Time travel

[Admiral Naismith]

I’m rather new to this debate but there is one big factor that I have not seen covered, and that is time travel.
The Feds have shown that they have controlled time travel(st: iv). I admit that spock is a genius even by Starfleet standards but surely they have figured it out by TNG era.

This would give the Feds a significant edge if they chose to use it.
In the movies the empire does not show the ability to travel through time (I think if they had it they would use it to save the Death Star.)
I’m wondering do they have it in the EU.

[Trinoya]

It's pretty much a given that the federation would never directly affect the time line with the single exception being to save the federation. They'd have to be loosing a war fairly big time, and in such a manner that it was unthinkable that they'd have a normal chance of winning in order for that to happen. By the 29th century, the federation has gone so far as to police time just to prevent it from being altered at all.

On a different note: Just letting time travel win it for the feds is hardly a worthwhile debate :P

Just saying.

[Mr. Oragahn]

I’m rather new to this debate but there is one big factor that I have not seen covered, and that is time travel.
The Feds have shown that they have controlled time travel(st: iv). I admit that spock is a genius even by Starfleet standards but surely they have figured it out by TNG era.

This would give the Feds a significant edge if they chose to use it.
In the movies the empire does not show the ability to travel through time (I think if they had it they would use it to save the Death Star.)
I’m wondering do they have it in the EU.

Dude, you get extra points for the sheer coolness of bearing Miles' Dendarii grade!

As far as time travel, obviously, in that whale probe film, it didn't took much for Kirk and co to both decide to go back in time, and actually do it.

You wonder why it's not used much more, notably by all the enemies of the Federation.
It's just the most convenient plot excuse to be used, and in all fairness, I hate time travel.

Sometimes, time travel is regulated. Sometimes, it's not.

[Who is like God arbour]

Sometimes, time travel is regulated. Sometimes, it's not.

No, it is always regulated - but sometimes they simply don't obey their rules. But that is very seldom. Or the rules have written exceptions or latitudes of judgement.

If the Federation would travel through time, all other powers would do it too. But time travelling can do unforeseeable damages to the time line.
That would be a huge risk to all species. So it isn't difficult to imagine that all governments have decided to ban time travel and to create forces to enforce the ban in an Temporal Accord.

These forces (out of the future) would prevent time-travelling (even in the past). Each time, someone decides to travel through time, these forces would prevent it. That's why, even if someone want to do it, he or she can't do it.

Why they have allowed some exceptions for the instances, we know from, we maybe will never come to know. But as they are able to scan the time and detect changes in the time line, they may be able to estimate the changes in the time line and can decide if these changes are acceptable or not.

One could easily imagine that - if something would endanger the continuity of the Federation or other powers - these time forces would allow time travells that are necessary to ban the danger. But even in such a situation they would only allow such missions, that do the smallest possible change to the time-line and have the smallest possible risk. All other attempts would be prevented.

[Cpl Kendall]

There's a well accepted theory amongst the VS community that ST time travel doesn't affect your immediate time line but generates an alternate time lime. Some of the episodes we've seen bear this out, such as the episode with the adult Alexander who watched Worf die on the Klingon High Council floor or the DS9 episode with the alternate Miles O'Brien.

Edit: This seems to only apply to the Federation time travel tech. The Guardian of Forever did not seem bound by these limitations and commented that "events were returning to there proper form" or words to that effect.

[Jedi Master Spock]

There's a well accepted theory amongst the VS community that ST time travel doesn't affect your immediate time line but generates an alternate time lime. Some of the episodes we've seen bear this out, such as the episode with the adult Alexander who watched Worf die on the Klingon High Council floor or the DS9 episode with the alternate Miles O'Brien.

Edit: This seems to only apply to the Federation time travel tech. The Guardian of Forever did not seem bound by these limitations and commented that "events were returning to there proper form" or words to that effect.

Well accepted in some circles.

In many cases, it appears as if it does alter your immediate timeline. ST:FC, which I just watched again recently, is one clear such example. ST displays both in-timeline and alternate-timeline time travel, and I wouldn't suggest there's any method to the madness of time travel in Trek.

[Cpl Kendall]

Well accepted in some circles.

In many cases, it appears as if it does alter your immediate timeline. ST:FC, which I just watched again recently, is one clear such example. ST displays both in-timeline and alternate-timeline time travel, and I wouldn't suggest there's any method to the madness of time travel in Trek.

I prefer not to pay any attention to the actual mechanics of time travel in ST and just watch the story. I only mention the theory as mojo seemed interested and thought he should be aware of different theories. I really only care for the TOS time travel episodes anyway.

[Who is like God arbour]

There's a well accepted theory amongst the VS community that ST time travel doesn't affect your immediate time line but generates an alternate time lime.

And there's a well accepted theory that God exists. That doesn't made it better.

They have a better understanding of temporal mechanics than we have today. And they are convinced that time travel - at least some kinds of time travel - affect your immediate time line.

Otherwise all the Temporal Integrity Commission, Temporal Accord, Temporal Agents, Temporal Cold War, Temporal Prime Directive and Department of Temporal Investigations stuff wouldn't be necessary to secure the integrity of the time line.

[l33telboi]

There's a well accepted theory amongst the VS community that ST time travel doesn't affect your immediate time line but generates an alternate time lime.

Not really. If you've taken part of debate handling this topic on SB recently, then you'll see that this theory is scoffed at for the most part. I have trouble seeing what the "temporal cold war" is about if you are unable to change the events in one specific timeline/reality.

[Cpl Kendall]

Not really. If you've taken part of debate handling this topic on SB recently, then you'll see that this theory is scoffed at for the most part. I have trouble seeing what the "temporal cold war" is about if you are unable to change the events in one specific timeline/reality.

I don't go to SB, with a few exceptions that place is populated with idiots. And I never expressed support or disdain for the theory, I only mentioned it so mojo was aware of it. Which if you had read my previous post you would be aware of.

[Cpl Kendall]

And there's a well accepted theory that God exists. That doesn't made it better.

They have a better understanding of temporal mechanics than we have today. And they are convinced that time travel - at least some kinds of time travel - affect your immediate time line.

Otherwise all the Temporal Integrity Commission, Temporal Accord, Temporal Agents, Temporal Cold War, Temporal Prime Directive and Department of Temporal Investigations stuff wouldn't be necessary to secure the integrity of the time line.

Congrats, you use a wiki as a source. I trust I need not say more. As for the rest I've already addressed it in previous and additional posts. You're just talking to hear your own voice.

[Who is like God arbour]

How can you decide that it is "well accepted" if you don't go to SB?

Maybe it is well accepted at StarDestroyer.Net - what isn't saying something - but not well accepted amongst the VS community.

If you promote the theory as "well accepted" if you don't really know if it is indeed "well accepted" you automatically support the theory.

Otherwise you wouldn't have introduced it as "well accepted" but only as one theory among others.

[Cpl Kendall]

I don't need you to tell me if I support something when I don't care either way about it.

[Who is like God arbour]

Congrats, you use a wiki as a source. I trust I need not say more. As for the rest I've already addressed it in previous and additional posts. You're just talking to hear your own voice.

That's rubbish.

1. First, Memory Alpha is not Wikipedia.
2. It happens that I often give links to Memory Alpha or Wikipedia for these among us who don't know from what I speak.
3. And even if I would use only Memory Alpha or Wikipedia as a source, that wouldn't make the given informations automatically incorrect or the arguments invalid.
4. I don't see that you have adressed that point in the two posts there are from you before this post.

What exactly is your point again?

[Cpl Kendall]

That's rubbish. *snip*

Is or is not Memory Alpha open to editing by anyone?

What exactly is your point again?

My point which I have mentioned about three times by now, is that I do not care either way for the theory and only mentioned it so mojo would be aware of it.