Tag: Star Trek

star-trekkin’ across the universe

Sometimes there’s a visible gulf between geekdom and academia, despite the stereotype of these two realms being congruent. I am reminded of this gulf by this odd story about a paper by William Edelstein, a senior and distinguished physicist (in my own field of MRI research), who has calculated the lethality of interstellar travel:

Interstellar space is an empty place. For every cubic centimetre, there are fewer than two hydrogen atoms, on average, compared with 30 billion billion atoms of air here on Earth. But according to William Edelstein of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, that sparse interstellar gas should worry the crew of a spaceship travelling close to the speed of light even more than the Borg decloaking off the starboard bow.

Special relativity describes how space and time are distorted for observers travelling at different speeds. For the crew of a spacecraft ramping up to light speed, interstellar space would appear highly compressed, thereby increasing the number of hydrogen atoms hitting the craft.

Worse is that the atoms’ kinetic energy also increases. For a crew to make the 50,000-light-year journey to the centre of the Milky Way within 10 years, they would have to travel at 99.999998 per cent the speed of light. At these speeds, hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts – the same energy that protons will eventually reach in the Large Hadron Collider when it runs at full throttle. “For the crew, it would be like standing in front of the LHC beam,” says Edelstein.

The spacecraft’s hull would provide little protection. Edelstein calculates that a 10-centimetre-thick layer of aluminium would absorb less than 1 per cent of the energy. Because hydrogen atoms have a proton for a nucleus, this leaves the crew exposed to dangerous ionising radiation that breaks chemical bonds and damages DNA. “Hydrogen atoms are unavoidable space mines,” says Edelstein.

The fatal dose of radiation for a human is 6 sieverts. Edelstein’s calculations show that the crew would receive a radiation dose of more than 10,000 sieverts within a second. Intense radiation would also weaken the structure of the spacecraft and damage its electronic instruments.

All well and good and I have no reason to doubt Dr. Edelstein’s calculations (we medical physics types do have a professional interest in radiation dose and shielding, after all). But clearly Dr. Edelstein is not a fan of Star Trek, because even the most newbie of Trekkies knows about the Navigational Deflector Array. In addition, Starfleet vessels also have Bussard Collectors on the warp nacelles, which are the sci-fi-ified version of the Bussard ramjet.

My point is, physics geeks and sci fi geeks clearly aren’t as overlapping sets as I had assumed. But where a medical physicist might see errant hydrogen atoms as dose, a different kind of physicist might see them as fuel. In a way we scientists do bring our own biases to the table…

the infinite Khan

This is amazing.

People always discount William Shatner as an over-actor, but this mesmerizing loop of his most famous syllable really highlights the incredible range of nonverbal emotion he is managing to convey with just a clenching of his jaw and a tic of his eye. This is only a few minutes long but apparently the full version is 15 minutes. This needs to be made into a screensaver or something.

Somehow I think Chris Pine has a long way to go before he can deliver something similar. It should be noted that even in the alternate timeline of the movie, Khan is out there, waiting to be discovered.

UPDATE – ah, Youtube! Here’s the complete Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan in ten minutes.

UPDATE 2 – and who can resist Wrath of Khan as a literal space opera, courtesy of Robot Chicken?

Sublime Star Trek episodes: “Yesterday’s Enterprise” and “The Offspring”

Yesterday on sci-fi’s TNG block I caught the ending of Yesterday’s Enterprise, which was then followed by The Offspring. These are two of the best TNG episodes ever. It struck me that TNG as a series remains unmatched even by DS9 in terms of how many truly great episodes there were that really explored the human condition in such powerful ways.

Yesterday’s Enterprise handled Trek nostalgia brilliantly though subtly – the uniforms worn by the Enterprise-C crew were directly taken from the Trek movies from Khan onwards, for example, and the shape of the Enterprise-C was far more evocative of the iconic Enterprise from TOS than the Enterprise-D (I always felt that the Enterprise-D was flat and curvy in exactly the wrong places). But the way the story retconned Tasha Yar’s character was the real lodestone – and the scene with Picard where she argues to be transferred to the doomed ship was perfection, especially Picard’s final almost-refusal resigned-approval. Plus Castillo’s simple statement, “I don’t want you here.” – superb.

The Offspring, meanwhile, is remarkable for how it explores father and daughter love, using emotionless androids, and manages to convey the essence of that relationship in a simple scene where Data and Lal hold hands. This is the fundamental purpose of science fiction – to explore the human condition by using non-humans, and Data is the personification of science fiction itself, making the literary genre a character in its own right. The final scene with Lal and Data, where she tells him she will feel for the both of them, is one that moves me every time. And the scene with Riker in Ten-Forward never fails to make me laugh out loud.

There’s no way around it – I need to get myself a full set of these as soon as possible. Even Firefly can’t match TNG as far as its literary science fiction credentials go – and while I wish the new Trek movie franchise all the best, the Star Wars-ification of Star Trek is not science fiction anymore, but just space opera.

If anyone has a favorite episode of TNG to share, please comment! lets get sentimental.

new trek for Star Trek: a contrarian view

I’ve been cautiously optimistic about the new Trek reboot movie until now, but the final product let me with a bit of a “meh” response. Don’t get me wrong – I didn’t dislike the film, nor do I think they have ruined Trek or or committed any blasphemies. In a lot of ways I agree with the generally positive reviews that the movie seems to capture the essence of the 60s original series (TOS) in some way, only amped up and refreshed for modern sensibilities (i.e. more sex, more violence, more explosions. I’m not complaining).

However I do still feel surprisingly un-invested in the outcome and direction that this new trek is taking us. I think this is because in a lot of ways, TOS was not “true” Trek for me – it was more of a backstory to the real Trek, namely the Next Generation (TNG). Not to say I didn’t like TOS either – it’s one of my favorite series of all time, up there with Galactica, Firefly, and yes, TNG. What made TOS great was not Kirk’s hypermasculinity or the short skirts. It was about the relationship between the three main characters, of whom Spock really stood out as the defining icon. The three of them formed a Holy Trinity of Science Fiction and every episode was ultimately as much about them as anything else. Others have written about how TOS was shaped by its Cold War conception and how it represented a positive vision for humanity unlike anything else ever written, but to me as a child, I didn’t really get all that. It was just simply a great show because it was cool.

But while I loved TOS, it was the first set of movies that really sealed the deal and ignited my fandom. For anyone watching the series and then the first three movies in particular, there’s a gigantic disconnect. The reason is because the movies were where Trek grew up and embraced its science fiction heritage identity. Instead of social issues like racism or war, which were staples of the TV series, the movies delved into concepts like humanity, sacrifice, duty, identity, intelligence, and even destiny. The screen was bigger and the story expanded to match. And there were at last real consequences, with Spock and the Enterprise both sacrificed so that the others may live. Yes, they brought Spock back, but not without cost.

When TNG started, it started out a bit schizophrenic, trying in some ways to evoke TOS (remember the male miniskirt? ugh) but also cognizant of the movies’ style too. Ultimately, in terms of both style and tone, TNG evolved beyond the movies and became something wholly new in its own right. TNG went for seven seasons – more than twice as long as TOS – and explored science fiction themes in incredible variety and depth. Just off the top of my head – Dharmok. Data’s trial. The Enterprise-C. “There are four lights!” And everything with Lt. Barclay. I’ve barely scratched the surface here – TNG had an incredible versatility and maturity to it, which I think helped reinvigorate science fiction as a whole genre, in both TV and literary forms.

and now? (spoilers follow)

Continue reading “new trek for Star Trek: a contrarian view”

How exactly is having weapons at maximum going to help the situation?

This is from Stargate: SG-1‘s 200th gala episode, which was.. different.

I’m starting to realize that SG-1 is one of the hidden gems of science fiction television. I will probably have to netflix the whole thing at some point. Ten seasons… yikes. Bigger than Ranma!

Also, I probably need to get started on Farscape too, if I have any hope of understanding why this is funny. “Something a little more obscure” indeed 🙂 Claudia Black’s little gleeful rubbing her hands together is just so awesome at the end of that clip, that it really motivates me.

May 2009 – Trek reboots

I can’t help myself. I don’t want to repeat my anticipation/disappointment cycle of Episode I but this is hitting all the right buttons for me.

And, the bad guys are Romulans. They are so much more interesting than Klingons… but speaking of Klingons, they also are rumored to be done right – without foreheads. As Worf said, “We don’t speak of it.”

Star Trek X: the first frontier

If you are looking for a comprehensive collection of spoilers about the upcoming Star Trek prequel/reboot film, then this is the place. I am actually pretty interested in this film; I’m a pretty dedicated Trek fan but I have been so disenchanted with the direction the franchise has gone that I didn’t even bother to go see (or even rent, or even netflix) Nemesis yet. What appeals to me about this is the chance for a fresh start and interpretation on the franchise; much like Batman and James Bond, the old formula for Trek movies has gotten stale, mainly because it was too tied down to the legacy of the TV shows. The only movie that ever really worked was Wrath of Khan; Search for Spock was just an extension. The rest were simply failures in terms of trying to recreate the magic of the show on the big screen, and TNG-era Trek never quite gelled either. The problem with translating a TV show with an ensemble cast to a film is that some of that ensemble suffer from lack of focus. On TV the various characters can rotate under the narrative focus from episode to episode, but there are only two hours to work with on film and a lot of that gets wasted in “backstory” needed to make the movie work for the supposed non-fanatic fans who might want to see it and justify the film’s (usually) enormous budget. It’s worth noting that Firefly was a singular exception to this rule, which is why this talk of hypothetical 7th seasons just made me melancholy. Sci fi seems to be a bad word in the entertainment industry, at least until someone comes along and rehabilitates it the way that Jackson did for LOTR and the fantasy genre. Will Star Trek X be the reboot for grand scifi film as a whole? I hope so. It is hard to be optimistic in the face of such disappointments, but then again Star Trek was always unique in valuing optimism first and foremost. That ethos has rubbed off on its fandom as well, which is why we tolerate the abuse. And usually come back for more.

I will admit to wincing a bit at the Apple-store chic of the redesigned Enterprise bridge, but am willing to overlook it 🙂

BSG season 4 tidbit: Romo Lampkin returns!

badgerThis interview with Ron Moore has lots of little morsels to chew on, but by far the best is the news that wily lawyer Romo Lampkin returns twice in season 4. He’ll always be The Badger to me, though.

The bad news is that there is no word on when the second half of the season will be aired; SciFi milking the series out until 2009 seems increasingly likely. Still, at least we get the first ten episodes of season 4 starting in just two weeks.

Interestingly, the interview with Moore also includes his thoughts on the new Sar Trek film. Overall, he is very positive, about the reboot with fresh blood. Worth reading in full.