this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
33 points (100.0% liked)

Daystrom Institute

3457 readers
2 users here now

Welcome to Daystrom Institute!

Serious, in-depth discussion about Star Trek from both in-universe and real world perspectives.

Read more about how to comment at Daystrom.

Rules

1. Explain your reasoning

All threads and comments submitted to the Daystrom Institute must contain an explanation of the reasoning put forth.

2. No whinging, jokes, memes, and other shallow content.

This entire community has a “serious tag” on it. Shitposts are encouraged in Risa.

3. Be diplomatic.

Participate in a courteous, objective, and open-minded fashion. Be nice to other posters and the people who make Star Trek. Disagree respectfully and don’t gatekeep.

4. Assume good faith.

Assume good faith. Give other posters the benefit of the doubt, but report them if you genuinely believe they are trolling. Don’t whine about “politics.”

5. Tag spoilers.

Historically Daystrom has not had a spoiler policy, so you may encounter untagged spoilers here. Ultimately, avoiding online discussion until you are caught up is the only certain way to avoid spoilers.

6. Stay on-topic.

Threads must discuss Star Trek. Comments must discuss the topic raised in the original post.

Episode Guides

The /r/DaystromInstitute wiki held a number of popular Star Trek watch guides. We have rehosted them here:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

For example, the Federation's founding members (Tellarites, Andorians, Vulcans, Humans) were the subject of fan theories and "fanon" for many years before the ENT writers made it official. One of the interesting (and fun) aspects of this recent wave of series has been seeing the writers increasingly add nods to fan theories and pieces of fanon lore over the years. What are some good examples of this?

And relatedly: what's a fan theory, or piece of fanon, that you suspect the current writers believe, even if they haven't explicitly stated it on-screen?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That the warp drive functions through the expansion and contraction of space.

There were many possible fan explanations for how TOS' warp drive would work, with Miguel Alcubierre developing the Alcubierre drive as his own attempt at making warp drive real, but the in-show explanations never really delved beyond a "the warp engines make the ship go fast to a certain point, but too much, and they fly off the ship".

TNG's explanation only amounted to saying they worked by pushing on subspace, which pushed back and propelled the ship, like a detergent-powered paper boat being dragged along, and can be responsible for subspace funkiness depending on how you use it.

DS9 seemed to imply that they altered the mass of the ship in some way, in conjunction with the deflector systems. TNG only implied that the warp field could alter the laws of physics within its area of effect.

But at some point the "contraction and expansion of space" explanation for how a warp field works seems to have stuck, sometime after Enterprise(?). Ask any random Star Trek person about how warp drive works, and they'll give a similar explanation. The writers almost certainly operate under similar beliefs.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Having Dr Erin MacDonald a Voyager fan and astrophysicist as the franchise’s science consultant is locking in the Alcubierre-like warp theory as a backdrop across the franchise at this point.

I find it interesting, going back to the warp-like FTL of MGM’s Forbidden Planet, that each of the crew had to stand in a columnar a suspension device to survive the transit. Given how much Roddenberry pulled from Forbidden Planet for TOS, it’s interesting that he decided that we had to be able to see the crew functional during FTL travel. George Lucas, who also drew heavily on Forbidden Planet for Star Wars, went the opposite direction and just had the hyperdrive act as a kind of jump.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't think so. Nothing in the new series explicitly contradicts the idea that warp drive functions by lowering the inertial mass of the ship. You may ask fans and they may answer, but that doesn't make them right. And until they come right out and say that it's the Alcubierre Drive, I don't buy it because we still see inertial effects being felt, which we wouldn't if it was an Alcubierre metric driving the ship.

I wrote a post in old Daystrom aying out the evidence why the two drives are different. I'll repost it here to see what comes out of it.