J.J. Abrams' Star Trek


Recommended Posts

I didn't say there were no surface facilities, I asked when they SPECIFIED that the entire ships were built on the surface. There are orbital facilites also. Every book has always made it very clear that ships are built in space, and the SIF would be useless until the ship was completed anyway.

edit: according to my TNG Technical manual, the assembly started at the Utopia Planitia assembly site, 16,625 kilometres above the surface of Mars with the joining of the Deck 10 computer core elliptical compression bulkhead, and the starboard main longitudinal compression bulkhead.

edit2: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Enterp...29#Construction

:rofl: Joel pulled out the technical manual, look out! :p

All I have to say is J.J. Abrahams is an awesome director with a unique vision and it's about time Star Trek got the director and budget it deserved. From the looks of the trailer, the man has done a hell of a job on this film and it will be a success. I read a while ago that they showed the first 15 minutes of the film to some Paramount executives and they were asking for more because it was so good. Rick Berman didn't have the budget J.J. Abrahams had to make a good film because Paramount never wanted to give him more than 50 milion to make a Trek film because of the failure of Star Trek: Generations at the box office so this new film is a big gamble for Paramount. If this film fails at the box office it wil be the end of the Star Trek films for a looooong time.

Just in case anyone was wondering. The music from the new trailer is by Two Steps From Hell, off their Legend CD the track is titled Freedom Fighters. Two Steps From Hell has done alot of big name movie trailer music in the past, I can see why they used them here.

*Edit* Actually it looks like it's from their upcoming CD called Nemesis II. But if you get the Legend CD you'll notice that some of the tracks sound familiar :D (Like the track named "Down with the Enterprise" which is from the 2nd trailer for Trek XI)

Edited by LOC
I didn't say there were no surface facilities, I asked when they SPECIFIED that the entire ships were built on the surface. There are orbital facilites also. Every book has always made it very clear that ships are built in space, and the SIF would be useless until the ship was completed anyway.

edit: according to my TNG Technical manual, the assembly started at the Utopia Planitia assembly site, 16,625 kilometres above the surface of Mars with the joining of the Deck 10 computer core elliptical compression bulkhead, and the starboard main longitudinal compression bulkhead.

edit2: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Enterp...29#Construction

I'm so glad someone else cares about canon. Everyone else just thinks it's going to be so cool to have another Star Trek film and yeah it will be great. But doesn't anyone stop to think that if you just change whatever you want then it's not really Star Trek anymore.....

I salute you Joel and award you the Starfleet Medal of Commendation for valor above and beyond the call of duty. :hug:

rrrriiiiggghhhhtttt....................... so after reading the memory alpha article. it turns out writer/producer robert orci explains how everything is different by saying it's in an alternate timeline. basically none of it is canon. it's good really it means I can look forward to the film without being annoyed.

what's the difference between built and assembled?

based on the dictionary definition there isn't one from what I can understand.

Anyone have good hi-resolution pics of the USS Enterprise G?

there isn't a enterprise g, btw we aren't like star trek ultra nerds we're getting our info from memory alpha so really you could do the same.

what's the difference between built and assembled?

based on the dictionary definition there isn't one from what I can understand.

there isn't a enterprise g, btw we aren't like star trek ultra nerds we're getting our info from memory alpha so really you could do the same.

I would assume it is like the International Space Station, pieces of it are built on earth, but then assembled in space.

rrrriiiiggghhhhtttt....................... so after reading the memory alpha article. it turns out writer/producer robert orci explains how everything is different by saying it's in an alternate timeline. basically none of it is canon. it's good really it means I can look forward to the film without being annoyed.

Thats how they made the Trekkies not complain so much. You can rest assured that if it makes a ton of money, it will be made canon when they start basing new things off of it.

rrrriiiiggghhhhtttt....................... so after reading the memory alpha article. it turns out writer/producer robert orci explains how everything is different by saying it's in an alternate timeline. basically none of it is canon. it's good really it means I can look forward to the film without being annoyed.

this is silly. how many alternate universes can they incorporate :p

first alternate universe where everyone was evil..and now alternate universe is like ours but its isnt.

i feel dissapointed. i dont care if kirk drives manual car or not +other things included :p

Funny how when these posters show the new Enterprise, the angles they choose are the ones that happen to hide the new, and some would say, ugly, proportions of the ship.

For example, the first image hides the awkward placement of the neck, farther back on the secondary hull, while the second ones don't really show the huge bussard ram-scoops on the warp engines...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!