Discovery - Timeline, continuity and other canonical issues [** SPOILERS **]

Sad Professor

Rather than clog up the episode threads with what will obviously be an ongoing issue, I thought we could use this thread for pointing out and discussing the various timeline and continuity problems with the new show. Discussion of such issues are by no means confined to this thread, but many may prefer to debate them here rather than have to carry them over to each new episode thread.

Warning: This thread will contain spoilers for the latest episode. New episodes are released on a Monday morning, so if you are late getting around to watching them, avoid this thread unless you want to be spoiled.

The_Valeyard

I think we've had this thread before. We could be stuck in a continuity loop.

The_Valeyard

I think we've had this thread before. We could be stuck in a continuity loop.

Evade

Will Frasier Crane show up in the last post?

AMKC

I have not even seen the show yet but am annoyed that they have holo tech and subspace mind melds in it. Sure this would have been fine if it was based after DS9 but its not its not even after The Original Series it is before it. Some of it I don,t mind because sets like does used on The Original series would just look wrong and terrible now but the holo tech that really annoys me.

Slydice

The_Valeyard wrote: »

I think we've had this thread before. We could be stuck in a continuity loop.

All hands abandon Ship! Repeat all hands ABANDON

Sonics2k

The only real continuity error that's bothering me is the hologram technology they use for communication.

I suppose they could argue down the line that it uses too much power, so they stop using it by the time the Enterprise rolls around.

It's got to be really hard for them though, in the 1960's when Star Trek started, the idea of a talking computer was literally insane, but now we have talking computers in our pockets and even on our wrists. At what point do you completely limit what we currently know to be useable technology, just to make sure you stick to the exact cannon and technology of the original.

TNG was lucky, because obviously they thought ahead massively. Sure Picard even had a a tablet computer, which seemed like insane tech in the 1980's, but now we can buy them for €50.

server down

Canon in TV shows is whatever the last script writer wrote. For something that was derived from a book, you can talk about canon, in a TV show it's the latest thing written.

( and I suppose for TV originated shows, TV is canon over movies).

Also extreme nerds dont really matter. Firstly the is show is trying to get younger people involved. They wont know or care about canon. Most of the fans of TNG probably were not aging fans of TOS. Many aging TOS fans didnt watch it, because their life had moved on.

If you are looking for older fans you are tying yourself into a decreasing market.

Evade

server down wrote: »

Canon in TV shows is whatever the last script writer wrote.

Even if it directly contradicts a previous episode of the same series?

server down

Evade wrote: »

Even if it directly contradicts a previous episode of the same series?

Yes, last script writer writes the canon.

degrassinoel

server down wrote: »

Yes, last script writer writes the canon.

..And should be shot out of it, and into the nearest sun.

Evade

server down wrote: »

Yes, last script writer writes the canon.

That seems like a terrible way to do a series.

server down

Evade wrote: »

That seems like a terrible way to do a series.

Well whether it is or not, its generally accepted after a while. Otherwise you are in thrall to a script writer who is long since retired, or dead.

Dr Who had a script writer who gave the doctor 12 lives. He just wrote that in an episode and damn the future.

Rather than end the series in the mid 2010s, a later script writer said that he had 507 lives. So it goes.

Greyjoy

server down wrote: »

Canon in TV shows is whatever the last script writer wrote. For something that was derived from a book, you can talk about canon, in a TV show it's the latest thing written.

( and I suppose for TV originated shows, TV is canon over movies).

Also extreme nerds dont really matter. Firstly the is show is trying to get younger people involved. They wont know or care about canon. Most of the fans of TNG probably were not aging fans of TOS. Many aging TOS fans didnt watch it, because their life had moved on.

If you are looking for older fans you are tying yourself into a decreasing market.

The producers of Discovery repeatedly claimed over the summer that the new show would stick to established canon 'as much as possible' even going so far as to claim that they had 'super fans' in the writing room to keep them on track. Even this early into the new show it's obvious that these claims were just smoke & mirrors to lure existing fans. If the producers had been honest and upfront by saying 'Discovery is a reboot' I would have been disappointed yet still able to accept the show on its own terms. Instead they created expectations of adhering to continuity in a show that isn't interested in doing so.

server down

Greyjoy wrote: »

The producers of Discovery repeatedly claimed over the summer that the new show would stick to established canon 'as much as possible' even going so far as to claim that they had 'super fans' in the writing room to keep them on track. Even this early into the new show it's obvious that these claims were just smoke & mirrors to lure existing fans. If the producers had been honest and upfront by saying 'Discovery is a reboot' I would have been disappointed yet still able to accept the show on its own terms. Instead they created expectations of adhering to continuity in a show that isn't interested in doing so.

So what problems you got? Some technology is a bit advanced and that's it?

Evade

server down wrote: »

Well whether it is or not, its generally accepted after a while. Otherwise you are in thrall to a script writer who is long since retired, or dead.

Or the one who wrote last week's episode.

The_Valeyard

So,.........Spore Travel.........discuss :P

PhiloCypher

The_Valeyard wrote: »

So,.........Spore Travel.........discuss :P

Spore gate SG-1 haha

In all honesty while the concept is a bit daft I don't think it's canon breaking at this point. If the incident on the Glens anything to go by its too dangerous to be practical and will likely be shelved. Explaining why we never see it used in the future.

Evade

It does seem dangerous and it's more than a little reminiscent of Captain Ransom's antics in Voyager. It seems to be similar to how the Iconian gateways operate too.

It does kind of put the argument that the post Nemesis galaxy is too small if they're covering 90 light years in a few seconds before TOS.

As a more general continuity niggle, was calling the first officer "number one" a widespread thing before? Was Picard just being a bit retro in TNG?

EDIT. Never mind, number one comes from the Cage

pixelburp

Let me think about it ... hmmm, could we call it 'Sporp Drive'?

I actually like it; it feels like a fresh idea within the broader, more general canon yet the way the pilot spun it, sounds like a technology so potentially lethal it'll be easy to explain why it disappears from subsequent series.

seamus

Illicit research has always played a part in Star Trek, with several references to banned technology being used/developed by ships flying under the radar. In this case we can kind of presume that nothing really comes of the "spore drive" in the end since it's never seen in later years. Most likely the real goal is the hull-breaking invincible alien that the Glenn had kept in confinement.

silverharp

seamus wrote: »

Illicit research has always played a part in Star Trek, with several references to banned technology being used/developed by ships flying under the radar. In this case we can kind of presume that nothing really comes of the "spore drive" in the end since it's never seen in later years. Most likely the real goal is the hull-breaking invincible alien that the Glenn had kept in confinement.

if you can get stuff past shields then surely it would be easier to beam explosives or tactical nukes on ships

blanch152

silverharp wrote: »

if you can get stuff past shields then surely it would be easier to beam explosives or tactical nukes on ships

But not as much fun as a hull-breaking invincible alien.

silverharp

blanch152 wrote: »

But not as much fun as a hull-breaking invincible alien.

Cookie_Monster

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Spore gate SG-1 haha

In all honesty while the concept is a bit daft I don't think it's canon breaking at this point. If the incident on the Glens anything to go by its too dangerous to be practical and will likely be shelved. Explaining why we never see it used in the future.

not bloody likely. look at the constant issues with transporters doing weird things but still around. A drive like that is far to practical to ever be abandoned and constant refinement would continue to happen. So the fact that it's never ever mentioned in TNG era makes it a stupid plot hole thats more nonsense (much like Excelsior transwarp from the film) :mad:

Evade

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

not bloody likely. look at the constant issues with transporters doing weird things but still around. A drive like that is far to practical to ever be abandoned and constant refinement would continue to happen. So the fact that it's never ever mentioned in TNG era makes it a stupid plot hole thats more nonsense (much like Excelsior transwarp from the film) :mad:

After a quick look at Wikipedia, the spore drive covering 90 light years in 3 seconds puts 26 galaxies within a day's travel. Or to put it in a bit more of a Star Trek context would have turned Voyager's journey into a 40 minute inconvenience.

Even if it turns the crew to inside out crew the ship itself seemed largely intact so intergalactic probes would still work.

Sad Professor

Pretty simple way of explaining away the spore-based propulsion system: it turns out it's based on the exploitation of a benign, intelligent life-form. Every-time they use it they are killing it, but Lorca thinks it's worth it to defeat the Klingons. Trek has done this kind of storyline before, so you know what happens next.

pixelburp

Yup and were this the case, it deftly introduces the whole "at what cost?" angle that feels like it has been hanging over Lorca's head the moment he suggested his shadiness. ... our heroes discover this interconnected spore thing is a living being, Lorca doesn't care about some space fungus, cue Michael stepping up against her captain

TheIrishGrover

My whole take on TranSPORtation is that it was looked into but eventually deemed too unreliable and was never widely adopted. Maybe used by S31 in extreme cases.
.
.
.
.
'course it is just a TV show.

Calibos

Sounds Dangerously close to MidiChlorians to me.

corkie

Star Trek: Discovery NCC 1031 ~~~ Section 31

Spoilers up to an including episode 3: -

Spore Travel [a.k.a DM - Blink Drive] science: -

The Suspect Science Of Star Trek: Discovery, 'Context Is For Kings,' Season 1, Episode 3

there is no difference at the quantum level between biology and physics,

I wonder what Sheldon Cooper would/will have to same about that quote?

Evade

corkie wrote: »

I wonder what Sheldon Cooper would/will have to same about that quote?

One of the Disco writers should probably have read this.

Slydice

corkie wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoW8Sq8-hr4

Cool video.

corkie wrote: »

Star Trek: Discovery NCC 1031 ~~~ Section 31

That might be more related to the Space Shuttle Discovery having designation: OV-103: https://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/shuttleoperations/orbiters/discovery-info.html

Section 31 would be cool though.

heebusjeebus

Discovery being 1031 doesn't make sense unless all these black science ships (like the Glenn) reference Section 31 too.

Goodshape

heebusjeebus wrote: »

Discovery being 1031 doesn't make sense unless all these black science ships (like the Glenn) reference Section 31 too.

Memory Alpha lists the USS Glenn's registry as NCC-1030 – http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/USS_Glenn

So presumably it's just coincidence and/or misdirection from the writers room.

seamus

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

My whole take on TranSPORtation is that it was looked into but eventually deemed too unreliable and was never widely adopted. Maybe used by S31 in extreme cases.

Or unsafe; if a huge jump turns people inside-out, maybe there's a continual deleterious effect from short jumps.
Or maybe you find there's a huge cool-down (or, why don't they just do a series of short jumps rather than one huge one?) which negates benefit of the jump and leaves you without warp propulsion for a long time? That's no good in a battle.

Anyway, we're jumping the gun on pointing out problems with a technology that we've had a 3 minute introduction to. No doubt the series will go into more detail as time goes on.

FutureGuy

Trek yards had the Glen down as NCC-1010 but the registry is very blurry.

There is a lot of tech that, in a hundred years, could explain a lot of S31 shenanigans. We know this is not widespread by the time TNG roles around but that does not mean it's not out there.

Remember, we are watching a franchise which develops transwarp before mothballing it completely because Scotty took out some parts. 🙄

It seems that people cant forgive ST:DISC for what they are doing when Trek as a franchise has been liberally changing canon around around to suit the need of the story for decades.

I fully believe that the people involved in Discovery are paying more attention to canon than any other Trek film or tv crew.

PhiloCypher

FutureGuy wrote: »

Trek yards had the Glen down as NCC-1010 but the registry is very blurry.

There is a lot of tech that, in a hundred years, could explain a lot of S31 shenanigans. We know this is not widespread by the time TNG roles around but that does not mean it's not out there.

Remember, we are watching a franchise which develops transwarp before mothballing it completely because Scotty took out some parts. 🙄

It seems that people cant forgive ST:DISC for what they are doing when Trek as a franchise has been liberally changing canon around around to suit the need of the story for decades.

I fully believe that the people involved in Discovery are paying more attention to canon than any other Trek film or tv crew.

As someone on reddit pointed out if you followed canon established in TOS's 'where no man has gone before' where the Enterprise enters the galactic barrier around the edge of the galaxy or Star Trek V where they reach the center of the galaxy all within a couple of days then Voyager makes no sense .

FutureGuy

PhiloCypher wrote: »

As someone on reddit pointed out if you followed canon established in TOS's 'where no man has gone before' where the Enterprise enters the galactic barrier around the edge of the galaxy or Star Trek V where they reach the center of the galaxy all within a couple of days then Voyager makes no sense .

Or again, how the Enterprise, with a few quick calculations, figures out how to time travel but never uses it again, nor does any other ship in the fleet.

Or how the Enterprise gets to the centre of the galaxy in the space of a movie. And back. Or how the Enterprise E can time travel back from First Contact

The truth is, we have seem Star Trek through the eyes of 6-7 crews on 6-7 ships and stations. Those ships have been exploratory/diplomatic ships with a specialised mission. That's a VERY narrow view of the Federation.

Who knows what secret or failed technologies have never been shown in Canon before.

But there is definite undercurrent of sh!tting on Discovery for the sake of it.

Theacros

FutureGuy wrote: »

Or again, how the Enterprise, with a few quick calculations, figures out how to time travel but never uses it again, nor does any other ship in the fleet.

Or how the Enterprise gets to the centre of the galaxy in the space of a movie. And back. Or how the Enterprise E can time travel back from First Contact

The truth is, we have seem Star Trek through the eyes of 6-7 crews on 6-7 ships and stations. Those ships have been exploratory/diplomatic ships with a specialised mission. That's a VERY narrow view of the Federation.

Who knows what secret or failed technologies have never been shown in Canon before.

But there is definite undercurrent of sh!tting on Discovery for the sake of it.

Of course there are plot holes in the other series, but the Abrams movies and this Discovery series take it to a whole other level, and far more frequently.

ezra_

My biggest bug with Star Trek is this:

you have ships out there with cloaking devices, of which no ship can really detect until they start getting attacked.
most ships don't travel around with shields up
every ship has a transporter.

So why are they bother with weapons that aren't fast enough to knock out a ship with one shot, when they could just transport everyone off the ship and into a sun, or into the vacuum of space, or into their own warp core (you get the point).

Why not just transport a photon torpedo into the engine room of the ship?

Transporters seems to have the potential for the ultimate weapon in trek, yet more and more I'm getting frustated that they aren't being used either as a weapon (beam someone into space) or as a delivery method (beam in a bomb).

This really was the case in the DS9 episode with the crashed Jem Hadar ship, where the dominion spend hours trying drive the people out of the ship by shooting around them, and then just beam directly to Sisko when the founder dies. Odo has transported! Beam the founder (or star fleet) out!

Its the same for every series (Disco included), it would have been way easier just use the transporter in many situations

Sad Professor

^ I believe the original explanation for this was that the cloak used so much power that firing weapons, raising shields or even using the transporter wasn't possible and/or would have resulted in immediate detection. Cloaking tech in TOS was far from perfect. Hell, in STIII, Kirk spotted a cloaked ship by looking carefully out the viewscreen. Then in TNG there was apparently political reasons for why cloaking tech wasn't more common.

Transporter technology was originally a lot more limited as well, not to mention risky. Transporting within the ship almost never happened. Abrams made a joke out of the transporter, using it to teleport across the galaxy and onto a moving starship and other silly sh*t.

ezra_

Sad Professor wrote: »

^ I believe the original explanation for this was that the cloak used so much power that firing weapons, raising shields or even using the transporter wasn't possible and/or would have resulted in immediate detection. Cloaking tech in TOS was far from perfect. Hell, in STIII, Kirk spotted a cloaked ship by looking carefully out the viewscreen. Then in TNG there was apparently political reasons for why cloaking tech wasn't more common.

Transporter technology was originally a lot more limited as well, not to mention risky. Transporting within the ship almost never happened. Abrams made a joke out of the transporter, using it to teleport across the galaxy and onto a moving starship and other silly sh*t.

True I guess, but there have been many incidents in all series where they had a Deus Ex Machina in the form of the transporter and just ignored it.

DS9 is the worst for this

Evade

After watching the latest episode I still have to wonder why they went the prequel route. If you change the date in the first episode to 2450 the only change that would have to be made is the inclusion of Sarek.

The dash drive is even faster than any of the other impossibly fast drives like transwarp and quantum slipstream. The only thing faster seems to be the mildly pedophilic drive.

silverharp

so far the oversized bug is the only one I am rooting for.

seamus

Evade wrote: »

If you change the date in the first episode to 2450 the only change that would have to be made is the inclusion of Sarek.

I think I had said this on the pre-release thread, but your issue with a new series is the Superman problem.

Think of the augmentations and the technology that Voyager returned to Earth with. A absolute f*ckload of Borg technology & scientific information (fluidic space?) that gives Starfleet absolute superiority in the galaxy, not just the alpha quadrant.

Voyager's over-reliance on miraculous last-minute lifesaving technology now makes it really hard to write a Starfleet-based story where anyone is really at any risk.

Evade

seamus wrote: »

I think I had said this on the pre-release thread, but your issue with a new series is the Superman problem.

Think of the augmentations and the technology that Voyager returned to Earth with. A absolute f*ckload of Borg technology & scientific information (fluidic space?) that gives Starfleet absolute superiority in the galaxy, not just the alpha quadrant.

Voyager's over-reliance on miraculous last-minute lifesaving technology now makes it really hard to write a Starfleet-based story where anyone is really at any risk.

Ok, but then they introduce the dash drive which arguably surpasses all those things.

They could write around the tech gap especially given 70 plus years. Do you think Romulan, Klingon, Breen, Dominion, etc scientists and intelligence agencies would just sit by and let the Federation have such a huge advantage for all that time?

Goodshape

Evade wrote: »

Ok, but then they introduce the dash drive which arguably surpasses all those things.

That's my only real annoyance with the "more advanced" technology.

I'm totally fine with most of the tech updates and visual overhaul, and I too have made the argument that post-VOY has too much silly technology to be interesting on a human-story level, but now we have a super advanced technology anyway :-/

Diminishes the point of setting it in the time they did, somewhat.

Not a huge deal though. I'm sure there'll be good reason why the tech wasn't continued; the writers seem pretty in-touch with the canon that matters, imo, despite changes to what I'd consider surface-level details.

AtomicHorror

Goodshape wrote: »

That's my only real annoyance with the "more advanced" technology.

I'm totally fine with most of the tech updates and visual overhaul, and I too have made the argument that post-VOY has too much silly technology to be interesting on a human-story level, but now we have a super advanced technology anyway :-/

Diminishes the point of setting it in the time they did, somewhat.

Not a huge deal though. I'm sure there'll be good reason why the tech wasn't continued; the writers seem pretty in-touch with the canon that matters, imo, despite changes to what I'd consider surface-level details.

The tech evidently requires them to keep an animal in captivity and torture it every time they jump, so I guess that'd not work well for Starfleet, ethically. Of course, other civilisations might not have such an issue with it.

pixelburp

Yeah, still way too soon to draw absolute conclusions, but going by the events of Episode 4, it's clear that the simple reason this Spore Drive doesn't become a thing is that it's ethically reprehensible.

More than that, the namedrop of the tardigrade suggests that the writers are taking inspiration from current popular science, so with that in mind I am wondering if the spores themselves - or indeed the network that stretches across the galaxy - is also a sentient / sapient life-form itself. Popular science has highlighted how the largest organism on earth is actually a giant fungus that stretches for KMs, and this network Stamets refers to sounds awfully like this real-world equivalent. It'd kill the research dead in its tracks if it wasn't just hurting a few single creatures, but a giant lifeform too. It'd also act as a nice capper to the whole ethical drama if indeed the principles of the Federation ultimately win out - which presumably they do given the continuity.

FutureGuy

Some interviews yesterday.

Akiva Goldman, a producer, responded to concerns that Discovery seemed to sidestep or contradict existing facts within the Star Trek mythos.

"We are wildly aware of everything that appears to be a deviation from canon," he said. "We will close out each of those issues before we arrive at [the end of the show]."

Likewise, other members of the cast and crew weighed in on how the show takes place ten years before the original series, but looks more advanced as a result of modern filmmaking techniques.

"There is a traditional in Star Trek of attempting to use modern storytelling: visual techniques, props, visual effects, et cetera, to contemporize the original feeling that was generated by the props, and the sets, and the visual effects at the time," Goldman said. "We're trying to remain true to the technology that was available then, but represent it with the technology we have now."

"[Discovery] isn't just made for the Trekkies," Isaacs added. "It's for all the new people who have never seen it before. They want to see new stories with new tech. The fact that you don't see it ten years later on a different show is consistent."