|
Powered Descent posted:Why do the frames have to be an eternal indestructible paradoxical looping object, but you're fine with the lenses being ordinary items that were manufactured, hung around for a few centuries, then went back in time and were in two places at once from 1986 to 2286? (In your example, one set of lenses would be mounted in the frames and one set in a landfill somewhere.) The lenses have a distinct and easy life to track, from being made in the 1980s (or whenever) to being broken during the battle in WoK. The frames are definitely implied to be looping, but since we don't go back to WoK after TVH, we can't verify. That said: Cojawfee posted:"Excuse me, weren't those a birthday present from Dr. McCoy?" The movie definitely makes it a joke that he'll get them again in the future (his past).
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
As someone who likes all trek except Discovery (including Voy and Ent to certain extent) I've liked the first episode of Picard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 21:59
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Even in a time travel story we tend to imagine that any given moment follows conventional rules*. I guess if you're supposing that things look normal only so long as the timeline is undisturbed, you could have all sorts of psychedelic nonsense happen after someone changes the past, rather than all this linear/cyclical stuff we've been imagining. Yeah, I've been trying to think of how you would even go about using film, a time-based medium, to depict a non-linear time reality. Or even language, really. It kind of seems to boil down to Determinism. Seems like either Determinism is real and that actions have consequences and time/events happens in order, or determinism isn't real and nothing can make sense. FlamingLiberal posted:The Prophets on DS9 do not see time linearly and are very confused about beings that do. Everything has already happened, in their view. Which is weird, because they should already have come to understand that some beings understand perceive differently! Binary Logic posted:Not sure if it fits your exact paradox but maybe "-All You Zombies" by Robert Heinlein. This sounds cool and reminds me of that short story where this guy dies and is going to be reincarnated, and he's like, wait, what, and "god" is like: every life on Earth is you, you're the perpetrator and victim of every crime, you're god all along and life is just me over and over. Okay, I'm streets behind on Short Treks but what's the deal with "Ephraim and Dot." Was the psuedo-50s documentary thing about the Tardigrade supposed to just be a fun animation choice or are we to take it people are now taught about this mycelial network?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
I don’t think Ephriam and Dot is supposed to be strict canon since it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. More like an in-universe educational short or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:02
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:As someone who likes all trek except Discovery (including Voy and Ent to certain extent) I've liked the first episode of Picard. Try to understand DIS. Its a newborn in a darker age of internet and streaming. They HAD TO do it action-filled and way less character development, or they would fail general audiences. Just try to be kind and find all these trek references and
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:Try to understand DIS. Its a newborn in a darker age of internet and streaming. Nah, I gave it half of a season, there's better ways to spend my time. Like rewatching the Expanse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:Try to understand DIS. Its a newborn in a darker age of internet and streaming. nah we understand it, we just think it's bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:08
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:I saw Casino Royale (tng 2x12) back in 1993-ish when I was a kid, but rediscovered and devoured multiple times all of trek except for TAS and TOS in 2013. Saw all the movies multiple times(even TMP till Undiscovered Country), but was always cautious when it comes to TOS/TAS. Start with one of the really good ones and see how it strikes you. I'd suggest Balance of Terror if you like starship combat, or The Devil in the Dark if you want strange new lifeforms. marktheando posted:I mean it's a predestination paradox either way, so I'm not sure why you are so insistent it can't be the same pair looping endlessly, when that's what we are told in the film. If we're taking absolutely everything literally, then Bones is actually a Romulan. He admitted as much in Wrath of Khan when he showed up at Kirk's apartment. (I don't see why everyone is so dead-set against the possibility, just because he "was obviously joking" or because there's "literally nothing else to suggest such an extraordinary thing" and "plenty of evidence against it". He's a Romulan since that's what we were told in the film. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:08
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Nah, I gave it half of a season, there's better ways to spend my time. Remember the rule of first season. It's always bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:09
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:I don’t think Ephriam and Dot is supposed to be strict canon since it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. More like an in-universe educational short or something. Well that's more what I meant, not canon in the little antics, but do they in-universe learn about the mycelial network.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:I saw Casino Royale (tng 2x12) back in 1993-ish when I was a kid, but rediscovered and devoured multiple times all of trek except for TAS and TOS in 2013. Saw all the movies multiple times(even TMP till Undiscovered Country), but was always cautious when it comes to TOS/TAS. On that basis, start with Spectre of the Gun S03E06. It's not the best episode in the series (it IS one of the better S3 epsiodes), but it may be the most stylistically TOS epsiode. The minimalist sets are decorated so strikingly you'll think all the rest of the episodes look "normal". Then watch everything else in order.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:19
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:I saw Casino Royale (tng 2x12) back in 1993-ish when I was a kid, but rediscovered and devoured multiple times all of trek except for TAS and TOS in 2013. Saw all the movies multiple times(even TMP till Undiscovered Country), but was always cautious when it comes to TOS/TAS. The big thing is that you want to keep in mind it was made in the 1960s (or animated in the 1970s). It's no different than how a radio play doesn't have any visual effects, or how a play has different details than a movie. (Indeed a good way to approach TOS is that they're two-act plays.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:If we're taking absolutely everything literally, then Bones is actually a Romulan. He admitted as much in Wrath of Khan when he showed up at Kirk's apartment. (I don't see why everyone is so dead-set against the possibility, just because he "was obviously joking" or because there's "literally nothing else to suggest such an extraordinary thing" and "plenty of evidence against it". He's a Romulan since that's what we were told in the film. Why do you think Kirk was joking about them being the same pair? There is zero evidence against it. One pair of specs or two, both are both equally impossible. Because you can't have an effect before a cause.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:22
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:Remember the rule of first season. It's always bad. At some point in the 30 years since next-gen started this stopped being an acceptable excuse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
Khanstant posted:Yeah, I've been trying to think of how you would even go about using film, a time-based medium, to depict a non-linear time reality. Or even language, really. It kind of seems to boil down to Determinism. Seems like either Determinism is real and that actions have consequences and time/events happens in order, or determinism isn't real and nothing can make sense. It's a minor quibble but dont forget that almost every single sci-fi thing (outside of Charles Stross) ignores the fact that if FTL travel/signals are possible then causality breaks down (i.e. time travel is possible) see tachyonic antitelephone and relativity of simultaneity for more. I would deeply love for someone to explore this in tv or film but it sort of breaks human understanding to view time and events like this. The DS9 Prophets being basically unfamiliar with the arrow of time is the best Star Trek has ever done with it just introducing aliens who can't understand causality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:38
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:Try to understand DIS. Its a newborn in a darker age of internet and streaming. AntherUslessPoster posted:Remember the rule of first season. It's always bad. what's this apologist attitude going on here buddy none of the stuff you said is actually a reality of tv now. the most successful shows of the past 20 years are pretty light on the action and heavy on character development, and i dunno why you think streaming has something to do with there being a lack of those things. but forget all that because there are some references to TOS? but then on the other hand you say, despite the change in era justifying the bad characters and action overload, it's okay that the first season sucked because tv shows made decades ago also had first seasons that sucked there are better things to waste time on. this kind of 'they did their best under difficult circumstances' thing is best left to the writers' parents. large_gourd fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Why do you think Kirk was joking about them being the same pair? There is zero evidence against it. One pair of specs or two, both are both equally impossible. Because you can't have an effect before a cause. Effect before cause is easy in given time travel has been introduced; the glasses being the same pair requires them to be entropy-proof glasses that haven't disintegrated after literally existing for infinite time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
You guys are putting more thought into this than the writers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:45
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:I saw Casino Royale (tng 2x12) back in 1993-ish when I was a kid, but rediscovered and devoured multiple times all of trek except for TAS and TOS in 2013. Saw all the movies multiple times(even TMP till Undiscovered Country), but was always cautious when it comes to TOS/TAS. "Balance of Terror" "Space Seed" "The City on the Edge of Forever" "Journey to Babel" "A Private Little war" "The Trouble with Tribbles" I think while there are some clunkers and often a sillier tone to TOS, it's important to note like half of the episodes I've listed end with with Kirk just defeated and telling everyone to go home. But seconding "Balance of Terror" being a good first watch. It's a loving amazing submarine movie in space and probably the most important episode of TOS.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:45
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Effect before cause is easy in given time travel has been introduced; the glasses being the same pair requires them to be entropy-proof glasses that haven't disintegrated after literally existing for infinite time. I mean sure, ok, I guess one impossible thing is even more impossible than the other impossible thing. It's more fun for them to be the same pair.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:48
|
|
|
Thanks for the TOS input guys, I'll guess I will start my next week with large_gourd posted:what's this apologist attitude going on here buddy When the s1 came out I said to my only pure trekkie friend 'If they gently caress it up, its okay. We still got some Trek after all these years'. We never had any of that 'after-trek' stuff or short treks until I found them somewhere else to watch. I dunno I just tend to find good sides in any bad thing. Even as bad as the Burnham's 'mutiny' and all that crap that was clearly not-trek or not in-universe and even contradicting the actual characters, laws and what is known. They evened it out with all other good stuff. Or I am delusional and just will pardon any idiocy in exchange for a few GOOD loving PROPER TREK minutes. Timeless Appeal posted:The list I did with my wife was when I started introducing her was... Added to the list. Thanks a lot man! Erulisse fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
A lot of shows have a great first season. Trek has historically started off bad, but it's not an excuse. Things are different--expectations are higher, and shows now are doing ten episode seasons that are all produced before air rather than having to poo poo out 26 episodes with seven day turnaround, which is why even a great season of every old Trek had at least a couple huge steaming turds in it. The production just isn't comparable. Discovery has had an incredibly troubled production history, going through staff like Spinal Tap drummers, which has to be a factor in why it's so weird. If they can stop firing the person in charge every five minutes maybe there would be a chance to get it working.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Picard said Data always wanted a daughter. Which is a super weird way to phrase it if he had anyway built and lost one. All I can think of is that don't want to mention her directly to avoid paying royalties to the writer like Tom Paris.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:00
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Why do you think Kirk was joking about them being the same pair? There is zero evidence against it. Except for nothing else in the entire history of Star Trek ever working that way. Hell, there's not even anything to suggest that's what Kirk meant. He and Spock are currently in the past, so the birthday when he got the glasses from McCoy is in the future. So they'll be gifted to him "again" when that time comes. It's a long, LONG way from that one throwaway line -- delivered with a wicked grin -- to "these glasses were never created, will never be destroyed, are somehow invulnerable to wear and tear, and will continue on a never-ending loop through the next three hundred years over and over, and I am being absolutely serious here, I have somehow been gifted the sure and certain knowledge that this remarkable object is absolutely unique and fundamentally different from every other one we've ever encountered, including everything else we brought back in time with us."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
I’ve said this before, but Disco had a lot of pressure on it to be good, since it was not only the first Trek series on TV in 12 years, but it was the tentpole show on a new streaming network. CBS execs were probably rightfully jumpy, probably focus-grouped the hell out of the concept, and got rid of anyone that was viewed as a squeaky wheel in its production. This...overbaking, as it were, has led to the majority of Disco’s issues I suspect. They just didn’t have the confidence in a new Trek show to just let it be Trek. But now that they’ve gotten a lot of feedback on Disco, they more than likely were a little more confident in Picard, which is why it seems to be shaping up nicely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
adaz posted:It's a minor quibble but dont forget that almost every single sci-fi thing (outside of Charles Stross) ignores the fact that if FTL travel/signals are possible then causality breaks down (i.e. time travel is possible) see tachyonic antitelephone and relativity of simultaneity for more. I would deeply love for someone to explore this in tv or film but it sort of breaks human understanding to view time and events like this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I still don't get the "FTL = time travel" thing because it seems like the argument is circular. "If you can go faster than light, you can travel through time, because nothing can go faster than light." I make no claims for this being actually the case, but if I discover the Nessus Wave, which can work like a radio but propagate 1,000 times faster than light, than presumably n (the speed of a Nessus wave in a vacuum) is the real speed limit of the universe. Imagine you are on Earth and there's a civilization around a star ten light years away. You want to observe events in that civilization with your telescope. Anything you observe is in the past from their perspective--it took ten years for the light to get to Earth, so events seen on Earth happened ten years ago on Planet X. Now imagine you have a FTL ship that can make the trip in a day. You jump to Planet X and see what's going on there. Let's say your ship blows up an asteroid coming in to destroy their civilization. Then you jump back to Earth. You now have information about that civilization and that asteroid. However, Earth does not. From your Earth telescope, you won't see that asteroid explode for ten more years, yet your ship already blew it up. This isn't just an artifact, it's real. In Earth's frame of reference, that asteroid has not blown up yet and will not do so until ten years in the future. But your FTL ship already has that information and event from Earth's future. Time's all messed up now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Imagine you are on Earth and there's a civilization around a star ten light years away. You want to observe events in that civilization with your telescope. Anything you observe is in the past from their perspective--it took ten years for the light to get to Earth, so events seen on Earth happened ten years ago on Planet X. Its not messed up because here on earth YOU KNOW you see what was happening some time ago, not exactly now. Its not time travel, its a delayed observation. You never watched Iron Man for example. You go watch it now and people have told you that Tony Stark is The Iron Man. By your argument they are time travellers, but you are the one who is late. This is why all things are relative in our universe and depend on the observer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:09
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Imagine you are on Earth and there's a civilization around a star ten light years away. You want to observe events in that civilization with your telescope. Anything you observe is in the past from their perspective--it took ten years for the light to get to Earth, so events seen on Earth happened ten years ago on Planet X. Whether or not the asteroid hit the planet or not is already true, though. We're watching Betelgeuse to see if it goes Supernova, but if it did, it did back in 1560 or something. That's true, irrelevant of whether or not I can "bend" space to touch two points and move between them, or step outside normal space/time, or whichever other FTL mechanism of choice you favour.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:14
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Imagine you are on Earth and there's a civilization around a star ten light years away. You want to observe events in that civilization with your telescope. Anything you observe is in the past from their perspective--it took ten years for the light to get to Earth, so events seen on Earth happened ten years ago on Planet X.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:14
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I still don't get the "FTL = time travel" thing because it seems like the argument is circular. "If you can go faster than light, you can travel through time, because nothing can go faster than light." I make no claims for this being actually the case, but if I discover the Nessus Wave, which can work like a radio but propagate 1,000 times faster than light, than presumably n (the speed of a Nessus wave in a vacuum) is the real speed limit of the universe. If you read the link on tachyonic anti-telephone it does the best, and easiest possible explanation for this under "numerical example with two way communication". The proof has nothing to do with going faster than light is impossible and instead relies on what we know is true - time dilation and relativity of simultaneity. Time dilation is the faster you go the slower time goes and relativity of simultaneity is the time an event happens is relative to the motion of the observer, i.e. humans perceive an event that happens at 12:01 pm in London is the same 12:01pm happening to someone driving in manchester but that's not actually the case and at very large speeds & distances it becomes increasingly noticeable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:16
|
|
|
The issue is that that's a naive explanation that you can poke holes in. The actual reason is that any form of FTL propagation allows you to envisage a spacelike path by which information arrives at the origin before it leaves, for reasons that can't be easily explained to the layman. Basically, events propagate at c, and if you can beat those events in two different directions, you end up where you started before you left. It's not just that events at a distance can be observed before the light arrives - if you travel on a path like this, events at the origin can be observed before they occur. Because Maths. MikeJF fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:18
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:When the s1 came out I said to my only pure trekkie friend 'If they gently caress it up, its okay. We still got some Trek after all these years'. I absolutely do understand where you're coming from, I can remember having the same conversation with my trekkie mom back when I was a teenager and Enterprise was new on TV. "Well, even bad Star Trek is better than most other crap!" we'd say to each other. I finally gave up on that show sometime during it's third season, I don't think she ever finished it either despite crushing pretty hard on Scott Bakula since his Quantum Leap days. I collect Transformers and vintage space Lego sets just for the nostalgia value, I won't judge somebody for enjoying something "the wrong way" or for purely emotional reasons, but being over 30 now I find I can't apply the same standards I have for 12 inch action figures and piles of plastic doodads I couldn't afford when I was little to modern hour-long science fiction dramas that go out of their way to paint themselves as seriously as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:18
|
|
|
You've taken information from ten years in Earth's future light cone and brought it to present Earth. Swap the asteroid for a race. Go observe the outcome, bring it back before the signal reaches Earth, place a bet on the winner since you already know the outcome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:You've taken information from ten years in Earth's future light cone and brought it to present Earth. Swap the asteroid for a race. Go observe the outcome, bring it back before the signal reaches Earth, place a bet on the winner since you already know the outcome. yeah but that doesn't create any kind of break in causality like people are talking about. you just have information beforehand. the causality is still intact, it's transmission from one place to another is only delayed and you happen to have been in a position to effect it before it gets where it is going. you're talking about someone sending a chat message over a bad connection, then calling the receiver on the phone to say 'guess what you're about to get a message' and when it comes the person goes 'whoah what are you a time traveller?'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:22
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Imagine you are on Earth and there's a civilization around a star ten light years away. You want to observe events in that civilization with your telescope. Anything you observe is in the past from their perspective--it took ten years for the light to get to Earth, so events seen on Earth happened ten years ago on Planet X. I accept that physicists have good reasons for saying why this would break causality that are true and Im not smart enough to understand them. However I've never liked this type of explanation because it seems to rely on already knowing why that is a breaking of causality. Let's assume we gather all our information through sound waves. We could then recreate this whole experiment instead replacing the ftl travel with supersonic travel, but it wouldn't be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
Yeah, that explanation isn't great - properly breaking causality requires both FTL and a change to a different direction, so you can loop back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:25
|
|
|
Oh my god. Read a book about special relativity, you may not like my attempt to make a simple example but you're seriously arguing with me that relativity isn't real. Take it up with physics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:25
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:You now have information about that civilization and that asteroid. However, Earth does not. From your Earth telescope, you won't see that asteroid explode for ten more years, yet your ship already blew it up. This isn't just an artifact, it's real. In Earth's frame of reference, that asteroid has not blown up yet and will not do so until ten years in the future. But your FTL ship already has that information and event from Earth's future. Time's all messed up now. I'm not a physicist, but I don't see how that's time being messed up so much as that there's normally a delay in getting information. We were talking before in the thread about spoilers, and I guess new episodes air in the rest of the world the day after they do in the US. So, if I watch the new episode and post, "We find out in this episode that the Picard show is just a holodeck simulation put on by Commander Riker to figure out what he should do about the Pegasus", and somebody reads that and is thereby spoiled, because he knows information before he could watch the episode, I haven't messed up his timeline. I've just been a jerk. If I'm the pilot of the FTL ship and blow up the asteroid, then come back to earth and say, "I blew up an asteroid.", isn't the only reason earth doesn't know that without my telling them because it takes time for the signals to propagate? My telling earth that the asteroid is blown up just means they'll know about it before they could naturally detect it, but even if I did nothing, ten years from now, they'll see that I blew up the asteroid. eta: And again, not a physicist, never took physics, don't know anything about relativity. Just trying to understand the analogy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
A lot of the naive explanations are missing what happens when you throw motion into it which causes time to pass slower to the observer. In the asteroid example the relative motion isn't super high and its harder to show he's arriving before the event happens. I lightly edited the wikipedia to remove the heavy lorentz calcs and just leave the pretty simple pure mathsquote:As an example, imagine that Alice and Bob are aboard spaceships moving inertially with a relative speed of 0.8c. At some point they pass right next to each other, and Alice defines the position and time of their passing to be at position x = 0, time t = 0 in her frame, while Bob defines it to be at position x′ = 0 and time t′ = 0 in his frame. In Alice's frame she remains at rest at position x = 0, while Bob is moving in the positive x direction at 0.8c; in Bob's frame he remains at rest at position x′ = 0, and Alice is moving in the negative x′ direction at 0.8c. Each one also has a tachyon transmitter aboard their ship, which sends out signals that move at 2.4c in the ship's own frame. e: this discussion is also a good reason why most sci-fi writers just ignore it. If you decide to account for it most universes become impossible or you have to invent some weird form of physics to account for the fact that relativity of simultaneity isnt a thing which uh good luck adaz fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 23:29
|
|