Recommended Posts

Cumberbatch's eyes aren't naturally that blue...

I may be inferring too much, but most "generically modified" ideals were based around the "blue eyes"...

You're right. I think his eyes look that way in some pictures but in the movie, he'll have his natural pale green eyes. Also, I think you meant "genetically modified". :p

All I'd really change is to spread the nacelles out just a bit more since they look kinda squished together. Other than that, it's fine.

The nacelles really ruin the ship for me. They just don't look "natural" at all.

Enterprise crashing down? Again? Bah, there will be a new one because the first rule of Starfleet is 'There always will be an Enterprise'

As long as there are letters left there will be a enterprise. On that note I dunno if we'll get a 1701-A version so soon, maybe at the end or for movie 3 they could do it. It depends on how trashed it really is or isn't.

Whoops! EW has spoilt the Villain secret!

Are you surprised? I am not surprised at all, not one bit, that he is indeed Khan. There are just way too many things that indicate he is indeed Khan.

For example, in the trailer he tells Kirk: "...Enjoy this moments of peace, for I have returned to have my vengeance."

Vengeance against who? Kirk? Spock? The whole Federation?

Also in the new Super Bowl ad, he tells Kirk: " I am better...At everything."

If you guys are hardcore Star Trek fans and you have seen the original series and movies thousands of times like I have; On the original Khan episode, "Space Seed", Khan told Kirk he was better than him and McCoy told Kirk the same thing and also told him that Khan was stronger, more intelligent.

Maybe I am wrong, but I get a feeling that this Khan came from another timeline, and the new Kirk of course, doesn't have a clue who he is because he has not met him yet. You gotta remember people, the effects of the first movie's timeline alteration are not fully known yet. What IF Khan has been somehow brought back to the new Kirk timelime? After all, when Reliant exploded, Genesis was created, Spock was reborn, and Khan? Yes, he died in the explosion of the Reliant, right? - Or did he?

If Spock's molecules were reborn, what makes you think Khan wasn't reborn too? Spock did say in ST3 that if the Genesis device is detonated where there is life, such life would be replaced by its new matrix.

I don't know. I am assuming. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe not. It's gonna be interesting to see where this guy came from and who he really is and why he is coming back (from where?) to get his vengeance (against who?, Kirk?)

Whoops! EW has spoilt the Villain secret!

Are you surprised? I am not surprised at all, not one bit, that he is indeed Khan. There are just way too many things that indicate he is indeed Khan.

For example, in the trailer he tells Kirk: "...Enjoy this moments of peace, for I have returned to have my vengeance."

Also in the new Super Bowl ad, he tells Kirk: " I am better...At everything."

Maybe I am wrong, but I get a feeling that this Khan came from another timeline, and the new Kirk of course, doesn't have a clue who he is because he has not met him yet. You gotta remember people, the effects of the first movie's timeline alteration are not fully known yet. What IF Khan has been somehow brought back to the new Kirk timelime? After all, when Reliant exploded, Genesis was created, Spock was reborn, and Khan? Yes, he died in the explosion of the Reliant, right? - Or did he?

If Spock's molecules were reborn, what makes you think Khan wasn't reborn too? Spock did say in ST3 that if the Genesis device is detonated where there is life, such life would be replaced by its new matrix.

I don't know. I am assuming. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe not. It's gonna be interesting to see where this guy came from and who he really is and why he is coming back (from where?) to get his vengeance (against who?, Kirk?)

How the &@#&%*^@#% did Khan go from Indian to British!? :pinch: If indeed he is an augment, chances are he's just one of Khan's goons. Alternate timeline or not, it still doesn't explain his change of ethnicity. The events of his "demise" in 1996 are still unchanged, since they happened before Nero's arrival.

Are you surprised? I am not surprised at all, not one bit, that he is indeed Khan. There are just way too many things that indicate he is indeed Khan.

For example, in the trailer he tells Kirk: "...Enjoy this moments of peace, for I have returned to have my vengeance."

Vengeance against who? Kirk? Spock? The whole Federation?

Also in the new Super Bowl ad, he tells Kirk: " I am better...At everything."

If you guys are hardcore Star Trek fans and you have seen the original series and movies thousands of times like I have; On the original Khan episode, "Space Seed", Khan told Kirk he was better than him and McCoy told Kirk the same thing and also told him that Khan was stronger, more intelligent.

Maybe I am wrong, but I get a feeling that this Khan came from another timeline, and the new Kirk of course, doesn't have a clue who he is because he has not met him yet. You gotta remember people, the effects of the first movie's timeline alteration are not fully known yet. What IF Khan has been somehow brought back to the new Kirk timelime? After all, when Reliant exploded, Genesis was created, Spock was reborn, and Khan? Yes, he died in the explosion of the Reliant, right? - Or did he?

If Spock's molecules were reborn, what makes you think Khan wasn't reborn too? Spock did say in ST3 that if the Genesis device is detonated where there is life, such life would be replaced by its new matrix.

I don't know. I am assuming. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe not. It's gonna be interesting to see where this guy came from and who he really is and why he is coming back (from where?) to get his vengeance (against who?, Kirk?)

This probably won't have anything to do with any of that. In ToS the crew of the Enterprise first encountered Khan and then exiled him to the planet where they found him again in The Wrath of Khan. This Khan is likely to be the alternate universe Khan, and the events in the movie will be a different first encounter, changed from the events in the television episode, not a variation of the second encounter in the movies. That's why Kirk won't know who he is yet; he will be meeting him for the first time. Having Khan in this movie will be introducing him much sooner than he should have been, however, unless this movie takes place several years after the last one. I'm not sure if that's intentional or an oversight and wonder if they'll even bother to try to explain that. I guess we'll just have to wait and see it.

ewkhan.jpg

I think that EW article that says he is indeed Khan is a fake. Look what I just found at the official EW website:

abwSTy23.jpg

By the way, the speech bubbles I added for humor but the article is real. Go check it out yourselves. They say his name is John Harrison, not Khan.

This probably won't have anything to do with any of that. In ToS the crew of the Enterprise first encountered Khan and then exiled him to the planet where they found him again in The Wrath of Khan. This Khan is likely to be the alternate universe Khan, and the events in the movie will be a different first encounter, changed from the events in the television episode, not a variation of the second encounter in the movies. That's why Kirk won't know who he is yet; he will be meeting him for the first time. Having Khan in this movie will be introducing him much sooner than he should have been, however, unless this movie takes place several years after the last one. I'm not sure if that's intentional or an oversight and wonder if they'll even bother to try to explain that. I guess we'll just have to wait and see it.

I bet this movie takes place 4 years latter, since it's coming 4 years after the first one. I bet the writers matched it up just the same. This probably brings us close to their 5 year mission end, if that still is the case.

I bet this movie takes place 4 years latter, since it's coming 4 years after the first one. I bet the writers matched it up just the same. This probably brings us close to their 5 year mission end, if that still is the case.

It takes place ~ 6 months later. They've said in multiple interviews.

"Without any insular knowledge of star dates, my understanding is that it?s roughly six months since the end of the first movie to the Nibiru mission of the new movie." - Damon Lindelof

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.
  • 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!