Top 10 Unanswered Questions in Geek Movies

[TC Pilot]

Um-the only ones who fly around a star at Warp in Star Trek IV are Kirk and his merry men in the 'Bounty'.

I know that. It's just bringing this tangent back to the OP, with it's "Why did the Klingons or Romulans never do it?"

[Mad]

Is the distinction even remotely relevant to this, though? From the time traveller's perspective, there will be a change. For the Borg in First Contact, they'll return to a reality in which they've assimilated Earth. For the Klingons/Romulans in ST:IV who fly around a star at warp, they'll return to a reality in which their empire reigns supreme. It's not as if, having completed their mission, the time traveller will return to their original dimension.

OK, so maybe it happens all the time, we just don't see those timelines.

TNG Parallels shows the many-worlds interpretation applies to Trek, so this isn't something new just for the new Star Trek movie.

[TC Pilot]

OK, so maybe it happens all the time, we just don't see those timelines.
TNG Parallels shows the many-worlds interpretation applies to Trek, so this isn't something new just for the new Star Trek movie.

It's new in that it applies to time travel, contradicting what happens in First Contact, and those TOS and ENT episodes. The idea, frankly, is assinine in principle and really flimsy in practice, for reasons I don't really want to get into at this point, beyond saying that it's a completely unique take on time travel, the Kelvin looks nothing like original timeline Starfleet, and Nero is apparently wasting his time getting revenge on some alternate reality. There's other problems, like Spock popping up in this supposedly alternate dimension that's been altered by Nero, rather than the original timeline. So I'll just leave it at that for now.

[Oskuro]

Possible, though that's a pretty weak cop-out, considering the Enterprise-E didn't have any trouble going through or recreating it to return home.

I was half-kidding about the ship's geometry. About the mass, though, not so much. From the look of it, the Ent-E is substantially smaller than even the Sphere, and obviously way less massive, so the Ent-E repeating the feat says nothing about the Cube's ability to do so.

[Gil Hamilton]

It's new in that it applies to time travel, contradicting what happens in First Contact, and those TOS and ENT episodes. The idea, frankly, is assinine in principle and really flimsy in practice, for reasons I don't really want to get into at this point, beyond saying that it's a completely unique take on time travel, the Kelvin looks nothing like original timeline Starfleet, and Nero is apparently wasting his time getting revenge on some alternate reality. There's other problems, like Spock popping up in this supposedly alternate dimension that's been altered by Nero, rather than the original timeline. So I'll just leave it at that for now.

Actually, it's not new to Trek Time Travel. It's exactly what ended up happening in "Yesterday's Enterprise". The Enterprise-C fell through a timewarp before it could intervene in a battle between the Romulans and Klingons, thus altering the timeline to where the Klingons and the Federation never patched things up and ended up at war. The new Enterprise-D sends tje Enterprise-C back in time again, now with "dead in Universe A, alive in Universe B" Tasha Yar and it succeeded in making a third and seperate timeline where Tasha Yar is enslaved by the Romulan captain who captures the C's survivors and produces Sela. This would be impossible with a single timeline in play.

[TC Pilot]

I was half-kidding about the ship's geometry. About the mass, though, not so much. From the look of it, the Ent-E is substantially smaller than even the Sphere, and obviously way less massive, so the Ent-E repeating the feat says nothing about the Cube's ability to do so.

So I guess it comes down to my point about why didn't they release the sphere earlier, thereby sidestepping the problem of plowing through the waiting Federation fleet. Sure, the sphere might not have a warp drive, but then why not use another ship that does?

Actually, it's not new to Trek Time Travel. It's exactly what ended up happening in "Yesterday's Enterprise". The Enterprise-C fell through a timewarp before it could intervene in a battle between the Romulans and Klingons, thus altering the timeline to where the Klingons and the Federation never patched things up and ended up at war. The new Enterprise-D sends tje Enterprise-C back in time again, now with "dead in Universe A, alive in Universe B" Tasha Yar and it succeeded in making a third and seperate timeline where Tasha Yar is enslaved by the Romulan captain who captures the C's survivors and produces Sela. This would be impossible with a single timeline in play.

Maybe. It certainly doesn't help your argument that the episode starts with regular, unaltered TNG before the E-C shows up, the fact Guinan "senses" that something's not the way it should be, or that it's all treated as a single, altered timeline, not as some parallel dimension. It's wonky time travel, but it's not "Time travel doesn't affect the original timeline."

[Oskuro]

Sure, the sphere might not have a warp drive, but then why not use another ship that does?

Oh, but VOY made sure to change Spheres from emergency evacuation vessels to fully warp capable scouts, thus widening this plot hole to cosmic proportions.

[Vendetta]

Excuse: As we've covered at length here, there would be no point; creating new timelines as Star Trek time-travel does would do nothing to benefit the Romulan Empire in their native timeline.

Until they manage to cross the barriers between timelines, which has also been done occasionally.

Spawn enough timelines where your empire rules supreme and you can start sending warfleets between them to conquer the ones you don't, massively overpowering them because you are devoting the resources of several galaxies onto their puny one.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we cannot allow a timeline gap!

[Mad]

It's new in that it applies to time travel, contradicting what happens in First Contact, and those TOS and ENT episodes.

How does it contradict there being multiple timelines? We're seeing the events from the viewpoint of the time travelers. This explanation has been brought up years ago to explain time travel in Trek. My point is that it is not a new idea.

it's a completely unique take on time travel

No it's not. Just Google "many worlds time travel" and see for yourself.

the Kelvin looks nothing like original timeline Starfleet

Then, clearly, the Kelvin is not from the original timeline.

and Nero is apparently wasting his time getting revenge on some alternate reality

He may not know or care.

There's other problems, like Spock popping up in this supposedly alternate dimension that's been altered by Nero, rather than the original timeline.

Quite possibly, the arrival of Spock creates another timeline branch. One where Spock arrives, and one where he does not.

[Gil Hamilton]

Maybe. It certainly doesn't help your argument that the episode starts with regular, unaltered TNG before the E-C shows up, the fact Guinan "senses" that something's not the way it should be, or that it's all treated as a single, altered timeline, not as some parallel dimension. It's wonky time travel, but it's not "Time travel doesn't affect the original timeline."

Actually, it bolsters the argument. If there were a single timeline and time travel was just part of it, then Guinan wouldn't be able to differentiate that something was wrong. How could she? If it were one single timeline, then there would be nothing wrong, since the time travel ALWAYS occured. However, if she could detect divergences... now that's something else.

Further, the whole point of it starting out with the original TNG is exactly how it should be. The E-C appears and a new timeline is created that we jump to the action in, one with Tasha Yar in it, who had died previously in the original time line. For the episode to work, a new time line HAS to be created. After all, if it were a single timeline, we'd never get a militaristic TNG, because the E-C would ALWAYS be returned in order to make its sacrifice again the Romulans BEFORE the Federation/Klingon thing came to a head. The whole thing is the result of three timelines. The original timeline, the timeline that was created by the E-C going to the future, and the third new timeline (which TNG continues to follow) where Tasha Yar from Timeline 2 is sent to the past.

[TC Pilot]

Actually, it bolsters the argument. If there were a single timeline and time travel was just part of it, then Guinan wouldn't be able to differentiate that something was wrong. How could she?

Because she's some magical being of indeterminant power apparently worth even Q's notice. More to the point, why would she decide that the timeline is wrong, persay? Are we now suggesting that there's an infinite number of Guinans out there weirded out by the fact that they're not in the TNG dimension?

After all, if it were a single timeline, we'd never get a militaristic TNG, because the E-C would ALWAYS be returned in order to make its sacrifice again the Romulans BEFORE the Federation/Klingon thing came to a head.

Not really. The E-C going forward necessitates what I'll call "wrong TNG" to occur until the point that it reappears in the future. The timeline can't change back to "right TNG" until the E-C is sent back. From the perspective of "right TNG," no perceptible change occurs, but from the perspective of the E-C, they enter a future where they didn't save the Klingons from the Romulans, since they travelled in time, and the timeline can't be fixed until they go back to the point they left and history goes on as it's "supposed to." It's, like I said, a "wonky" take on time travel, like if Marty McFly had gone to his future in Part 2 only to have it not happen because he went forward to see it, but it's a viable alternative to this "no-effect, create-a-new/seperate-timeline" idea that you need to retcon at least 3 episodes off the top of my head to fit.

It's also, in my opinion at least, an incredibly depressing theory. How do you think the "wrong TNG" people feel when they realize "Oh shit, we're still here. Now the Kligons will kill/enslave us all," or that McCoy has subjected billions of people to enslavement/extermination under the Nazis, or that the Borg have assimilated Earth? It also completely throws out this whole "temporal cold war" from Enterprise, though I'd say that might actually be a good thing.

[Oskuro]

Because she's some magical being of indeterminant power apparently worth even Q's notice. played by Whoopie Goldberg.

By the way, who said PST discussion was dead?

[Slacker]

So what about the alien Nazis in Enterprise season 4? Or that TOS episode where McCoy jumps through that portal and changes the outcome of World War II by saving that woman? Should we just retcon all that into some interdimensional nonsense so a few fans don't cry quite as hard about a reboot?

Oh hey, I didn't say I bought it, I was just trying to come up with a suitably Treknobabble reasoning for it.

[Gil Hamilton]

Because she's some magical being of indeterminant power apparently worth even Q's notice. More to the point, why would she decide that the timeline is wrong, persay? Are we now suggesting that there's an infinite number of Guinans out there weirded out by the fact that they're not in the TNG dimension?

If the Trek timeline was a single timeline and time travel worked that way, it would be impossible fr Guinan to declare something wrong, because any time travel has ALWAYS occured and therefore isn't "wrong", but natural. However, with divergent timelines, she could be detecting the instance of a time travel related divergence. That makes alot more sense than Guinan waking up and deciding things were wack, even though what's causing it has always occured (by your logic).

Not really. The E-C going forward necessitates what I'll call "wrong TNG" to occur until the point that it reappears in the future. The timeline can't change back to "right TNG" until the E-C is sent back. From the perspective of "right TNG," no perceptible change occurs, but from the perspective of the E-C, they enter a future where they didn't save the Klingons from the Romulans, since they travelled in time, and the timeline can't be fixed until they go back to the point they left and history goes on as it's "supposed to." It's, like I said, a "wonky" take on time travel, like if Marty McFly had gone to his future in Part 2 only to have it not happen because he went forward to see it, but it's a viable alternative to this "no-effect, create-a-new/seperate-timeline" idea that you need to retcon at least 3 episodes off the top of my head to fit.

Way selectively quote me by removing my argument and responding only to what you cropped.

The problem is that the "Wrong TNG" is, by definition, a DIVERGING TIMELINE. That's the only way to approach it without getting the paradox of a spontaneously existing Tasha Yar in the timeline. Both timelines MUST exist in order for her to not appear ex nihilo, at which point, a third divergence was made upon her being sent back in time. Look:



Even if you only take it as two timelines (that is, Tasha Yar goes to the "Regular TNG past and gives birth to Sela" and the Federation/Klingon war TNG), there still needs to be a minimum of seperate timelines in order for all the characters to exist!

It's also, in my opinion at least, an incredibly depressing theory. How do you think the "wrong TNG" people feel when they realize "Oh shit, we're still here. Now the Kligons will kill/enslave us all," or that McCoy has subjected billions of people to enslavement/extermination under the Nazis, or that the Borg have assimilated Earth? It also completely throws out this whole "temporal cold war" from Enterprise, though I'd say that might actually be a good thing.

Life isn't fair, sadly.

[Darth Wong]

It's also, in my opinion at least, an incredibly depressing theory. How do you think the "wrong TNG" people feel when they realize "Oh shit, we're still here. Now the Kligons will kill/enslave us all,"

They won't realize anything. The E-D was on the verge of being destroyed when the E-C went through the portal. They'll all be dead. Nobody else in the timeline would have any idea that the other timeline existed.

or that McCoy has subjected billions of people to enslavement/extermination under the Nazis

No one will have any idea that it could have been any other way.

or that the Borg have assimilated Earth?

Again, no one will know that it could have been any other way. And we already know there are Borg-victory timelines anyway, from "Parallels".

It also completely throws out this whole "temporal cold war" from Enterprise, though I'd say that might actually be a good thing.

The "temporal cold war" was always stupid. Why were the future-Feds so reluctant to intervene directly when their enemies were doing so with abandon? Why didn't their enemies simply go back further in time and try again whenever their plans were foiled? I really think that once the writers start messing around with any time travel that isn't portrayed as an irreproducible event, they will inevitably paint themselves into a corner where "the writers just didn't think of that" becomes the only viable explanation.

[TC Pilot]

If the Trek timeline was a single timeline and time travel worked that way, it would be impossible fr Guinan to declare something wrong, because any time travel has ALWAYS occured and therefore isn't "wrong", but natural. However, with divergent timelines, she could be detecting the instance of a time travel related divergence. That makes alot more sense than Guinan waking up and deciding things were wack, even though what's causing it has always occured (by your logic).

Why does Guinan sensing that they're in a divergent timeline (yet only after E-C shows up) make any more sense than her sensing the timeline's been altered? Simply declaring so by fiat as you seem to be doing isn't going to cut it, so far as I'm concerned.

Way selectively quote me by removing my argument and responding only to what you cropped.

How am I removing parts of your argument? I quoted your reasoning and cut out the conclusions, since it's superfulous to questioning your reasoning.

The problem is that the "Wrong TNG" is, by definition, a DIVERGING TIMELINE. That's the only way to approach it without getting the paradox of a spontaneously existing Tasha Yar in the timeline. Both timelines MUST exist in order for her to not appear ex nihilo, at which point, a third divergence was made upon her being sent back in time. Look:

I'm sorry, but "I say so" doesn't cut it for me. There's nothing paradoxical about the E-C bringing Tasha-who-was-not-killed back with it from the alternate timeline, any more than it would be paradoxical for the E-C to have come back from a timeline that their actions now prevent from ever happening.

Another point that I think undermines this whole "divergent timelines" theory from the episode is the fact that what you think is the third timeline (regular TNG but now with "wrong TNG's" Tasha Yar) actually detects the time warp the E-C used to go back to fix the past. That wouldn't be possible, beyond some technobabble bullshit excuse, like would be needed to explain away First Contact or "City on the Edge of Forever."

Even if you only take it as two timelines (that is, Tasha Yar goes to the "Regular TNG past and gives birth to Sela" and the Federation/Klingon war TNG), there still needs to be a minimum of seperate timelines in order for all the characters to exist!

Why is that neccesarily the case? E-C's act of going forward alters the timeline so Tasha isn't killed by the oil slick. Then they go back with her and "fix" the timeline so that "wrong TNG" never happens. Are you saying that Tasha should have just blinked out of existence? That's one way of looking at time travel, certainly, but it doesn't do anything to prove your argument. It's just you assuming it to be the case

Oh hey, I didn't say I bought it, I was just trying to come up with a suitably Treknobabble reasoning for it.

Gotcha.

Clearly, the chronoton radiation from the spatial anomaly caused an isodimensional rupture in the space-time continuum.

They won't realize anything. The E-D was on the verge of being destroyed when the E-C went through the portal. They'll all be dead. Nobody else in the timeline would have any idea that the other timeline existed./
No one will have any idea that it could have been any other way./Again, no one will know that it could have been any other way. And we already know there are Borg-victory timelines anyway, from "Parallels".

But we know it.

It's not that "depressing theory" = "it must be wrong" to me, it's that on top of there being no reason why this "divergent timelines" theory is superior to "altered timeline" (and some problems like Enterprise-E momentarily seeing Borgified Earth in their timeline, or Kirk/Spock discovering the Enterprise has vanished from orbit), it leads to a situation where billions upon billions of people are forced to suffer/die/etc. Unless, of course, there's some Paramount dictate that "divergent timelines" is the canonical explanation, in which case I'll concede the objection.

The "temporal cold war" was always stupid. Why were the future-Feds so reluctant to intervene directly when their enemies were doing so with abandon? Why didn't their enemies simply go back further in time and try again whenever their plans were foiled? I really think that once the writers start messing around with any time travel that isn't portrayed as an irreproducible event, they will inevitably paint themselves into a corner where "the writers just didn't think of that" becomes the only viable explanation.

I agree. And there's too many variations of time travel in ST to be able to make any sense of it all as a single, coherent phenomenon. It's also not like they can just go the Doctor Who route and just not give a shit

[Darth Wong]

It's not that "depressing theory" = "it must be wrong" to me, it's that on top of there being no reason why this "divergent timelines" theory is superior to "altered timeline" (and some problems like Enterprise-E momentarily seeing Borgified Earth in their timeline, or Kirk/Spock discovering the Enterprise has vanished from orbit), it leads to a situation where billions upon billions of people are forced to suffer/die/etc.

The problem with altered timelines is the potential for a causality paradox. The advantage of divergent timelines is the fact that we already know canonically that they exist, from "Parallels", and the fact that they resolve the paradox issue.

Unless, of course, there's some Paramount dictate that "divergent timelines" is the canonical explanation, in which case I'll concede the objection.

If Paramount doesn't supply you with a theory, then the theory is no good? Why can't we do our own thinking on this?

The "temporal cold war" was always stupid. Why were the future-Feds so reluctant to intervene directly when their enemies were doing so with abandon? Why didn't their enemies simply go back further in time and try again whenever their plans were foiled? I really think that once the writers start messing around with any time travel that isn't portrayed as an irreproducible event, they will inevitably paint themselves into a corner where "the writers just didn't think of that" becomes the only viable explanation.

I agree. And there's too many variations of time travel in ST to be able to make any sense of it all as a single, coherent phenomenon. It's also not like they can just go the Doctor Who route and just not give a shit

Just to add another wrinkle (as if there weren't enough already), Enterprise also introduced the idea that if you kill the person who caused all of these changes to the timeline, then everything he did will magically be reversed.

[TC Pilot]

The problem with altered timelines is the potential for a causality paradox. The advantage of divergent timelines is the fact that we already know canonically that they exist, from "Parallels", and the fact that they resolve the paradox issue.

Perhaps, but it still requires us to come up with some excuse as to why First Contact and "City on the Edge of Forever" happen as they do, so it would come down to making up an excuse for at least those two incidents (and possibly to explain why the "third timeline" from "Yesterday's Enterprise" detected the time portal E-C went back in time with from "second timeline"), or making an excuse for why there are no causality paradox.

It's one thing to say that there are parallel universes (a "fact" we've known since "Mirror Mirror"), but something else entirely that parallel universes are created by time travelling, which is why I brought up the issue of Guinan suddenly realizing that there's something "wrong" with the timeline.

If Paramount doesn't supply you with a theory, then the theory is no good? Why can't we do our own thinking on this?

That's not what I'm saying. What I've said, or at least tried to, is that this "divergent timelines" theory is predicated on the assumption that it's the way time travel works, which we have no reason to believe any more than the "altered timeline" theory. If, however, Paramount dictates that one theory is correct and the other isn't, then that's that.

Just to add another wrinkle (as if there weren't enough already), Enterprise also introduced the idea that if you kill the person who caused all of these changes to the timeline, then everything he did will magically be reversed.

Wow, really? That detail had completely slipped my mind (been a few years since I've bothered watching Enterprise). At least we can always fall back on the argument that the whole series is just one of Riker's holoprograms.

[Darth Wong]

Perhaps, but it still requires us to come up with some excuse as to why First Contact and "City on the Edge of Forever" happen as they do, so it would come down to making up an excuse for at least those two incidents (and possibly to explain why the "third timeline" from "Yesterday's Enterprise" detected the time portal E-C went back in time with from "second timeline"), or making an excuse for why there are no causality paradox.

Those behaviours are really easy to explain with divergent timelines, and in fact, they are much harder to explain without them. In STFC, they see the Borgified Earth because they jumped with the Sphere into the divergent timeline, but they still recall the old timeline because it still exists. In "City on the Edge of Forever", the Portal presumably moves people in its vicinity into the divergent timeline, which is why they still recall the old timeline.

Without divergent timelines, how do you explain why they would not disappear from existence when their own history changes? Why would they still recall their old histories? "Temporal shielding?" The Borg sphere's "temporal wake?" That's completely meaningless and you know it. You can't "shield" yourself against causality. If you could, then you would be virtually omnipotent, since you would be literally able to alter the entire concept of cause and effect.

It's one thing to say that there are parallel universes (a "fact" we've known since "Mirror Mirror"), but something else entirely that parallel universes are created by time travelling, which is why I brought up the issue of Guinan suddenly realizing that there's something "wrong" with the timeline.

That is not particularly difficult to explain: Guinan recognizes that the E-C is a time traveller and "doesn't belong" here, hence her unease. Maybe she even recognizes somehow that the E-C's original timeline is a much more pleasant place to be than the one they're in, thus adding to her unease. It's far easier to explain than the stupid and completely meaningless concept of "temporal shielding" which is routinely required to explain single-timeline travel without massive causality problems.

That's not what I'm saying. What I've said, or at least tried to, is that this "divergent timelines" theory is predicated on the assumption that it's the way time travel works, which we have no reason to believe any more than the "altered timeline" theory. If, however, Paramount dictates that one theory is correct and the other isn't, then that's that.

We have plenty of reasons to believe it. You are just refusing to recognize them for some reason, as if causality paradoxes are not a serious problem even though real physicists have cited it as a very serious conceptual problem with time travel.

Wow, really? That detail had completely slipped my mind (been a few years since I've bothered watching Enterprise). At least we can always fall back on the argument that the whole series is just one of Riker's holoprograms.

It actually happened. Near the end of the series run, they tied up the whole time-traveling Nazi storyline by having the main antagonist die. All of a sudden, everything he did to the timeline was undone.

[TC Pilot]

Those behaviours are really easy to explain with divergent timelines, and in fact, they are much harder to explain without them. In STFC, they see the Borgified Earth because they jumped with the Sphere into the divergent timeline, but they still recall the old timeline because it still exists. In "City on the Edge of Forever", the Portal presumably moves people in its vicinity into the divergent timeline, which is why they still recall the old timeline.

Without divergent timelines, how do you explain why they would not disappear from existence when their own history changes? Why would they still recall their old histories? "Temporal shielding?" The Borg sphere's "temporal wake?" That's completely meaningless and you know it. You can't "shield" yourself against causality. If you could, then you would be virtually omnipotent, since you would be literally able to alter the entire concept of cause and effect.

How is "temporal shielding" meaningless but "Oh, and the time machines move you into the new timline" not? They're both technobabble excuses. One magically prevents causality from influencing people in close proximity to the time travel, the other magically moves them into the exact same point of time in a new timeline.

That is not particularly difficult to explain: Guinan recognizes that the E-C is a time traveller and "doesn't belong" here, hence her unease. Maybe she even recognizes somehow that the E-C's original timeline is a much more pleasant place to be than the one they're in, thus adding to her unease. It's far easier to explain than the stupid and completely meaningless concept of "temporal shielding" which is routinely required to explain single-timeline travel without massive causality problems.

Except it's not that she sees the E-C and feels uneasy, it's that she's blundering around the E-D and saying things like "somehow this is all wrong. This isn't the way it's supposed to be."

To be more specific, after we literally see the bridge transform when the E-C comes through, they cut to Guinan back in suddenly-militarized Ten Forward, looking around like "What the fuck just happened?" before declaring "This isn't right. It's changed." Edit - I'm checking the episode for it now, but I even think there's a scene where Guinan says Tasha's supposed to be dead.

We have plenty of reasons to believe it. You are just refusing to recognize them for some reason, as if causality paradoxes are not a serious problem even though real physicists have cited it as a very serious conceptual problem with time travel.

Sure, they might be serious problems for time travel, but until time travel becomes more than some imaginary phenomenon in the realm of fiction, it's just speculation.

[TC Pilot]

Damn, didn't get in before the time limit:

Guinan flat-out says: "We're not meant to know each other. At least that's what I sense when I look at you. Tasha, you're not supposed to be here," before going on to explain that Tasha's death was "an empty death, a death without purpose."

[Gil Hamilton]

[Why does Guinan sensing that they're in a divergent timeline (yet only after E-C shows up) make any more sense than her sensing the timeline's been altered? Simply declaring so by fiat as you seem to be doing isn't going to cut it, so far as I'm concerned.

I'm suggesting she is detecting the divergence, because in a single timeline system, she wouldn't be able to recognize anything was wrong, because only history has occurred and any changes made by time travel would be PART of history. Explain how she'd recognize wrongness in a single timeline, please.

I'm sorry, but "I say so" doesn't cut it for me. There's nothing paradoxical about the E-C bringing Tasha-who-was-not-killed back with it from the alternate timeline, any more than it would be paradoxical for the E-C to have come back from a timeline that their actions now prevent from ever happening.

Causality says so. She's be Grandfather Paradoxed if it was a single timeline because the act of sending the E-C to the past. The only way to avoid a Grandfather Paradox is a minimum of two seperate timelines; one where she always gets killed by evil goo because the E-C succeeded in assisting the Klingons and one where the E-C never shows up (due to the time warp) and thus Tasha never encounters her demise. Otherwise, she spontaneously exist ex nihilo in the original (or even third) timeline due to an event that never ends up taking place.

Time travel ONLY makes sense from a many worlds perspective.

Another point that I think undermines this whole "divergent timelines" theory from the episode is the fact that what you think is the third timeline (regular TNG but now with "wrong TNG's" Tasha Yar) actually detects the time warp the E-C used to go back to fix the past. That wouldn't be possible, beyond some technobabble bullshit excuse, like would be needed to explain away First Contact or "City on the Edge of Forever."

Time travel is silly enough as it is. I'm talking casuality, which if you take as true in the same universe as time travel, strictly requires a Many Worlds interpretation and divergent timelines.

Why is that neccesarily the case? E-C's act of going forward alters the timeline so Tasha isn't killed by the oil slick. Then they go back with her and "fix" the timeline so that "wrong TNG" never happens. Are you saying that Tasha should have just blinked out of existence? That's one way of looking at time travel, certainly, but it doesn't do anything to prove your argument. It's just you assuming it to be the case.

No, it's a Grandfather Paradox if you are only using a single timeline, because the "Wrong TNG" timeline never occurs even though it is required to occur. You heard me. From a single timeline perspective, the notion is silly. However, if you take a divergence and have a minimum of two timelines, both timelines exist and Tasha was merely transfered from one to another by the time travel event, thus avoiding the Grandfather Paradox entirely.

So from a single timeline perspective, which is true? The E-C defends the colony or the E-C doesn't defend the colony? It can only be one or the other in a single timeline, because only one version of events can happen at a time and place. Given Yesterday's Enterprise, the E-C is present, however with people for which the event didn't happen historically. That's a direct contradiction, with Tasha Yar being the obvious reason why. Get it? The only way out is to say there are at least two valid timelines in play!

[Darth Wong]

How is "temporal shielding" meaningless but "Oh, and the time machines move you into the new timline" not?

For the same reason creationism is different from evolution, you retrograde moron. One of them has a mechanism, and one of them doesn't.

They're both technobabble excuses. One magically prevents causality from influencing people in close proximity to the time travel, the other magically moves them into the exact same point of time in a new timeline.

We know they're moving in time, so there's no point saying that the movement in time requires some sort of magic. However, we have no idea how the hell you could possibly shield against cause and effect, even on a vague conceptual level.

[TC Pilot]

I'm suggesting she is detecting the divergence, because in a single timeline system, she wouldn't be able to recognize anything was wrong, because only history has occurred and any changes made by time travel would be PART of history. Explain how she'd recognize wrongness in a single timeline, please.

Who knows why? There's no explanation for it, just like there's no explanation why she'd know if it's a divergent timeline, or an explanation for her character, period. Fact is, she realizes something's wrong only after the E-C shows up, causing the change, and she "just knows" that something's changed, things aren't the way they're supposed to be, and that Tasha Yar is supposed to be dead, to the point that she even vaguely knows the details of her death. Even more than that, she apparently even retains some inkling of what happened in the alternate timeline, considering her "No, everything's just fine" and "Geordi, tell me about Tasha Yar" lines.

Causality says so. She's be Grandfather Paradoxed if it was a single timeline because the act of sending the E-C to the past. The only way to avoid a Grandfather Paradox is a minimum of two seperate timelines; one where she always gets killed by evil goo because the E-C succeeded in assisting the Klingons and one where the E-C never shows up (due to the time warp) and thus Tasha never encounters her demise. Otherwise, she spontaneously exist ex nihilo in the original (or even third) timeline due to an event that never ends up taking place.

So what? It's not as if a grandfather paradox is some sort of fact with any authority to it. This isn't a real life phenomenon governed by laws and principles we're talking about, it's a fictional occurence dictated by the whims of the author. One may as well rail against Futurama and Fry being his own grandfather, or half the shit from Doctor Who for all the good it's going to do you.

Time travel ONLY makes sense from a many worlds perspective.

Sure, but only if you arbitrarily dictate that time travel works the way you want it to work.

Time travel is silly enough as it is. I'm talking casuality, which if you take as true in the same universe as time travel, strictly requires a Many Worlds interpretation and divergent timelines.

Why should someone neccesarily believe your take on the issue of causality in time travel? You sure as hell can't prove anything either way, and as I said with Darth Wong, you're just substituting "magic shield" with "magic teleportation" in terms of the examples I've mentioned.

No, it's a Grandfather Paradox if you are only using a single timeline, because the "Wrong TNG" timeline never occurs even though it is required to occur. You heard me. From a single timeline perspective, the notion is silly. However, if you take a divergence and have a minimum of two timelines, both timelines exist and Tasha was merely transfered from one to another by the time travel event, thus avoiding the Grandfather Paradox entirely.

That's nice. I still have absolutely no reason to believe your take is in any way better than my take for reasons I've already gone over.

And as I've already said, if someone can just produce this dictate from Paramount (or whoever it is that produced the new movie) that supposedly exists, the matter would be closed.

The only way out is to say there are at least two valid timelines in play!

We're just going in circles at this point. The only reason your argument would be neccesarily superior is if we arbitrarily suppose the principles of time travel operate in the way you want them to operate. Since time travel is simply a fictional concoction, you'll need to produce something in-universe (or a convenient proclamation from the people who dictate canon), which if you actually watch "Yeesterday's Enterprise" pretty much constantly shits all over your theory, in order to demonstrate that time travel works that way in ST.

For the same reason creationism is different from evolution, you retrograde moron. One of them has a mechanism, and one of them doesn't.

Keep your pants on. There's no need for us to get pissy over this.

But by all means, please explain how your take has a mechanism to it. How is the Enterprise-E suddenly teleported into an alternate reality where the Borg assimilated Earth before travelling back in time. Explain the mechanism behind Kirk and Spock suddenly teleporting into the new timeline before they follow McCoy back into the 1930s.

We know they're moving in time, so there's no point saying that the movement in time requires some sort of magic. However, we have no idea how the hell you could possibly shield against cause and effect, even on a vague conceptual level.

I think you're misunderstanding the two examples I brought up (let's just ignore Enterprise for the sake of argument). In the cases of both Kirk/Spock and Enterprise-E, they percieve the changes around them (the Enterprise-A vanishing from orbit because the Federation doesn't exist, and an Earth assimilated by the Borg, presumably in the 21st century) before they go back in time to correct the timeline. In order to avoid causality, they're either shielded by some technobabble bullshit (which is what the characters theorize is the case), or transported into this new timeline by some technobabble bullshit.

[Samuel]

TC, their point isn't that the solution they are proposing makes perfect sense, just that it makes more sense than the alternate solution. We are dealing with a situation where things are not consistent and have to do the best we can.