Star Trek Into Darkness

[volkov2006]

Great. Now how about your analysis of the movie we're actually discussing?

~BB~

I have not seen it yet and still have not made up my mind if I want to see it. I was answering GroobyKrissy on what a hardcore Star Trek fan feels for these movies so I am starting with the movie that I have seen. I apologize if I went to far off topic.

[BellaBellucci]

I have not seen it yet and still have not made up my mind if I want to see it. I was answering GroobyKrissy on what a hardcore Star Trek fan feels for these movies so I am starting with the movie that I have seen. I apologize if I went to far off topic.

It's all good. I'm just messing with ya.

~BB~

[volkov2006]

It's all good. I'm just messing with ya.

~BB~

Okay sorry, I don't like to make people mad if I can help it, although I usually do when I point out facts which can't be helped.

But if and when I see this "Star Trek" movie I will give my analysis of it as best I can.

[GroobyKrissy]

!WARNING I AM A HARDCORE STAR TREK NERD YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

Okay let me start: [edit: krissy - shortened quote for space]

I find stuff like this fascinating... and good for providing conversational fodder if I ever happen to be at the table with Star Trek Fans. So yes, continue.

Did you research these all yourself or is there some sort of forum / website that you aggregated this from? You definitely sound like you know what you're talking about but I'm always a bit wary when discussing matters that I have limited knowledge of.

I think some of your points are artistic license. Star Trek is, after all, Sci-Fi(ction / Fantasy). I think if you start pulling physics into a critique of the series, given our limited understanding of the universe, you're going to end up with some heartache. Anyway, if no one else minds, I am totally interested in reading more so I can check them.

Thanks!

[GroobyKrissy]

Has Data's origin ever been really explained in detail besides the episodes in [I think] Next Generation? Always thought he was a fascinating character too.

[volkov2006]

I find stuff like this fascinating... and good for providing conversational fodder if I ever happen to be at the table with Star Trek Fans. So yes, continue.

Did you research these all yourself or is there some sort of forum / website that you aggregated this from? You definitely sound like you know what you're talking about but I'm always a bit wary when discussing matters that I have limited knowledge of.

I think some of your points are artistic license. Star Trek is, after all, Sci-Fi(ction / Fantasy). I think if you start pulling physics into a critique of the series, given our limited understanding of the universe, you're going to end up with some heartache. Anyway, if no one else minds, I am totally interested in reading more so I can check them.

Thanks!

Well as I said I am a very hardcore Star Trek Fan and I found those all by myself(which because of this no one wants to watch Star Trek with me for fear of me going off on a scientific rant).

And while Star Trek is Sci-Fi it is rooted in science fact. As an example in Star Trek there is a particle that occurs naturally in space called a neutrino that can travel faster than the speed of light, 3 years ago scientists said that going faster than the speed of light is not possible in anyway shape or form. 2 years ago scientists discovered a particle that can travel faster than the speed of light and they named that particle neutrino. Also during the writing and filming of the TV series and the movies they would get a hold of NASA and scientists to check to see what they have is even possible, in fact on one episode of the TNG called "Descent" Stephen Hawking made an appearance. On the same note the science behind how the engines work makes perfect logical sense when all of the recent scientific discoveries that have been made.

Other things that they were ahead of science was Anti-matter, Dark matter, and many spacial anomalies. So while Star Trek is Sci-Fi alot of it is Sci-Fact.

For Data I am not sure I have not read any books that make any changes to his origin story. Which speaking of him in the comic book leading up to the 2009 movie it is said that he is the Captain of the Enterprise-E, which makes no sense because if you go with the theory that B-4 becomes Data after Nemesis, which in books that I have read never happen Data is dead(sad, which Worf becomes his 1st officer). Data would be Picards 1st officer unless Picard died during the mission Data would not become captain of the Enterprise. If he would become captain he would be transferred to a new ship just like in today's world that a 1st officer can not become captain of the same vessel for the fact that the officers and crew underneath him/her may of would not respect them.

[GroobyKrissy]

Well as I said I am a very hardcore Star Trek Fan and I found those all by myself(which because of this no one wants to watch Star Trek with me for fear of me going off on a scientific rant).

And while Star Trek is Sci-Fi it is rooted in science fact. As an example in Star Trek there is a particle that occurs naturally in space called a neutrino that can travel faster than the speed of light, 3 years ago scientists said that going faster than the speed of light is not possible in anyway shape or form. 2 years ago scientists discovered a particle that can travel faster than the speed of light and they named that particle neutrino. Also during the writing and filming of the TV series and the movies they would get a hold of NASA and scientists to check to see what they have is even possible, in fact on one episode of the TNG called "Descent" Stephen Hawking made an appearance. On the same note the science behind how the engines work makes perfect logical sense when all of the recent scientific discoveries that have been made.

Other things that they were ahead of science was Anti-matter, Dark matter, and many spacial anomalies. So while Star Trek is Sci-Fi alot of it is Sci-Fact.

LoL... I would love to sit down and watch Star Trek with someone like yourself. Like I said, I find discrepancies in films fascinating. I have a friend who is a LOTR fanatic and sat through basically three days with her going through the movies vs the books. It was a-maz-balls.

I was aware that Star Trek consulted with NASA and other scientists (I'll use that term to blanket astrophysicists, theoretical physicists, etc. with apologies to those fields) to create the natural laws which govern the universe, which I think is great. Being somewhat science minded myself, the science of it all appeals more to me than anything.

Anyway... thanks for sharing and feel free to pvt me with more

[BellaBellucci]

Has Data's origin ever been really explained in detail besides the episodes in [I think] Next Generation? Always thought he was a fascinating character too.

Which? There were a few. Data's backstory has been explored to death, as have the social and moral implications of his existence.

~BB~

[GroobyKrissy]

Which? There were a few. Data's backstory has been explored to death, as have the social and moral implications of his existence.

~BB~

Think I caught some episodes on Spike or something where he went and found his brother or something, who turned out to be a "bad" model or used to almost destroy the Enterprise... something like that. I had it on in the background while i was working.

I haven't read any of the Star Trek comics or books so I am just talking TV / movies here. Any specific episodes of Data lore? I am too lazy to Google it.

[BellaBellucci]

Any specific episodes of Data lore?

Yes. Datalore.

Season one. Episode Thirteen.

~BB~