loved Trek films.

TREK XI has only gotten a more sever chasting in this subject because there are some that actually HATE ¿this movie as opposed to the more reasonable folks who either like or dislike it.

Does it get treat unfairly, maybe slightly more simply because it's fresh on everyone's mind.


Interestingly enough " slingshot effects " ¿do have some basis in actual science that most don't realize. For example if you had a large enough gravity well(much larger than the sun could generate) you could do a slingshot through time.

The Genesis Wave is akin to a newborn star after first ignition so thats not too far fetched either.

Subspace shockwave could very well be scientifically sound, provided we can prove the existence of subspace. Even if subspace doesn't exist we know that when a star goes supernovae it can put out massive shock waves that could potentially travel through subspace provided it exists.

I actualy meant specific "behavioral properties" of those elements, BAX...not the elements themselves.

For example...the ability of the Genesis Wave to detonate and "create" a planet from almost nothing, even though it was specifically designed to detonate on a "pre-selected area of a lifeless space body...a moon or other dead form." The idea of detonating it on a "pre-selected area" would lead one to believe that the process should be a delicate one. And, even if someone says "the matter in the Mutara Nebula is what became the planet," someone would need to show me the physics equation that shows how an EXPANDING wave then reverses direction to allow a planet to coalese!

With the "subspace shockwave..." I think I'd need to understand how the phenomenon traveled at such high speeds as to intersect the Excelsior seemingly minutes after an explosion that took place light years away.

It's those kinds of "little things" that seem to go uncriticized...at least compared to issues like the size of the new Enterprise and the properties of the Red Matter-created singularity.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 10:54 am

Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ April 21 2010, 10:46 am)
Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 7:09 am)
Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ April 21 2010, 10:02 am)
Quote (Vger23 @ April 21 2010, 6:31 am)
Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 6:58 am)
I posted this in another thread, but thought it warranted discussion in it's own thread.

We've all seen the comments on how time travel through a black hole and Red matter creating a black hole is just "bad science".

Sci-Trek: Breaking Time

I watched it last night. They specifically spoke of using black holes to travel back in time.

So... I don't think that "plot hole" is any bigger a stretch than transporters, replicators or Warp travel?

I also did a little looking around about "Red Matter" (more correctly "RED" Matter)

R-Reverse E-Energy D-Distribution or Red Matter. This is String Theory in reverse. Take numerous Zero Points and serially align them; you then have changed a one dimensional universe into a two dimensional universe. Apply energy to the string of zero points and the string begins to vibrate, adding a third dimension, The vibration of the string requires the string to be in multiple locations, thus you have a temporal horizon or 4th dimension. Reverse the applied energy distributed to the string of zero points, and the 3rd and 4th dimensions will collapse. The dimensional collapse of both 3rd and 4th dimensions will allow both worm holes and black holes to theoretically occur, much like a whirlwind or tornado will arise in the reverse of wind direction in a thunderstorm. Although red matter is a great tool for the movie Star Trek's plot, it is also a new discussion in the world of quantum physics along with the Higgs Boson.
Source(s):
Fred Allen Wolf, Parallel Universes; Stephen Hawking's discussion, String Theory's affect on Energy and Time.


Now, my head just blew up but if it's good enough for Steven Hawking's to talk about, it's good enough for a Star Trek movie.

Has the "science" of STXI been unfairly criticized?

I think it has been a bit more "unfairly criticized" than some bad science in some of the other Trek films (don't get me started on the Genesis Wave, protomatter, slingshot effects, traveling to the Galactic Center in hours, and "subspace shockwaves" for example).

I still think XI has some HIGHLY questionable science in it...but no more than many of the other well-loved Trek films.

TREK XI has only gotten a more sever chasting in this subject because there are some that actually HATE ?this movie as opposed to the more reasonable folks who either like or dislike it.

Does it get treat unfairly, maybe slightly more simply because it's fresh on everyone's mind.


Interestingly enough " slingshot effects " ?do have some basis in actual science that most don't realize. For example if you had a large enough gravity well(much larger than the sun could generate) you could do a slingshot through time.

The Genesis Wave is akin to a newborn star after first ignition so thats not too far fetched either.

Subspace shockwave could very well be scientifically sound, provided we can prove the existence of subspace. Even if subspace doesn't exist we know that when a star goes supernovae it can put out massive shock waves that could potentially travel through subspace provided it exists.

Yeah, it's probably receiving no more "bashing" than any other move someone dislikes. I just remember some sort of consensus on the "plot hole", then I saw that show and it dawned on me.

Star Trek has always had "it's based on real science". Seems like it still is, no matter if you liked the movie or not.

They do try, yet this is the FIRST time a TREK movie was made and a scientist was hired just to say the had one on set.

It reminds me of "Top Gun."

They had a former Naval Fighter Weapons School instructor on hand for the writing and filming of "Top Gun." The guy was constantly telling them "it's not really like that...that wouldn't happen...that doesn't work that way," and they just ignored him in favor of making an entertaining movie.

You can see him in interviews on the Blu-ray where he says "and they were right...because if they listened to me it would have been a pretty dull, documentary-like movie."

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 11:15 am

Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 11:06 am)
Quote (Vger23 @ April 21 2010, 10:54 am)
Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ April 21 2010, 10:46 am)
Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 7:09 am)
Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ April 21 2010, 10:02 am)
Quote (Vger23 @ April 21 2010, 6:31 am)
Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 6:58 am)
I posted this in another thread, but thought it warranted discussion in it's own thread.

We've all seen the comments on how time travel through a black hole and Red matter creating a black hole is just "bad science".

Sci-Trek: Breaking Time

I watched it last night. They specifically spoke of using black holes to travel back in time.

So... I don't think that "plot hole" is any bigger a stretch than transporters, replicators or Warp travel?

I also did a little looking around about "Red Matter" (more correctly "RED" Matter)

R-Reverse E-Energy D-Distribution or Red Matter. This is String Theory in reverse. Take numerous Zero Points and serially align them; you then have changed a one dimensional universe into a two dimensional universe. Apply energy to the string of zero points and the string begins to vibrate, adding a third dimension, The vibration of the string requires the string to be in multiple locations, thus you have a temporal horizon or 4th dimension. Reverse the applied energy distributed to the string of zero points, and the 3rd and 4th dimensions will collapse. The dimensional collapse of both 3rd and 4th dimensions will allow both worm holes and black holes to theoretically occur, much like a whirlwind or tornado will arise in the reverse of wind direction in a thunderstorm. Although red matter is a great tool for the movie Star Trek's plot, it is also a new discussion in the world of quantum physics along with the Higgs Boson.
Source(s):
Fred Allen Wolf, Parallel Universes; Stephen Hawking's discussion, String Theory's affect on Energy and Time.


Now, my head just blew up but if it's good enough for Steven Hawking's to talk about, it's good enough for a Star Trek movie.

Has the "science" of STXI been unfairly criticized?

I think it has been a bit more "unfairly criticized" than some bad science in some of the other Trek films (don't get me started on the Genesis Wave, protomatter, slingshot effects, traveling to the Galactic Center in hours, and "subspace shockwaves" for example).

I still think XI has some HIGHLY questionable science in it...but no more than many of the other well-loved Trek films.

TREK XI has only gotten a more sever chasting in this subject because there are some that actually HATE ?this movie as opposed to the more reasonable folks who either like or dislike it.

Does it get treat unfairly, maybe slightly more simply because it's fresh on everyone's mind.


Interestingly enough " slingshot effects " ?do have some basis in actual science that most don't realize. For example if you had a large enough gravity well(much larger than the sun could generate) you could do a slingshot through time.

The Genesis Wave is akin to a newborn star after first ignition so thats not too far fetched either.

Subspace shockwave could very well be scientifically sound, provided we can prove the existence of subspace. Even if subspace doesn't exist we know that when a star goes supernovae it can put out massive shock waves that could potentially travel through subspace provided it exists.

Yeah, it's probably receiving no more "bashing" than any other move someone dislikes. I just remember some sort of consensus on the "plot hole", then I saw that show and it dawned on me.

Star Trek has always had "it's based on real science". Seems like it still is, no matter if you liked the movie or not.

They do try, yet this is the FIRST time a TREK movie was made and a scientist was hired just to say the had one on set.

It reminds me of "Top Gun."

They had a former Naval Fighter Weapons School instructor on hand for the writing and filming of "Top Gun." The guy was constantly telling them "it's not really like that...that wouldn't happen...that doesn't work that way," and they just ignored him in favor of making an entertaining movie.

You can see him in interviews on the Blu-ray where he says "and they were right...because if they listened to me it would have been a pretty dull, documentary-like movie."

Did they "ignore" the scientist on the Star Trek set, or use him/her?

I'm sure they probably used them to some extent...but if it ever came down to a battle between "the story" and "scientific accuracy..." I'm sure the former won every time.

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 11:17 am

Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 11:12 am)
Quote (Narada @ April 21 2010, 10:48 am)
:logical: ?:logical: ?:logical: ?:cool:

Thank you for sharing Yanks!

No problem. Just caught my eye.

I also agree since Star Trek is science fiction they are allowed to base stories from science and also use their imagination. I have also seen other articles about the theoretical possibilities of traveling through worm holes by using exotic matter. However I did not see this special about using RED matter to travel through black holes but it is very interesting to me. I also am encouraged that such prominent scientists are speaking on this subject.

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 11:29 am

People always complained she was only used for the end credits and a few other shots. I think they expect she would be science adviser with everything but maybe she was mostly in charge of making sure the space shots look more realistic? I remember there was a comment how the rings of Saturn were not at the right angle but they knew of this and decided to make it more picturesque from their angle. I think that is a good choice.

;)

cptdon

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 320

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 2:24 pm

For the record, the black hole and time travel was not one of my problems with the films. Hell, I used to write black hole time travel stories all the time. This is science fiction, fiction is the key word. The science is were your supposed to relax and accept it right?

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 6:36 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ April 21 2010, 6:30 pm)
Quote (Narada @ April 21 2010, 11:29 am)
People always complained she was only used for the end credits and a few other shots. I think they expect she would be science adviser with everything but maybe she was mostly in charge of making sure the space shots look more realistic? I remember there was a comment how the rings of Saturn were not at the right angle but they knew of this and decided to make it more picturesque from their angle. I think that is a good choice.

;)

Right on the money, Narada.

Planetary scientist Dr. Carolyn Porco was primarily use for helping the planets to look good. That may very well have been all she was used for.

One may read the interview here.

Referring to Dr. Porco as the science advisor for STXI is a bit of a reach.

Thank you. Yes I think people got the wrong idea there and it may be a small misnomer to call her science adviser. I am glad she did a good job with the space shots and planets even though the science was not 100% accurate I am hoping they can improve it even more with the sequel. I accept that it is science fiction and our imagination will be stretched but I would also like all of the Star Trek fans to be mostly satisfied with the story and plot devices.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 6:53 pm

Quote (cptdon @ April 21 2010, 2:24 pm)
For the record, the black hole and time travel was not one of my problems with the films. Hell, I used to write black hole time travel stories all the time. This is science fiction, fiction is the key word. The science is were your supposed to relax and accept it right?

Agreed. Besides, I think it's extremely arrogant and short-sighted to think that we know even a FRACTION about the scientific realities of a "black hole." For all we know, the "laws" of physical reality do not even apply once you move beyond the event horizon. Who's to say? Our quaint little theories and mathematical proofs don't even begin to tell us the truth.

Black holes one of the largest, most unknown scientific mysteries known to humanity. I think anyone claiming to "know" what would happen if you entered a black hole is equivilant to someone telling you that they "know" you would fall off the edge of the Earth if you sailed too far 500 years ago.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 7:48 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ April 21 2010, 7:21 pm)
Quote (Vger23 @ April 21 2010, 6:53 pm)
Quote (cptdon @ April 21 2010, 2:24 pm)
For the record, the black hole and time travel was not one of my problems with the films. Hell, I used to write black hole time travel stories all the time. This is science fiction, fiction is the key word. The science is were your supposed to relax and accept it right?

Agreed. Besides, I think it's extremely arrogant and short-sighted to think that we know even a FRACTION about the scientific realities of a "black hole." For all we know, the "laws" of physical reality do not even apply once you move beyond the event horizon. Who's to say? Our quaint little theories and mathematical proofs don't even begin to tell us the truth.

Black holes one of the largest, most unknown scientific mysteries known to humanity. I think anyone claiming to "know" what would happen if you entered a black hole is equivilant to someone telling you that they "know" you would fall off the edge of the Earth if you sailed too far 500 years ago.

Black Holes FAQ, Berkeley
Black Holes, NASA
All About Black Holes, space.com
Black Hole, World Book at NASA

Yes, it's all theoritical. No one I know of has ever seen or been sucked into a black hole. The nonsense is when anyone begins to claim anything or anyone traveled through a black hole and exited with any physical integrity as this goes against all current theory which is where black holes currently exist.

:)

I don't argue that AT ALL. You are 100% correct. Absolutely positively right.

I simply argue that current theory might as well be written on a giant fluffy roll of 2-ply.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 7:55 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ April 21 2010, 5:44 pm)
I thought the RED matter was a beautiful plot device. I have no problem working out what could have happened.

When a star is just sitting there doing it's normal thing, as does Sol - our star, we enjoy its benefits. Its gravity does not suck us in because its mass does not change.

When a star goes nova, its detrimental effects expand greatly. If Sol were to go nova most of the solar system would either be destroyed or end up very differently.

The RED matter used on the Hobus nova artifically caused it to collapse into a black hole. During that collapse there are all sorts of possibilities of what could have happened. Gravity waves could have been generated which pulled the Narada and the Jellyfish toward the collapsing nova. As the matter collapsed, it did so faster than those ships were pulled toward the forming event horizon. This resulted in an unintended and inescapable slingshot effect which threw both ships back in time. While I saw no evidence of it, it could also have caused one of those fictional/theorized temporal rifts and caused them to also go into a parallel universe. Newer fringe theories also purport the creation of bubble universes when there is time travel.

Very well said.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 8:36 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ April 21 2010, 8:34 pm)
Quote (stovokor2000 @ April 21 2010, 7:55 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ April 21 2010, 5:44 pm)
I thought the RED matter was a beautiful plot device. I have no problem working out what could have happened.

When a star is just sitting there doing it's normal thing, as does Sol - our star, we enjoy its benefits. Its gravity does not suck us in because its mass does not change.

When a star goes nova, its detrimental effects expand greatly. If Sol were to go nova most of the solar system would either be destroyed or end up very differently.

The RED matter used on the Hobus nova artifically caused it to collapse into a black hole. During that collapse there are all sorts of possibilities of what could have happened. Gravity waves could have been generated which pulled the Narada and the Jellyfish toward the collapsing nova. As the matter collapsed, it did so faster than those ships were pulled toward the forming event horizon. This resulted in an unintended and inescapable slingshot effect which threw both ships back in time. While I saw no evidence of it, it could also have caused one of those fictional/theorized temporal rifts and caused them to also go into a parallel universe. Newer fringe theories also purport the creation of bubble universes when there is time travel.

Very well said.

Why, thank you :D

Although, I admit, I could have read it on a discarded bar napkin...

;)

I hope it wasnt a handi tissue.

And your welcome.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 8:43 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ April 21 2010, 8:30 pm)
Quote (Vger23 @ April 21 2010, 7:48 pm)
I don't argue that AT ALL. You are 100% correct. Absolutely positively right.

I simply argue that current theory might as well be written on a giant fluffy roll of 2-ply.

I believe the ramifactions of using fluffy bathroom tissue would not be conducive to written information.

I suggest using the "John Wayne" tissue found at $35.00 per night motels.

Although... many breakthroughs have been written on bar napkins.

:p

:laugh:

As much as I admittedly enjoy a good argument...I find it impossible to argue with these facts...!

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Apr. 21 2010, 10:08 pm

Quote (Yanks @ April 21 2010, 10:00 pm)
I also immediately caught the "SUPERDUPERNOVA" thing when I first watched the movie. I think this was probably the biggest "oops" in the movie. I'm sure they meant "Solar System" :)

What exactly fo you consider a mistake about it???

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: miklamar, darmokattanagra

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