TF Views

Shock wrote:Hey, I have another question for you guys: Do you consider the animated Trek series to be canon?

I have to pick and choose when forced. I mean, Kirk's middle name comes from ST:TAS, and some of Spock's established background comes from TAS, but some of TAS is really difficult to justify as canon even before Roddenberry said it was out, like M'Ress and Arex on the bridge crew, or "The Magicks of Megas-Tu". So I guess overall I say "yes" and just try to close my eyes to the more out-there stuff like pink Klingons.

Sparky Prime wrote:You're misunderstanding the difference here... By the Many-Worlds Interpretation, and what Data says in "Parallels", those universes already exist in their own separate quantum realities based on any possible choices made to any given event. That episode isn't arguing changes to a timeline at all, because there is no time travel involved. Take the Futurama episode where the Professor makes a box with a universe inside of it for example. They found out it was essentially the same as their universe, although the difference between their universes is that coin flips yielded the opposite result. That's essentially what "Parallels" is saying, every decision we could make exists as a new quantum reality, not that each change to a timeline causes a new quantum reality.

I'm not misunderstanding anything, the Futurama episode "The Farnsworth Parabox" is describing stuff like Star Trek's "Mirror Mirror" universes, where everything is always different. "Parallels" argues something else, it says "For any event there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. Our choices determines which outcomes will follow. But there is a theory in quantum physics that all possibilities that can happen, do happen, in alternate quantum realities." So every action creates a new universe, you have the "turn left" universe and the "turn right" universe for every choice made, "all possibilities that can happen, do happen", the TURN LEFT universe and the TURN RIGHT universe are each separate quantum realities, creating an infinite number of parallel universes.

Do you remember the chalkboard scene from Back to the Future 2? Any time travel-altered timeline is going to be the same thing, Yesterday's Enterprise starts with universe A, the ship is ripped out of time which creates universe B, and then the ship is sent backwards in time with repairs and Tasha Yar, creating a THIRD universe.

The chalkboard scene was about alternate timelines, not alternate universes. Doc never once says they've created a parallel universe, only an alternate timeline. In fact, as he's drawing it on the chalkboard he says: "Imagine that this line represents time... Here's the present, 1985, the future, and the past. Prior to this point in time...(pointing to 1985) somewhere in the past, the timeline skewed into this tangent, creating an alternate 1985." The timeline skewed into an alternate timeline, it didn't create an alternate universe.

Alternate timelines ARE alternate universes, especially in Trek where "Parallels" confirms that theory. Back to the Future doesn't subscribe to it, but Trek does because our current understanding of quantum mechanics suggests that's may really be possible.

"Yesterday's Enterprise" is a bit more complicated. The alternate timeline of the Enterprise C traveling forward in time resulted in a Tasha Yar that wasn't killed, Timeline B. The timeline was restored to timeline A by the Enterprise C returning where it was supposed to be. However, the alternate Tasha was then made a part of the original timeline having went with the Enterprise C, essentially making a duplicate of her in the timeline.

But it's not restored, she's not "made a part of the original timeline", that is a new event which creates a 3rd timeline... I'll try to give a visual explanation, but as you said, Yesterday's Enterprise is quite complicated...

Star Trek IV's timeline and how it creates alternate universes:


ST:TNG Yesterday's Enterprise timeline (forgive compact nature, I hadn't considered just widening the chalkboard) and its 3 alternate universes:


And New Coke Trek (2009)'s timeline and how it creates an alternate universe:


The producers are arguing that their Trek universe is akin to "Universe B" of Yesterday's Enterprise, and nobody has yet gone back in time and changed it to something else.

My previous point about it being dependent on perspective is that ST4, Yesterday's Enterprise and New Coke Trek have the audience follow the main characters without showing the alternate timelines they left, while Parallels follows only Worf so the rest of the main characters are changed with every parallel universe he jumps into, and those parallel universes are all created by alternate timelines.

No, a paradox can't be explained by parallel quantum realities because that is an entirely different concept. A paradox exists because of contradictions in a single altered timeline, not between parallel universes. You're not understanding the differences between the two concepts here.

You're mistaken, if there's to be something that looks like a temporal paradox existing, it must be from an alternate quantum reality or else it would negate itself - that's what makes it a paradox, and thus impossible. Back to the Future doesn't subscribe to this, hence Marty's incursion into the past begins erasing his own self, but Star Trek does subscribe to branching timelines creating alternate universes, Parallels, New Coke Trek, ST4, they all make this argument by having the main characters make changes to the past without affecting themselves, and while Yesterday's Enterprise doesn't SEEM to, it actually does because Tasha (B universe) enters our main characters' "normal" universe without being an impossible temporal paradox.

If Marty McFly's trip into the past erases his future, then he cannot be in the future to take a trip into the past to erase himself, THAT is a paradox, it's logically impossible, so it cannot be. Back to the Future doesn't attempt to answer this riddle because it's trying to be a simple, straightforward piece of self-contained entertainment and nothing more.

TOS: "The City on the Edge of Forever" - McCoy travels to the past using the Guardian of Forever, and inadvertently causes a change to the timeline where the Nazi's win WWII and the Federation never came into existence. The landing party in the 'present' is protected from the changes to the timeline, supposedly because of the Guardian itself, but the Enterprise no longer exists. So naturally they have no other option but to follow McCoy into the past and correct the timeline. No parallel universe is created here.

Actually, it does. The universe they return to has small changes (unless the Guardian fixed them and didn't mention it, but why would he not just fix McCoy's errs then?), someone's clothes are stolen by Kirk & Spock, a policeman now has a story about being knocked unconscious by a man who looked like the devil, Keeler's soup kitchen has 2 less meals to give out to the hungry that day, the soup kitchen does not have need to offer others the job of cleaning so someone may have gone poorer, several stores have their stocks of electronic equipment diminished, a homeless man steals McCoy's phaser and vaporizes himself rather than live to do whatever else he was going to, all these little things DO affect the timeline even if in small ways, they're all changes however minor, and that altered timeline is a parallel universe.

The alternative that you're suggesting is that they return to their original timeline, yet those little changes now take place. That leaves 2 conclusions possible, either Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were always destined to change the past in these ways and time is cyclical and immutable - which Trek clearly says isn't the case in other time-travel stories - or they return to a timeline that is both the same and not the same, which is a paradox that cannot exist. Logic says that a paradox cannot exist, it simply cannot be, that is what defines it as a paradox, so Trek extrapolates on an existing theory in current Quantum Mechanics that explains paradoxes away via branching alternate parallel universes.

Shockwave wrote:Either there's only one "timeline/reality/continuity" and it changes depending on whatever some time traveler does that essentially causes reality to be "overwritten" (again for lack of a better word) or there's multiple "timelines/realities/continuities/whatever" and each time some random time traveler does something, a new "timeline/reality/whatever" is created that exists separately from the original.

Star Trek has been pretty consistent with time travel overwriting the original timeline, not creating a new parallel universe.

but they have also portrayed time travel as also creating separate "whatevers" as seen in "Parallels", "Mirror, Mirror",

Those episodes don't have anything to do with time travel. Those are parallel universes that exist because of a theory in quantum mechanics that anything that can happen does happen, in alternate universes. In other words, they came into existence on their own, not because of someone messing up the timeline.

Several Voyager Episodes (the one where Ensign Kim goes back to unfreeze Voyager, the message he got from himself at the end implied that the "future" Kim stayed in his own "whatever"),

You're forgetting that the corrected calculations that Kim sent back in time didn't work. Voyager still fell out of the quantum slipstream and crashed on that ice world. That's why that timeline didn't change at that instant because they hadn't succeeded in actually altering Voyager's fate yet. It wasn't until Kim sent a second correction to which that timeline was changed, at the same instant that future Delta Flyer was destroyed.

and even the finale "Endgame" where future Janeway, essentially from an alternate "whatever" came back and saved Voyager.

That Janeway didn't come from an alternate whatever, she simply traveled back in time with the intent to re-write history.

So really, it seems as though time travel, like everything else in Trek, has been changed to fit whatever the story required and it really isn't as consistent as you've said.

Again, Star Trek has been pretty consistent in how it portrays time travel. Honestly, you're mis-remembering these episodes a bit...

JediTricks wrote:I'm not misunderstanding anything, the Futurama episode "The Farnsworth Parabox" is describing stuff like Star Trek's "Mirror Mirror" universes, where everything is always different. "Parallels" argues something else, it says "For any event there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. Our choices determines which outcomes will follow. But there is a theory in quantum physics that all possibilities that can happen, do happen, in alternate quantum realities." So every action creates a new universe, you have the "turn left" universe and the "turn right" universe for every choice made, "all possibilities that can happen, do happen", the TURN LEFT universe and the TURN RIGHT universe are each separate quantum realities, creating an infinite number of parallel universes.

No, you're not understanding because "Parallels" is exactly the same thing as "The Farnsworth Parabox". Replace your example of a RIGHT or LEFT turn with HEADS or TAILS in a coin flip and that's EXACTLY how that Futurama episode explains the differences between those two universes. "For any event there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. Our choices determines which outcomes will follow. But there is a theory in quantum physics that all possibilities that can happen, do happen, in alternate quantum realities." Again, that difference was explained to be as simple as the out comes of coin flips being the opposite result and thus so was the decision they made.

Alternate timelines ARE alternate universes, especially in Trek where "Parallels" confirms that theory. Back to the Future doesn't subscribe to it, but Trek does because our current understanding of quantum mechanics suggests that's may really be possible.

Once again, alternate universes can essentially be alternate timelines by comparison but altered timelines are not alternate universes. If you alter the timeline of a universe, that's not creating a new universe, that's overwriting the timeline of that universe with a new timeline. "Parallels" involves zero time travel. Those universes exist as they were always meant to.

But it's not restored, she's not "made a part of the original timeline", that is a new event which creates a 3rd timeline... I'll try to give a visual explanation, but as you said, Yesterday's Enterprise is quite complicated...

Ah, but see this is not what you said before... Before you were saying "creates a 3rd universe" but this time you said "creates a 3rd timeline", and there in lies the difference.

You're mistaken, if there's to be something that looks like a temporal paradox existing, it must be from an alternate quantum reality or else it would negate itself - that's what makes it a paradox, and thus impossible.

You're wrong about this. Star Trek, when it actually does explain a time paradox, usually explains it with something like "chroniton particles" protecting the ship/crew or being out of temporal phase or some other such temporal techno-bable thing. They have NEVER explained a paradox in a time travel episode as being part of an alternate quantum reality.

The alternative that you're suggesting is that they return to their original timeline, yet those little changes now take place.

An insignificant blip as far as the grand tapestry of history is concerned. It's close enough to their original timeline that it really makes no difference, and certainly doesn't make it an alternate universe. The universe itself doesn't change with a time travel story in Star Trek, only the timeline.

Not sure where you got those timeline charts from, but they are mislabeled. I've seen essentially those exactly before, but with "Timeline" in place of "Universe" because that's what they are supposed to be. Causing an Alternate Timeline =/= Parallel Universe in Star Trek.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Shockwave wrote:Either there's only one "timeline/reality/continuity" and it changes depending on whatever some time traveler does that essentially causes reality to be "overwritten" (again for lack of a better word) or there's multiple "timelines/realities/continuities/whatever" and each time some random time traveler does something, a new "timeline/reality/whatever" is created that exists separately from the original.

Star Trek has been pretty consistent with time travel overwriting the original timeline, not creating a new parallel universe.

They have not been consistent. The real problem here is that the Trek universe has essentially been subscribing to two totally different completely unrelated temporal theories. It works one way or the other, not both. Either you only have one continuity and can go back and change and overwrite things in your own reality, or there's multiple realities. It's one or the other, not both. By portraying other universes, AND portraying "overwrites" they've essentially contradicted themselves.

Shockwave wrote:They have not been consistent. The real problem here is that the Trek universe has essentially been subscribing to two totally different completely unrelated temporal theories. It works one way or the other, not both. Either you only have one continuity and can go back and change and overwrite things in your own reality, or there's multiple realities. It's one or the other, not both. By portraying other universes, AND portraying "overwrites" they've essentially contradicted themselves.

How have they not been consistent? Other than NuTrek, which frankly I don't think anyone can deny wasn't written consistently with the previous Star Trek series to begin with, I have yet to see anyone provide an example from ANY series or movie that actually supports that claim. Parallel universes is an entirely separate concept than time travel creating an alternate timeline and there is absolutely no contradiction with having both with how Star Trek has handled them being as two different things. The problem is, you're still looking at it as if the two are the same thing, when they are NOT.

Sparky Prime wrote:Star Trek has been pretty consistent with time travel overwriting the original timeline, not creating a new parallel universe.

I disagree, just because they don't usually SAY they're creating an alternate universe doesn't mean that's not what's happening. That's what I mean by perspective, our heroes return to a new timeline that they are happy with because it matches the changes they want to make, we follow the heroes so when they arrive from the past with timeline changes, they are happy. They look at it as a timeline change, but a timeline change automatically means an alternate timeline, and an alternate timeline means a parallel universe.

Those episodes don't have anything to do with time travel. Those are parallel universes that exist because of a theory in quantum mechanics that anything that can happen does happen, in alternate universes. In other words, they came into existence on their own, not because of someone messing up the timeline.

Actually, quantum mechanics says that anything that can PLAUSIBLY happen, does happen in alternate universes, and that is a big difference because that is branching theory, while the Mirror Mirror universe is not a plausible thing, it argues not that they turned left instead of right, but that everybody who was good is evil, everything is and always was different. That's not what "Parallels" was saying, nor is it what quantum mechanics says.

That Janeway didn't come from an alternate whatever, she simply traveled back in time with the intent to re-write history.

What makes it a parallel, alternate universe version of Janeway is if Future Janeway changes her own timeline, that creates a self-defeating paradox and a paradox is something that cannot happen, therefore if Future Janeway succeeded and the changes are permanent, then how could Future Janeway have the same history to start that mission in the first place? Ergo, she must have been from an alternate timeline.

No, you're not understanding because "Parallels" is exactly the same thing as "The Farnsworth Parabox". Replace your example of a RIGHT or LEFT turn with HEADS or TAILS in a coin flip and that's EXACTLY how that Futurama episode explains the differences between those two universes. "For any event there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. Our choices determines which outcomes will follow. But there is a theory in quantum physics that all possibilities that can happen, do happen, in alternate quantum realities." Again, that difference was explained to be as simple as the out comes of coin flips being the opposite result and thus so was the decision they made.

The Farnsworth Parabox says that Universe 1's behavior is that EVERY coin flip is ALWAYS the opposite of Universe A's, so it's not just that Leela said yes instead of no to Fry, it's that Leela said yes, Leela's hair came out orange and Fry's came out black, Bender chose glorious gold over foghat gray, the professor attempted self brain surgery, Zoidberg has a purple shell over red, Amy prefers cream over pink, etc. - these actions are not linear, turning left instead of right didn't lead to Bender choosing gold and Fry's hair being black and Zoidberg being blue, those are always different and always were.

That is further supported when we see that the sky is not blue but a ringed colored mass and virtually everything is a different color, and when the other boxes have a universe where everybody's a hippie, another where everybody's a robot, everybody's a bobblehead, nobody's got eyes in one, there are pirate and leprechaun universes - those are examples of the Mirror Mirror Universe type of thing, where everything is arbitrarily different throughout, NOT because of an alternate choice that sent a ripple effect in motion across the sea of their time. Those universes are not examples of possible outcomes to the choices made. A coin flip is not a choice, it is chance based on physics generally outside the control of the person flipping, so if every single time chance creates an opposite outcome, that is not something someone chose, that is a different law of physics - that means that it cannot be a parallel reality because every parallel reality still has to obey the same universal laws of physics, it's only the plausible choices that are different, not the rules governing the universe.

Ah, but see this is not what you said before... Before you were saying "creates a 3rd universe" but this time you said "creates a 3rd timeline", and there in lies the difference.

No difference, alternate timelines are alternate universes in the vein of "Parallels" parallel realities, I have been saying this consistently throughout. Parallels does not need to have time travel to speak to the affect of different choices, if Picard dropped out of the academy 40 years prior to the events of Parallels, the parallel reality is affected by a choice made 40 years ago where Picard never would become captain of the Enterprise, so the branch in reality wasn't today, it was a long time ago.

An insignificant blip as far as the grand tapestry of history is concerned. It's close enough to their original timeline that it really makes no difference, and certainly doesn't make it an alternate universe. The universe itself doesn't change with a time travel story in Star Trek, only the timeline.

First off, it's not one "insignificant blip", it's several. Second, the point of a timeline is that each action creates a ripple effect, those ripples are each branches in a timeline, originally a timeline had the homeless guy assassinate a first lady or something but now he doesn't because he eats a phaser, or the guy whose clothes were stolen couldn't make it to work that day, lost his job, and his family suffered poverty for generations instead of becoming affluent and sending their son to college to discover a cure for a disease which led to overpopulation that led to the Bell riots. Everything is connected, you cannot pull on one loose thread and expect the tapestry to stay intact. Your attitude of "it's close enough that it makes no difference" isn't how quantum mechanics works, if the universe's timeline was affected because of McCoy making one change to create a parallel reality's timeline - which it did - then every change Kirk and Spock make attempting to fix that will also have that same effect. Quantum mechanics says you can't have it both ways, it either is or it isn't, "close enough" cannot be "the same thing".

Not sure where you got those timeline charts from, but they are mislabeled. I've seen essentially those exactly before, but with "Timeline" in place of "Universe" because that's what they are supposed to be. Causing an Alternate Timeline =/= Parallel Universe in Star Trek.

I made the graphics, as I said earlier.

Alternate timeline = parallel universe, they are the same thing. "Parallels" says it because quantum mechanics theorizes it. It is impossible for a transmutable timeline to be a singular reality, that flies in the face of logic, while alternate timelines creating parallel universes holds to logic.

Shockwave wrote:

Sparky Prime wrote:

Shockwave wrote:Either there's only one "timeline/reality/continuity" and it changes depending on whatever some time traveler does that essentially causes reality to be "overwritten" (again for lack of a better word) or there's multiple "timelines/realities/continuities/whatever" and each time some random time traveler does something, a new "timeline/reality/whatever" is created that exists separately from the original.

Star Trek has been pretty consistent with time travel overwriting the original timeline, not creating a new parallel universe.

They have not been consistent. The real problem here is that the Trek universe has essentially been subscribing to two totally different completely unrelated temporal theories. It works one way or the other, not both. Either you only have one continuity and can go back and change and overwrite things in your own reality, or there's multiple realities. It's one or the other, not both. By portraying other universes, AND portraying "overwrites" they've essentially contradicted themselves.

City on the Edge of Forever and the like aren't an unrelated temporal theory, it simply doesn't state it outright, it doesn't confuse the issue by saying "well, this isn't actually the timeline we came from but it looks enough like ours so we'll stick with it but it must be a parallel universe, an alternate reality based on the idea of branching quantum mechanics ensuring the lack of temporal paradoxes, but that's got to be good enough because we can't actually live in the universe we came from anymore as our time traveling makes that impossible so we'll just settle here." They simplify it by saying "there, it's fixed and now *essentially* the same as it was", and they don't usually bother with the rest of the statement behind that. So they let it seem like it's "fixing" the timeline for clarity's sake, but it never outright SAYS that it's *not* creating multiple alternate realities by affecting the past timeline.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Shockwave wrote:They have not been consistent. The real problem here is that the Trek universe has essentially been subscribing to two totally different completely unrelated temporal theories. It works one way or the other, not both. Either you only have one continuity and can go back and change and overwrite things in your own reality, or there's multiple realities. It's one or the other, not both. By portraying other universes, AND portraying "overwrites" they've essentially contradicted themselves.

How have they not been consistent? Other than NuTrek, which frankly I don't think anyone can deny wasn't written consistently with the previous Star Trek series to begin with, I have yet to see anyone provide an example from ANY series or movie that actually supports that claim. Parallel universes is an entirely separate concept than time travel creating an alternate timeline and there is absolutely no contradiction with having both with how Star Trek has handled them being as two different things. The problem is, you're still looking at it as if the two are the same thing, when they are NOT.

Sure it is. According to the "alternate timeline theory" every decision we make happens. Both things happen. They just happen in different universes. Alternate timelines CAUSE parallel universes and those universes don't cease to exist once created. Whether that parallel universe is created by a single decision or by time travel is irrelevant, the result (a parallel universe) is the same.

But look man, I can see what you're saying I just disagree with it, so I'm just gonna say "agree to disagree" and I'm out of this discussion. I'm not mad or anything, but that last post is about the best I can explain my opinion on the matter and I know it's still an opinion you disagree with.

Ok, then we'll switch gears.

One of the guys on my SW forum just got the Diamond Select Toys Klingon Bird of Prey from Redford Films (they recently had a sale), and really likes it. The version he got has the ST6 General Chang voices, and he said he chose it because the Kruge exclusive version has a lot more light bleed through the plastic. His pics show very good paint and decent molding, although there are a few seams showing that betray its production quality a tiny bit: http://www.sirstevesguide.com/showthrea ... post771056
The lights are described as very bright, and I realize now I'd sometimes rather have subtle lights over bright ones, but I'll wait to make a final decision on this piece until I get it at Comic-Con (I hope). This is, btw, the first non-Enterprise ship they've done in the DST starships line.

They announced an HMS Bounty version with landing gear built into the battery hatch (hopefully swappable with an included regular one), I am very tempted to get that one instead, but there's currently no release date for it. I'm having a hard time containing my interest in just getting this ST6 version instead, far more difficult than waiting for the Excelsior over the Ent-B that's out - Ent B somehow doesn't do it for me at all.


Also, I just found out about another piece that DST is doing, a cutaway version of the TOS Enterprise:
http://imperialholocron.com/star-trek-e ... away-ship/
Unfortunately, it's retailing for $175 which is WAY too rich for my blood at only 18" long and not a lot of detail showing inside the largest deck shown - just a blank honeycomb of empty rooms.

JediTricks wrote:I disagree, just because they don't usually SAY they're creating an alternate universe doesn't mean that's not what's happening. That's what I mean by perspective, our heroes return to a new timeline that they are happy with because it matches the changes they want to make, we follow the heroes so when they arrive from the past with timeline changes, they are happy. They look at it as a timeline change, but a timeline change automatically means an alternate timeline, and an alternate timeline means a parallel universe.

They didn't say Captain Picard was a pink bunny, but that doesn't mean that he was a pink bunny. You can't claim a complete lack of evidence as evidence that's what it is. And you're ignoring all the evidence they present to us in those time travel story lines that it doesn't cause an alternate universe. They way they explain things, when they do explain anything in any given time travel story, it doesn't involve parallel universes. And parallel universes is shown in Star Trek to be an entirely different concept from an alternate timeline.

Actually, quantum mechanics says that anything that can PLAUSIBLY happen, does happen in alternate universes, and that is a big difference because that is branching theory, while the Mirror Mirror universe is not a plausible thing, it argues not that they turned left instead of right, but that everybody who was good is evil, everything is and always was different. That's not what "Parallels" was saying, nor is it what quantum mechanics says.

You're nitpicking. I think you know I meant it had to be anything that is plausible, not simply just anything. I was the one that brought up the many-world interpretation that "Parallels" uses as a basis in the first place, I know what it says.

What makes it a parallel, alternate universe version of Janeway is if Future Janeway changes her own timeline, that creates a self-defeating paradox and a paradox is something that cannot happen, therefore if Future Janeway succeeded and the changes are permanent, then how could Future Janeway have the same history to start that mission in the first place? Ergo, she must have been from an alternate timeline.

Of course Admiral Janeway was from an alternate timeline, she successfully changed the timeline, albeit not exactly according to her plans. That doesn't mean her timeline was a parallel universe. Her timeline was erased, overwritten when she changed history. But she still exists because she was a part of that 'present' timeline, becoming a part of the event necessary to change history. I know that's not a clear explanation that you seem to so badly want reason out, but like it or not, that's how Star Trek explains such paradox's. It is what it is. There are other episodes that speculates on similar events, like Enterprise's "E²" or DS9's "Children of Time", where the characters are left wondering how they can remember their future descendants if the timeline changed and they no longer exist, but ultimately are left without answers. They would bring up a parallel universe if they thought that's what it is, but these are characters that know the difference between a parallel universe and an alternate timeline and they never even mention the possibility it could be a parallel universe thing. What does that tell you? It simply exists because it must for the timeline to be what it became.

Similarly, the Stargate series used the same concepts of alternate timelines and parallel universes that Star Trek does. There was an episode where they found out a ZPM (Ancient alien power source) was on Earth in ancient Egypt and the only way they could get it was via time travel, and they happened to have a time machine. Of course, things go wrong and it alters the timeline, and the resulting timeline, having found a message from the team at an archaeological dig, ends up having to go back in time to fix it. In the end, the timeline is back how it was supposed to be and they don't even have to time travel to get the ZPM anymore because they find it at an archaeological dig along with a message explaining what happened from the team who got stuck in the past. Carter (the team's resident expert on all science stuff) explains that's all the more there is to it. Sure, it's a paradox, but because the timeline was already altered, there was nothing more they could or even needed to do about it. They had a few episodes similar "Parallels" where alternate universe versions of SG-1 started coming through the Stargate, or they accidentally traveled into a parallel universe themselves. And they point out how this is a different concept from an altered timeline.

To point out another example, If Marty ceased to exist in Back to the Future because he was never born, then how could he have gone back in time to disrupt how his parents met in the first place? You're over thinking it by trying to find a nice explanation for everything, but in the process confusing it with a different theory in an attempt to explain it.

The Farnsworth Parabox says that Universe 1's behavior is that EVERY coin flip is ALWAYS the opposite of Universe A's, so it's not just that Leela said yes instead of no to Fry, it's that Leela said yes, Leela's hair came out orange and Fry's came out black, Bender chose glorious gold over foghat gray, the professor attempted self brain surgery, Zoidberg has a purple shell over red, Amy prefers cream over pink, etc. - these actions are not linear, turning left instead of right didn't lead to Bender choosing gold and Fry's hair being black and Zoidberg being blue, those are always different and always were.

There would be a universe for each and every plausible outcome of the coin flip, INCLUDING if EVERY coin flip was the opposite. It's not that each of these universes were "always different and always were" at all, just that their coin flips always happened to be the opposites.

That is further supported when we see that the sky is not blue but a ringed colored mass and virtually everything is a different color, and when the other boxes have a universe where everybody's a hippie, another where everybody's a robot, everybody's a bobblehead, nobody's got eyes in one, there are pirate and leprechaun universes - those are examples of the Mirror Mirror Universe type of thing, where everything is arbitrarily different throughout, NOT because of an alternate choice that sent a ripple effect in motion across the sea of their time. Those universes are not examples of possible outcomes to the choices made. A coin flip is not a choice, it is chance based on physics generally outside the control of the person flipping, so if every single time chance creates an opposite outcome, that is not something someone chose, that is a different law of physics - that means that it cannot be a parallel reality because every parallel reality still has to obey the same universal laws of physics, it's only the plausible choices that are different, not the rules governing the universe.

To be fair, Futurama is a comedy that, while taking real theory, will stretch it to a parody, so the other alternate universes they show in that episode are only there purely for comedic value. There is a reason why the episodes only focus is on developing the first parallel universe they encounter. And the show isn't meant to be taken as 100% scientifically accurate. With that said, I supposed it should be argued that neither is Star Trek or any other science fiction series for that matter. They take a bit of an artistic license to tell a story to the audience.

No difference, alternate timelines are alternate universes in the vein of "Parallels" parallel realities, I have been saying this consistently throughout. Parallels does not need to have time travel to speak to the affect of different choices, if Picard dropped out of the academy 40 years prior to the events of Parallels, the parallel reality is affected by a choice made 40 years ago where Picard never would become captain of the Enterprise, so the branch in reality wasn't today, it was a long time ago.

It makes ALL the difference and you've been consistently wrong about it. They aren't the same thing and an alternate timeline does not create a parallel universe. I've already pointed out several episodes of Star Trek that goes to show this, some of which you didn't dispute. "Parellels" is about the choice not taken in other universes, so to speak, as such they appear like alternate timelines, but does not make it the same thing as an alternate timeline as that is an entirely different concept here.

First off, it's not one "insignificant blip", it's several. Second, the point of a timeline is that each action creates a ripple effect, those ripples are each branches in a timeline, originally a timeline had the homeless guy assassinate a first lady or something but now he doesn't because he eats a phaser, or the guy whose clothes were stolen couldn't make it to work that day, lost his job, and his family suffered poverty for generations instead of becoming affluent and sending their son to college to discover a cure for a disease which led to overpopulation that led to the Bell riots. Everything is connected, you cannot pull on one loose thread and expect the tapestry to stay intact. Your attitude of "it's close enough that it makes no difference" isn't how quantum mechanics works, if the universe's timeline was affected because of McCoy making one change to create a parallel reality's timeline - which it did - then every change Kirk and Spock make attempting to fix that will also have that same effect. Quantum mechanics says you can't have it both ways, it either is or it isn't, "close enough" cannot be "the same thing".

Whatever, clearly it had no impact on the overall timeline given, as far are the series is concerned, the original timeline was restored to the way things should be. That's not "my attitude" about quantum mechanics at all, that's how the SHOW ITSELF portrays it. Unless you've somehow became an expert on quantum mechanics and how it works in a fictional universe, your opinion of whether or not that's how quantum mechanics works is irrelevant, unless you want to argue with how the show portrays it with the writers who originally wrote it. On a related note, in that SG-1 episode I mentioned earlier, it's a running joke that O'Neill likes to go fishing in a pond that has no fish in it, but at the end of that episode there are fish in the pond. Carter asks him about it, being concerned that isn't the only difference in the timeline but he says it's "close enough". You're over-thinking this Jedi.

I made the graphics, as I said earlier.

Ah, must have missed that comment. Well I guess that explains the inaccuracy then.

Alternate timeline = parallel universe, they are the same thing. "Parallels" says it because quantum mechanics theorizes it. It is impossible for a transmutable timeline to be a singular reality, that flies in the face of logic, while alternate timelines creating parallel universes holds to logic.

No, they are very much not the same thing. "Parallels" says nothing about time travel creating parallel time lines. That's the whole point. Those universes exists for entirely different reasons and as such it's not the same thing at all. It isn't impossible for a singular realities timeline to be transmutable. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any consequences to time travel, that universe should still exist unaffected. That's simply not how it works. And I might point out you're trying to reason something considered to be impossible to happen in the first place.

City on the Edge of Forever and the like aren't an unrelated temporal theory, it simply doesn't state it outright, it doesn't confuse the issue by saying "well, this isn't actually the timeline we came from but it looks enough like ours so we'll stick with it but it must be a parallel universe, an alternate reality based on the idea of branching quantum mechanics ensuring the lack of temporal paradoxes, but that's got to be good enough because we can't actually live in the universe we came from anymore as our time traveling makes that impossible so we'll just settle here." They simplify it by saying "there, it's fixed and now *essentially* the same as it was", and they don't usually bother with the rest of the statement behind that. So they let it seem like it's "fixing" the timeline for clarity's sake, but it never outright SAYS that it's *not* creating multiple alternate realities by affecting the past timeline.

Temporal theory is unrelated to the many-worlds interpretation. The problem is that so often people use theory of alternate timelines and the theory of alternate realities interchangeably, but they actually have different definitions and theories for each. You're treating them as the same thing, trying to reason one with the other, when they are two different concepts caused by two very different types of events. I get where you're coming from in trying to reason it all out, but that just isn't how it is portrayed in the shows, and there is simply no evidence that supports your claims here.

Shockwave wrote:Sure it is. According to the "alternate timeline theory" every decision we make happens. Both things happen. They just happen in different universes. Alternate timelines CAUSE parallel universes and those universes don't cease to exist once created. Whether that parallel universe is created by a single decision or by time travel is irrelevant, the result (a parallel universe) is the same.

I think you mean the "many-worlds interpretation". And again, that has nothing to do with time travel, which makes all the difference as those universes exist regardless of any changes to a timeline. In Star Trek, alternate timelines does NOT cause parallel universes. Alternating the timeline overwrites the timeline of that universe. Every single instance of Time Travel we've seen in Star Trek goes to prove that, as we never see a parallel universe created as a result of time travel, with the ONE exception of NuTrek, and that is only at the instance of those writers.

The closest thing was Enterprise's "In a Mirror, Darkly" where the Defiant was revealed to have passed through a "interphasic rift" (or "spatial interphase" as TOS called it), and the ship was pulled into the mirror universe as well as into the past. But that episode showed the Mirror universe had existed long before that event occurred, with Zefram Cochrane killing the Vulcans at First Contact, as well as the more militaristic opening credits. So that universe clearly wasn't created as a result of time travel either.

But look man, I can see what you're saying I just disagree with it, so I'm just gonna say "agree to disagree" and I'm out of this discussion. I'm not mad or anything, but that last post is about the best I can explain my opinion on the matter and I know it's still an opinion you disagree with.

We have essentially just been arguing circles for the last several posts...

Sparky Prime wrote:In Star Trek, alternate timelines does NOT cause parallel universes.

Not necessarily. On screen sure, but there have often been other Star Trek media stories that have gone back and visited those alternate timelines as if they still carried on even after the episode ended. I've read books and comics that have at least partially taken place in the "Yesterday's Enterprise" universe where Starfleet is still at war with the Klingons.

Sparky Prime wrote:Alternating the timeline overwrites the timeline of that universe.

I will concede that this is most likely what the writers intend for us to believe. We're supposed to think everything's either back to normal or put right the way it should be. But, I do not believe this is how it would actually work. I think that in addition to parallel universes existing on their own that time travel would also cause parallel universes. So, in "Yesterday's Enterprise" we're supposed to believe that the universe we're seeing at the end is restored back to the same one we were watching at the beginning of the episode (in spite of the small continuity error at the end). But, I think what would really happen is that we actually wind up in a situation where the universe we're watching after that is not the same one we started with because Picard sent Tasha back, thus causing a 3rd universe like JT has been suggesting all along (and again, just for the record, I do not think this is what the writers want us to believe).

Shockwave wrote:Not necessarily. On screen sure, but there have often been other Star Trek media stories that have gone back and visited those alternate timelines as if they still carried on even after the episode ended. I've read books and comics that have at least partially taken place in the "Yesterday's Enterprise" universe where Starfleet is still at war with the Klingons.

None of the books or comics are considered to be part of canon though, with the exception of Jeri Taylor's 'Mosaic' and 'Pathways' according to StarTrek.com's description of the canon.

I will concede that this is most likely what the writers intend for us to believe. We're supposed to think everything's either back to normal or put right the way it should be. But, I do not believe this is how it would actually work. I think that in addition to parallel universes existing on their own that time travel would also cause parallel universes. So, in "Yesterday's Enterprise" we're supposed to believe that the universe we're seeing at the end is restored back to the same one we were watching at the beginning of the episode (in spite of the small continuity error at the end). But, I think what would really happen is that we actually wind up in a situation where the universe we're watching after that is not the same one we started with because Picard sent Tasha back, thus causing a 3rd universe like JT has been suggesting all along (and again, just for the record, I do not think this is what the writers want us to believe).

It's impossible to say how it would actually work considering this is all based on theories to begin with. The only thing we can take from the episodes here is how the episodes themselves portrays it. And they do no show the creation of parallel universes, just timelines overwriting a timeline that has been altered. It's that simple.

Sparky
-Out of this discussion went out the window?