PDA

View Full Version : Star Trek - Why I just can't get in to it.



wiggy
2013-Jul-08, 08:36 AM
Circuit breakers. Yes circuit breakers.

Every time the space ships in star trek get shot at, their control panels blow up.

Why is it in the future, they have warp drive technology but have forgotten how to install a fuse?

profloater
2013-Jul-08, 08:56 AM
It's because the electromagnetic pulse (as also seen in Matrix) overwhelms such devices by causing enormous explosive magnetic fields in conductors of all kinds and in later models can also be focussed by a kind of phased array, as first used in the phasers. The warp drive superconductors actually make the problem worse by a kind of self focussing. We are working on it but it's a hard problem.

Jens
2013-Jul-08, 10:34 AM
Along the same lines, and speaking of fuses, why are the timers on time bombs in movies just the right length so that you can defuse them with 1 second left? You'd think the criminals would get smart and make the fuses a few seconds shorter!

Glom
2013-Jul-08, 10:37 AM
Along the same lines, and speaking of fuses, why are the timers on time bombs in movies just the right length so that you can defuse them with 1 second left? You'd think the criminals would get smart and make the fuses a few seconds shorter!

In Goldfinger there was 7 seconds left.

profloater
2013-Jul-08, 10:49 AM
Oh yes and why don't they put an offset in the timer so it blows at one minute? That would catch a lot out, but then these genius criminals forget to use real bullets when the hero is getting closer, that's a bad mistake too.

HenrikOlsen
2013-Jul-08, 12:14 PM
Oh yes and why don't they put an offset in the timer so it blows at one minute? That would catch a lot out, but then these genius criminals forget to use real bullets when the hero is getting closer, that's a bad mistake too.
Evil Overlord List (http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html), item 15.

Nick Theodorakis
2013-Jul-08, 01:07 PM
Along the same lines, and speaking of fuses, why are the timers on time bombs in movies just the right length so that you can defuse them with 1 second left? You'd think the criminals would get smart and make the fuses a few seconds shorter!

That was "lampshaded" in Galaxy Quest when the self-destruct was designed to stop at 1 second no matter when it was deactivated.

Nick

Swift
2013-Jul-08, 01:19 PM
Fuses. Heck, I don't think they figured out how to bolt down the chairs until the third movie. ;)


That was "lampshaded" in Galaxy Quest when the self-destruct was designed to stop at 1 second no matter when it was deactivated.

Nick
I love that movie

Gwen DeMarco: What is this thing? I mean, it serves no useful purpose for there to be a bunch of chompy, crushy things in the middle of a hallway. No, I mean we shouldn't have to do this, it makes no logical sense, why is it here?

Jason Nesmith: 'Cause it's on the television show.

Gwen DeMarco: Well forget it! I'm not doing it! This episode was badly written!

JustAFriend
2013-Jul-08, 01:25 PM
Why is it in the future, they have warp drive technology but have forgotten how to install a fuse?

Depends on how much power they have.

Maybe you've never seen what happens when they throw a simple switch at a modern power station:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMbN9nb3qyk

swampyankee
2013-Jul-08, 02:46 PM
Along the same lines, and speaking of fuses, why are the timers on time bombs in movies just the right length so that you can defuse them with 1 second left? You'd think the criminals would get smart and make the fuses a few seconds shorter!

Why are the timers always accurate? Why not wise up and either a) blow up with <insert random number here> seconds left or b) not have the stupid digital display?

And why is it always "cut the red wire?" Why not the green wire? Or why not have cutting any wire set the bomb off? (Note that this does not apply to that series Danger: UXB, where the Germans went to a lot of effort to prevent the good guys disarming their bombs)

John Mendenhall
2013-Jul-08, 03:34 PM
Fuses. Heck, I don't think they figured out how to bolt down the chairs until the third movie. ;)

Shucks, the Air Force has never figured out they should tie down their aircraft. Then when they blow over in a hurricane or tornado they act sooo surprised.

Regards, Navy Guy.

schlaugh
2013-Jul-08, 04:12 PM
And why is it always "cut the red wire?" Why not the green wire? Or why not have cutting any wire set the bomb off?

The Abyss had a good spin on this when the Ed Harris character has to cut a wire on a nuclear bomb while using a greenish-yellow light. None of the wires showed their "natural" colors.

profloater
2013-Jul-08, 04:18 PM
The Abyss had a good spin on this when the Ed Harris character has to cut a wire on a nuclear bomb while using a greenish-yellow light. None of the wires showed their "natural" colors. There was a similar Richard Harris IIRC plot on a ship where the bomb maker had a personal vendatta and the most unsatisfactory part of the action was that he, after hesitation, cut the "wrong" wire, not the one extracted by torture from the bomb maker, but failed to tell his mates he was doing that, so if he blew up they would not know what he did.

Jim
2013-Jul-08, 04:22 PM
(Seems this is more SMaL than OTB. Moved.)

HenrikOlsen
2013-Jul-08, 05:31 PM
There was a similar Richard Harris IIRC plot on a ship where the bomb maker had a personal vendatta and the most unsatisfactory part of the action was that he, after hesitation, cut the "wrong" wire, not the one extracted by torture from the bomb maker, but failed to tell his mates he was doing that, so if he blew up they would not know what he did.
Yep, remember that one, he'd even been established as a "real" pro earlier.
Dumbest bomb disposal ever.

That Abyss scene was nice, sodium under-water torch with monochromatic light, indiscernible wires.
Still a stupid design though.

profloater
2013-Jul-08, 05:47 PM
Yep, remember that one, he'd even been established as a "real" pro earlier.
Dumbest bomb disposal ever.

That Abyss scene was nice, sodium under-water torch with monochromatic light, indiscernible wires.
Still a stupid design though. Thanks for the evil overlord list by the way, saves a lot of replies. They could have just used wires all the same colour of course, or coded them with letter sleeves spelling out riddles, have they done that one? Seems an obvious tactic.

Solfe
2013-Jul-08, 06:23 PM
Yep, remember that one, he'd even been established as a "real" pro earlier.
Dumbest bomb disposal ever.

That Abyss scene was nice, sodium under-water torch with monochromatic light, indiscernible wires.
Still a stupid design though.

I love the wire cutting in the Abyss. It is the one time that somebody, anybody, has an actual manual for a nuclear weapon with complete instructions on how to make it safe or blow it up and the hero is messed up by something completely random like a chem light.

The one thing I hate about Star Trek is that no one has figured out the comedy value of a transporter. If you think prank calls are fun, imagine being able to drop a sleeping friend in a lake.

Glom
2013-Jul-08, 06:33 PM
The Abyss had a good spin on this when the Ed Harris character has to cut a wire on a nuclear bomb while using a greenish-yellow light. None of the wires showed their "natural" colors.

In an episode of Stargate SG-1 where they did Armageddon, they had to cut the wire of x colour, but they were all yellow.



The one thing I hate about Star Trek is that no one has figured out the comedy value of a transporter. If you think prank calls are fun, imagine being able to drop a sleeping friend in a lake.

Scotty beamed tribbles over to Koloth's ship.

DonM435
2013-Jul-08, 06:50 PM
The Star Trek attitude towards circuit breakers is similar to their attitude about seat belts. The crew is always getting tossed around.

HenrikOlsen
2013-Jul-08, 06:52 PM
Just think of the potential for beaming up someones clothes at an important affair.

Noclevername
2013-Jul-08, 08:14 PM
I'm pretty sure transporter misuse is a court-martial offense in Starfleet.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jul-08, 10:32 PM
The one thing I hate about Star Trek is that no one has figured out the comedy value of a transporter. If you think prank calls are fun, imagine being able to drop a sleeping friend in a lake.

They sort of did this in "Generations", when they teleported the plank away and Worf fell into the water. I think it technically counts because sometimes they use transporter tech to run the holodeck.

swampyankee
2013-Jul-08, 11:02 PM
Just think of the potential for beaming up someones clothes at an important affair.

Or naked midshipmen streaking the ST Universe equivalent of the Oscars.

Solfe
2013-Jul-09, 03:28 AM
Scotty beamed tribbles over to Koloth's ship.

I forgot about that.

In the Expanded Universe, they have the Andromedeans that can transport whole ships, friend and foe alike. And the same creatures have Power Absorbers which allows them to store energy from enemy fire to use to power their own ship mounted weapons. And a warp something or other that cause their opponents weapons to cross more space than their weapons.

Now that I think of it, Star Trek tech taken to the extreme is really not fun. But these Andromedeans do make every one else's weapons make sense. Disruptors disrupt, phasers focus power on a tiny point, webs slow things down, and so on. They stop being gimmicks or hats when you consider the other possibilities.

Launch window
2013-Jul-09, 05:59 AM
This is one of my favorite sites for a laugh http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ScienceFiction The site Television Tropes and Idioms, collects and talks about stereotypes, cliches, repeating plot devices, archetypes within movies and books. It's been around since 2004, I think it started with Joss Whedon's Buffy the Vampire Slayer but quickly moved onto stereotypes and cliche in other media such as Star Wars, X Files, Doctor Who, Stargate, Fringe, Star Trek and other literature, comics, video games...whatever show or book you love the site probably has a page on it :)
It covers all kinds of plot devices like all the Captain's electronic equipment exploding and lack of circuit breakers!!

Solfe
2013-Jul-09, 04:59 PM
I love TVTropes.org.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-09, 05:08 PM
Depends on how much power they have.
Or what kind of power is there.
I'm not sure about TOS, but TNG had a lot of EPS conduits to distribute plasma about the ship.




Maybe you've never seen what happens when they throw a simple switch at a modern power station:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMbN9nb3qyk
No I haven't. Thanks for that, it's impressive.


They sort of did this in "Generations", when they teleported the plank away and Worf fell into the water. I think it technically counts because sometimes they use transporter tech to run the holodeck.
Only if you consider holodeck technology as your "sort of". It wasn't teleported anywhere, it just disappeared. (Oops, you did say that)

Riker:"Computer! Remove the Plank!"
Captain Jean-Luc Picard:"Number 1, that's 'retract plank', not 'remove plank'."

There seems to be some inconsistencies there anyway. They couldn't transport Moriority (or his chair) but Worf and Picard did get hit by a snowball.

Noclevername
2013-Jul-09, 07:50 PM
There seems to be some inconsistencies there anyway. They couldn't transport Moriority (or his chair) but Worf and Picard did get hit by a snowball.

That's because in canon, sometimes the holodeck uses projected fields, and sometimes it uses replicated matter. (A snowball is a lot less complex than creating a living human body, or even a molecularly accurate wooden chair.)

Concerned
2013-Jul-09, 11:23 PM
In Goldfinger there was 7 seconds left.

Not in octoPussy, 1 second.

starcanuck64
2013-Jul-09, 11:30 PM
That's because in canon, sometimes the holodeck uses projected fields, and sometimes it uses replicated matter. (A snowball is a lot less complex than creating a living human body, or even a molecularly accurate wooden chair.)

The way it often gets explained on NG is that the holodeck uses a limited form of the transporter technology that only allows the created forms in the holodeck to exist there. Instead of beaming matter from one place to another, I guess the idea is that matter is temporarily created within a limited field.

Jens
2013-Jul-10, 07:56 AM
The Star Trek attitude towards circuit breakers is similar to their attitude about seat belts. The crew is always getting tossed around.

Even without seat belts, you'd think that if they'd thought up the technology to keep the crew glued to the floor at the proper angle wherever they are on the ship, they might also have come up with the idea of changing the field to offset the effect of any acceleration...

HenrikOlsen
2013-Jul-10, 08:41 AM
Even without seat belts, you'd think that if they'd thought up the technology to keep the crew glued to the floor at the proper angle wherever they are on the ship, they might also have come up with the idea of changing the field to offset the effect of any acceleration...
It can be retconned simply to be: they're already doing that, the real acceleration of the ship is vast in those combat situations, what we see is the tiny bit that the system fails to compensate for.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-10, 01:01 PM
Even without seat belts, you'd think that if they'd thought up the technology to keep the crew glued to the floor at the proper angle wherever they are on the ship, they might also have come up with the idea of changing the field to offset the effect of any acceleration...
I thought that's what inertial dampers were for.

Doodler
2013-Jul-11, 01:06 PM
The one thing I hate about Star Trek is that no one has figured out the comedy value of a transporter. If you think prank calls are fun, imagine being able to drop a sleeping friend in a lake.


The Relaunch novels have the Andorians, no longer members of the Federation, using transporters to create Thomas Riker-type transporter clones of Andorians who refused to leave Starfleet to resolve a population implosion. They literally beam someone to discuss returning home, get turned down and send them back, then create a duplicate who's then taken against their will to their homeworld. I'm sure the guy who developed the technique gets quite a laugh out of his victim's misery.

Doodler
2013-Jul-11, 01:06 PM
It can be retconned simply to be: they're already doing that, the real acceleration of the ship is vast in those combat situations, what we see is the tiny bit that the system fails to compensate for.

Into Darkness actually showed integrated restraints on their seating.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-11, 03:11 PM
Didn't one of the TOS movies have something where the armrests in the captains chair folded in over the thighs?

Swift
2013-Jul-12, 01:26 PM
Didn't one of the TOS movies have something where the armrests in the captains chair folded in over the thighs?
IIRC, the first Star Trek movie (Star Trek: The Motion Picture) and you see it during the scene when they go into the wormhole.

wiggy
2013-Jul-12, 10:03 PM
I was trained in booby-trapping in the army. Those bomb movies always make me laugh. I saw Speed about a week after I did my training. I could have defused the bomb on the elevator in under a minute safely or about 2 seconds in a hurry. It could have been literally "defused." The detonators were sitting right there on top. They could have been yanked out, or if worried about them being booby trapped too, it would have taken about 30 seconds to dig away the explosive to see that they weren't.

Oh, and the rule is always cut the blue wire first. This is so if you get blown up & there's multiple bombs, the next guy knows not to cut the blue wire first. So we were taught to only use blue wire.

publiusr
2013-Jul-12, 10:08 PM
Richard Taylor didn't seem to like the design of the Enterprise
http://beyondthemarquee.com/21244/

If it wasn't the smiling swan we remember--and just another rocket--I don't think Trek would have taken off.

Trakar
2013-Jul-14, 08:08 PM
They sort of did this in "Generations", when they teleported the plank away and Worf fell into the water. I think it technically counts because sometimes they use transporter tech to run the holodeck.

Well, in a holodeck sim, nothing is "beamed away," they simply edited the simulation. but yeah similar effect. Might relate it to the way ensign Barclay fanaticized in "Hollow Pursuits."

Ara Pacis
2013-Jul-15, 06:00 AM
Well, in a holodeck sim, nothing is "beamed away," they simply edited the simulation. but yeah similar effect. Might relate it to the way ensign Barclay fanaticized in "Hollow Pursuits."

Sure it's beamed away. If it's not a "force field" of some sort, then it's material that's beamed in from the storage area of input matter, similar to how the food replicators work.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-15, 06:33 PM
Richard Taylor didn't seem to like the design of the Enterprise
http://beyondthemarquee.com/21244/

If it wasn't the smiling swan we remember--and just another rocket--I don't think Trek would have taken off.
He really sounds like he is not happy with the franchise at all.

It's hard to follow the timeline in that interview. He started in '73 on the project (which was originally going to be a '75 film) but then talks about comparing the look of Star Wars. All I can think is that he's mixing the original project with that of the '78 project.

There is a lot of things that he says that make complete sense from a sci-fi point of view, but a lot of his gripes seem to stem from the fact that he didn't have the freedom to stray from the designs in the series. Sorry Richard, but if it's going to be the original enterprise, it's got to be the original design.

Although, I do agree about the 12 foot door. I don't know why Gene may have insisted on that.


It does confirm Swift's recollection of the armrests being in that movie.

Trakar
2013-Jul-15, 08:39 PM
Sure it's beamed away. If it's not a "force field" of some sort, then it's material that's beamed in from the storage area of input matter, similar to how the food replicators work.

According to Trek physics (quite the esoteric tangle of imagination) holodecks are all holograms and force fields. Replicators actually build food (and serviceware) an atom at a time, though later versions did utilize teleporter tech in that they use raw energy to create the atoms and stored patterns of the food (serviceware), at least that is in the books I wasted several hours reading back before the internet was up and running terribly well. Of course, I am most familiar with the original ST and am not sure how such issues unfolded in later variant timelines within the trekverse. ;)

Ara Pacis
2013-Jul-15, 11:51 PM
According to Trek physics (quite the esoteric tangle of imagination) holodecks are all holograms and force fields. Replicators actually build food (and serviceware) an atom at a time, though later versions did utilize teleporter tech in that they use raw energy to create the atoms and stored patterns of the food (serviceware), at least that is in the books I wasted several hours reading back before the internet was up and running terribly well. Of course, I am most familiar with the original ST and am not sure how such issues unfolded in later variant timelines within the trekverse. ;)

According to the Star trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual p. 156

The Holodeck utilizes two main subsystems, the holographic imagery subsystem and the matter conversion subsystem. The holographic imagery subsystem creates realistic background environments. The matter conversion subsystem creates physical "props" from the starship's central raw matter supplies. Under normal conditions, a participant in a Holodeck simulation should not be able to detect differences between a real object and a simulated one.

The Holodeck also generates remarkably lifelike recreations of humanoids or other lifeforms. Such animated characters are composed of solid matter arranged by transporter-based replicators and manipulated by highly articulated computer-driven tractor beams. The results are exceptionally realistic "puppets," which exhibit behaviors almost exactly like those of living beings, depending on software limits. Transporter-based matter replication is, of course, incapable of duplicating an actual living being.

Objects created on the Holodeck that are pure holographic images cannot be removed from the Holodeck, even if they appear to possess physical reality because of the focused forcebeam imagery. Objects created by replicator matter conversion do have physical reality and can indeed be removed from the Holodeck, even though they will no longer be under computer control.

MikeMcc
2013-Jul-16, 03:26 AM
Along the same lines, and speaking of fuses, why are the timers on time bombs in movies just the right length so that you can defuse them with 1 second left? You'd think the criminals would get smart and make the fuses a few seconds shorter!and why use a timer with a display anyway? Why give the EOD guy any info?

Trakar
2013-Jul-16, 05:28 AM
According to the Star trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual p. 156

Never seen that one, which variant universe does it portray? Of course, by the time that was published I had pretty much become a rare viewer of the ST universe shows, or purveyor of ST universe "science," (I think I only really watched a few episodes of TNG when they were still filming episodes) thank-you for updating my understanding.

They would require a lot bigger ship just to carry all the extra bulk required to meet holodeck requirements. And it would definitely conflict with the work-arounds they wrote into all of the Voyager and DS9 storylines; thinking in particular of the Voyager's EMH Mark I (emergency medical hologram - the doctor).

ToSeek
2013-Jul-16, 02:57 PM
Yeah, sounds to me as if the holodeck would use as much energy and resources as the warp drive.

DonM435
2013-Jul-16, 04:37 PM
Along the same lines, and speaking of fuses, why are the timers on time bombs in movies just the right length so that you can defuse them with 1 second left? You'd think the criminals would get smart and make the fuses a few seconds shorter!

In The Andromeda Strain -- the Robert Wise film, not the dumb remake -- the nuclear destriction is halted with about 30 seconds to go, I think.

If you bother to check, you'll find that the sequence plays out in real time.

(Unless your station sticks a commercial break in there -- in which case it'll seem like forever and you'll have forgotten what you were nervous about.)

Ara Pacis
2013-Jul-16, 06:37 PM
Never seen that one, which variant universe does it portray? Of course, by the time that was published I had pretty much become a rare viewer of the ST universe shows, or purveyor of ST universe "science," (I think I only really watched a few episodes of TNG when they were still filming episodes) thank-you for updating my understanding.

They would require a lot bigger ship just to carry all the extra bulk required to meet holodeck requirements. And it would definitely conflict with the work-arounds they wrote into all of the Voyager and DS9 storylines; thinking in particular of the Voyager's EMH Mark I (emergency medical hologram - the doctor).

As far as I know, it's the definitive one for TNG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation_Technical_Manual).


Authored by Rick Sternbach and Michael Okuda, who both worked in the art department on the television series, with a foreword by series creator Gene Roddenberry, the first and only edition was published in 1991 (ISBN 0-671-70427-3) by Pocket Books, and Paramount Pictures holds all copyrights.