Star Trek Discovery ***Season 3*** [** SPOILERS WITHIN **]

Baggly

How does the future become the present. You travel through time to get there. As I said I think the wording in STD is very broad and if I had a pint and a couple of hours I'd be happy to waffle on further.

Baggly

Kirk is Generation's is deffo one, no?

CastorTroy

If anyone should be punished it would be Michael and her mother for travelling back in time to change future events with the Red angel suit.

~Rebel~

Baggly wrote: »

Kirk is Generation's is deffo one, no?

Ah yeah, probably true, can't remember if he actually came out of the nexus, or just met Picard in there, with the nexus itself sort of being 'removed from time'. Been ages since i've seen that movie!


Speaking of time travel in general - I really hope they don't end up going back in time to stop The Burn from happening... it's been so long, it would just totally invalidate billions of lives lived. Like someone popping up here and deciding to just undo World War One, or the Black Plague or something.

Baggly

When he agreed to help Picard he popped out onto that desert planet, which was TNG era.

Evade

Baggly wrote: »

Kirk is Generation's is deffo one, no?

Is that not more a case of Picard traveling back in time to alter the past?

JeffKenna

11/22/63 was someone going back in time to stop JFK's assassination.

JeffKenna

The Time Machine is someone going forward in time to change the future.

Baggly

JeffKenna wrote:

11/22/63 was someone going back in time to stop JFK's assassination.

Yeah but after he does he goes forward again and wants to change the future.

Baggly

Evade wrote:

Is that not more a case of Picard traveling back in time to alter the past?

Picard travelled back, Kirk forward.

FunLover18

~Rebel~ wrote: »

These are mostly going into the past to change the present though... the poster said people going from the present to the future to mess with things there, in the future. Thanos and Seven are I think the two that match that.

But yeah, the wording yer man used could only logically be used for someone then going back into the past, which our Disco lads can't do anyway.

You can add Back To The Future Part II to the list.

Evade

Baggly wrote: »

Picard travelled back, Kirk forward.

Well yeah, but my point is Picard was the instigator, Kirk would have been more than happy to stay in the Nexus. By STD's new rule only Kirk's actions would be illegal which is bizarre.

JeffKenna

Baggly wrote: »

Yeah but after he does he goes forward again and wants to change the future.

But he didn't travel into the future to try and change that future. He went back in time again to change it.

Baggly

JeffKenna wrote:

But he didn't travel into the future to try and change that future. He went back in time again to change it.

Yeah OK fair point

Baggly

Evade wrote:

Well yeah, but my point is Picard was the instigator, Kirk would have been more than happy to stay in the Nexus. By STD's new rule only Kirk's actions would be illegal which is bizarre.

Let's hope it doesn't go to court so, I guess

Evade

This whole issue would have been solved by "You can't go into the past to change the present*" pretty much stating they're stuck there and it lines up with the previous iterations of the temporal prime directive even though it has been broken in the past.

*the 31st century one

Baggly

Or just leave it at you can't change the time line via timetravel. Afair that did for every other TNG era show and movie.

Even throw in the temporal prime directive line if you want to.

CastorTroy

But that temporal prime directive wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for time travel stopping Control.

Baggly

I'm not saying the temporal prime directive is the way to go.

I'm saying it's a better way to explain how the 31st century feels about time travel.

It's gonna end up that the Red angel somehow came out of time in order to cause the burn.

Saru has the patience of a saint. Burnham is just lucky she doesn't exist in the same universe as The Expanse. Their character would be spaced by now.

pixelburp

I don't think the Burn will be related to actions by Burnham or Disco myself. So far the show has made a big effort to emphasise just how permanent the time jump is. There's a resignation to the crew - highlighted by the disastrous dinner - that flies against any idea this might be "fixable". The Burn seems more like a crude attempt to make the Disco relevant in a situation where it might otherwise be utterly archaic tech. The Spore drive suddenly becoming the most important asset in the quadrant. I know the writing can be poor but fail to believe Michelle Paradise is that foolish as to make this huge conceit tied to the ship.

TheValeyard

I believe my tag line sums it up pretty well, about past present future. No further discussion is needed

Sleepy

Deleted User wrote: »

It's gonna end up that the Red angel somehow came out of time in order to cause the burn.

Saru has the patience of a saint. Burnham is just lucky she doesn't exist in the same universe as The Expanse. Their character would be spaced by now.

Picard would have at the least had her court martialled again.

PhiloCypher

Really hope they at least handwave at Discoverys shields and armaments being upgraded before they get sent out on a mission. Would be the height of stupidity for Starfleet to send out the ship with the only functioning spore drive and navigator where they'd be outgunned by just about everyone.

Baggly

Keep him hooked up and fire a few quantum red bulls into him so he is always awake, and they can just jump away from trouble.

pah

OK, Back to the Future 2 I'll give you that one although from Docs perspective he sees what happens to Martys kids, goes to get Marty and then travels to a point in the past (relative to him viewing the fallout of their actions) to try and change the outcome.

I think we can all agree that it was poorly worded and could have simply been " An interstellar treaty, outlawing timetravel to prevent interference with the natural course of time" or something. Regardless, it's dumb - how do you police time travel from a particular point in the timeline without being able to timetravel yourself to deal with it?

pixelburp

Same with any other treaty really; if you really, really want to ignore it you can but otherwise functions as a mutual agreement between all parties involved to behave in accordance to the "law". The repercussions if found out made harmful enough that it's not worth the effort.

TheValeyard

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Really hope they at least handwave at Discoverys shields and armaments being upgraded before they get sent out on a mission. Would be the height of stupidity for Starfleet to send out the ship with the only functioning spore drive and navigator where they'd be outgunned by just about everyone.

Literally could be taken out by an escape pod.

Rawr

TheValeyard wrote: »

Literally could be taken out by an escape pod.

Might even be taken out by an Oberth Class......maybe.....

TheValeyard

Rawr wrote: »

Might even be taken out by an Oberth Class......maybe.....

Love to see a 31st century version though.