Star Trek

[Not Afraid]

I am just in awe that so many people have a) seen this film and b) are participating in a thread that is now 146 posts long. It's just another NA clueless moment - of which there are many.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

I am just in awe that so many people have a) seen this film and b) are participating in a thread that is now 146 posts long. It's just another NA clueless moment - of which there are many.

Mel Brooks makes a cameo as Spock's cousin Spechala.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Alex

Not to mention that it even had an escape hatch just in case someone was accidentally teleported into the tube from a couple solar systems away (not to further mention that teleporting into a non-gaseous medium is quite the nifty trick according to the canon on the technology).

How do you know that the water in the non-transparent chamber he was transported into wasn't being held in some sort of gaseous suspension state. Sure that usually requires heat and pressure that a human couldn't survive, but it IS the future you know!

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

I am just in awe that so many people have a) seen this film and b) are participating in a thread that is now 146 posts long..

Including your husband.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Alex

See! The world repeats. The Transformers thread is also peppered with NA popping in every once in a while to point out that she hasn't seen it and is surprised others have.

NA Prime is dead, replaced by NA'

Cool! I've been looking for a replacement!

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Including your husband.

My husband is regularly clueless to me. Besides, what else what he going to do while I was hosting a quilting party? It IS a movie I wouldn't be mad that he saw without me.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

How do you know that the water in the non-transparent chamber he was transported into wasn't being held in some sort of gaseous suspension state. Sure that usually requires heat and pressure that a human couldn't survive, but it IS the future you know!

You raise a good point. I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Some fanwankery math. When they teleported onto the Enterprise from Hoth it was going at warp speeds and presumably at least Warp 3 since they were in a hurry (Scotty later was said to maybe be able to get them up to Warp 4).

That means they were moving at 27 times the speed of light. So let's say it takes four seconds for the complete phase-in of the teleportation effect from the first hint of that whine to the final molecule being in place.

So, to put it in local terms, when they first started to appear the Enterprise was on the surfage of the Earth and when they finished it was 3.1 times farther away than the moon.

That's some fancy shooting.

More seriously, I do think that from a "creating a new canon" point of view, the super-transporter may be their biggest mistake. How many "problems" in future movies are we going to have to just pretend that this technology doesn't exist? Enemy ships in quantrant X should now not be met with a cry of "send the fleet to battle" but rather "gather everybody on Treasure Island and we'll just teleport onto the enemy ships while their still 900 lightyears away!"

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Alex

More seriously, I do think that from a "creating a new canon" point of view, the super-transporter may be their biggest mistake. How many "problems" in future movies are we going to have to just pretend that this technology doesn't exist? Enemy ships in quantrant X should now not be met with a cry of "send the fleet to battle" but rather "gather everybody on Treasure Island and we'll just teleport onto the enemy ships while their still 900 lightyears away!"

There was similar technology introduced in an early TNG episode. It turned out that using it more than once or twice caused genetic damage (or something) that eventually killed the people using it. If the writers care enough to explain with super-transporting isn't used in future crises, they could use a similar explanation.