Just count the face-to-face kills.

Dukat's 5 million Bajorans loses out to the Female Shapeshifter's 300 million or so Cardassians, I should think ... or was that in the billions?

Darn, now I'm going to have to watch "What You Leave Behind" again.

Although if we're only counting face-to-face kills, I think Worf might win.

Having watched "What You Leave Behind" many times since Christmas, I believe the total number of Cardassian casaulties was 800 million.

Thanks, tothemax - I knew 300 million seemed too low.

From the Chosen Realm thread:


That is some heavy stuff to deal with at 5 AM, but I'll try. It's very interesting to think about, so I went to that thread you mentioned, and found an interesting book quote there(from one of the novels,Scotty saying this:

"What the transporter does is analyze the energy state of each particle in the body and then produce a Dirac jump to an equivalent state somewhere else. No conversion [to energy and back] is involved -- if it were, we'd blow up the ship."

Now I don't know what a Dirac jump is- 20th century physicist I haven't heard of, or what. But doesn't what they're suggesting sort of futz with quantum mechanics- unless they've found some technology which undoes the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, how could they analyze every particle and duplicate where it's going to go a nanosecond after?They'd necessarily change something. So with that in mind, maybe it is what you said, identical cloning, but taking the matter on the receiving pad, changing it to be the "energy state" of the person before, and dematerializing the person on the sending pad.

If any actual physicists wish to kill me where I stand, am perfectly fine with that. The above analysis stems merely from junior year physics, AP Chem, and the freshman chem course I just took.( I should probably not contemplate quantum physics at 5 in the morning anyway.)

While I'm not 100% sure, I think the 'identical clone' transporter theory has its roots in mythos rather than in Trekkian fact.

I was always under the impression that the transporter disassembled the transportee at the "quantum level" - this is why you never see cargo transporters being used as much as the regular ones: they're not 'quantum rated,' which is less safe for living matter - then his/her/its atoms are sent off to be reassembled at the transportation target. While I know they're not strictly 'legal,' many of the novels (TOS and others) have had characters who are afraid of the transporter because it would 'kill them and leave a copy on the other end,' but the regulars always tell them that it doesn't work that way.

A small amount of matter can become a huge amount of energy (E=mc squared), which is what the line about "blowing up the ship" means. I don't see where the idea of "turning into energy comes" from anyway- why not posit a breakdown to molecules and reconstructing them elsewhere with a "jump"? (Energy could be sent at the speed of light; molecules may not.) This ensures that all the molecules will all be there- and helps with the Heisenberg. After all, if you have all the molecules and you don't have any left over, you can be pretty sure things went OK.

Something in my brain is telling me that they've mentioned "Heisenburg compensators" in the past as a nod to the problems real transporters would pose.

"Heisenberg Compensators" are definitely in Sternbach and Okuda's Tech Manual, and I distinctly remember Geordi mentioning them in an episode, though I'm not sure which one. Maybe it was more than one.

I'm not quite sure this is the correct place for this, but I have a few questions. Is it canon that Vulcans are touch telepaths? I can only remember it mentioned onscreen once, in the Animated Series, and I know that's not actually considered canon.

If it is canon, has it been dealt with on Enterprise? Do we know that the humans know this about the Vulcans? Because I keep thinking that if he doesn't already know, when Trip finds out that T'Pol's been privy to all of his thoughts while she's been massaging away, boy, is he gonna be pissed.

Maybe the touch only works when they want it to. And it seems they don't need the touch- Spock once got a guard to open a door by concentrating hard.

The tech manuals and various canon sources defintiely include mention of the Heisenburg Compensators. When asked how they work, the Mike Okuda replies, "very well, thank you."

The 100% clone question is troubling from a perspective of metaphysics. I would argue that it all depends on what the source of the matter is for your reassembly. If they dematerialize you, then beam your transporter data to another place and reassemble you from some molecules they have lying around, then you're made of all new atoms and that's very troubling. But since the standard transporter use model isn't pad-to-pad, but pad-to-site, I can't believe that's how it works. I'm pretty sure they reassemble you from the same molecules you were made of when you started. They do frequently refer to the "matter stream".

As for Vulcan touch-telepathy, wasn't there something where Vulcans don't like being touched because it is at least mildly telepathic. And even though they're touch-telepaths, they seem to be more receptive to non-touch telepaths. Kes was in Tuvok's brain more than once.

I thought this was because Kes was a strong telepath, not because Vulcans are more receptive to non-touch telepaths.

Yeah, but Kes didn't so much get inside anyone else's brain. Also, Tuvok had problems resisting the Borg voice that time that Janeway got them assimilated on purpose. Some said his mental discipline should have made him less succesptible than Janeway or Torres, but I think his natural telepathy made him a higher risk.

Of course, that's assuming the Borg link up telepathically and not wirelessly.

According to the Trek Encyclopedia, Heisenberg compensators were mentioned in "Realm of Fear" and "Ship in a Bottle." It's defined in the Encyclopedia:



Steps in transporting, technobabble from Okuda's Tech Manual:



So it seems the transporter beams and reassembles you from your original atoms. Transporter clones aren't created in the regular beaming process, only accidentally like Tom Riker.

It does make you wonder how Tom Riker can even exist. I mean, aren't you essentially talking about creating matter? I guess there's the Schroedinger's Cat thing, where you can both beam Riker molecules back and leave them stuck on the planet, but I'm not sure how that would even work. Perhaps I need to go back and pay attention to the precise technobabble they used.

I remember the signal was weak or something, so they boosted the matter stream- which I guess means they add matter.

But now you're making someone out of molecules that aren't theirs. That's troubling from a metaphysical perspective. Still, better than letting them die because half their molecules didn't make it, I guess.

If I recall the technobabble, what happened was they were having trouble beaming him through the Whatever Problem, so the transporter chief used a second beam to increase the strength-- essentially beaming the same thing twice, intending to integrate the two beams on his end. But then the first beam got through on its own, so he dropped the second beam.

But how can something be beamed twice if it's the same matter stream?

New question: I did a google search on "Parisi Squares", and evidently, it's named after a math thing. Has any ST show actually showed this game being played? There have been references to how brutal it is, but, what is it??

Dr.N, I swear we get a snippet in an episode somewhere that totally makes it looks like some kind of American Gladiators event. I know we see Tasha Yar and Worf in uniform for a game during 11001001 but so far I can't come up with the one where we get to see game play. And no, I'm not thinking of that stupid "martial art" match between Riker and his dad in The Icarus Factor!!

In VOY's "Year of Hell," we get a mention of a Klingon who is quoted to be "the first and only Klingon to play the game," Jean-Luc Riker breaks his arm playing Paresiis Squares in "Future Imperfect," and the Holodoc's 'daughter' dies from a game injury in "Real Life."

But I'm pretty sure we've never actually seen anybody playing it.

What year (in our format) was Encounter at Farpoint set? The official site only lists the star date and I'm trying to see how much time passed between ST VI (2293) and TNG.

According to this TNG starts in 2364.

Thanks. I wasn't expecting it to be that late since McCoy was still alive. Humans have really expanded their life expectancies.

The Technical Manual gives the launching date as being in October, 2363, and commissioning is given as being in July of that year in "Data's Day". That said, "Encounter at Farpoint" may have been a bit after. In "The Neutral Zone," Data says the year is 2364, so the whole season is treated as that. Seasons seem to run January-December, no matter when they air (although Enterprise has given exact dates).

There's a symmetry: TOS is 2266-2269, exactly 300 years after it was aired. If we assume that that was the end of the five-year mission (maybe squeezing in TAS at the end), said mission began 2264. So TNG is exactly 100 years after that. Also, I remember one of the first articles about TNG giving "78 years later" as the number- TVH had just come out, so 2285+78=2263.

Ten years of real time passed before TMP, but it's only two years or so of Trek time (2271). This was all fixed by WOK-SFS-TVH-TFF, which were three, five, and seven and ten years later in real time, but all about 14-15 years later in Trek time (2284-2286). Finally, TUC was about 2293, and the opening of Generations about 2294.

Pocket Books now has a whole series (they've done others in the past, and there've been comics too) set from 2293-2364. Pretty much all of the "blanks" in Trek have been filled in by novels and/or comics.

McCoy said he was 137, I think. That would mean he was born in 2227, and so was about 40 during TOS- about five years older than Kirk, and about Spock's age (but Vulcans age less). 120 is seen as a maximum nowadays, and by Trek's time 120 seems to be a normal lifespan (remember the TNG ep "Half a Life," which means 60 there)- take away disease and most people today would live to that, I think. So 137 isn't remarkably that much more, especially for someone (a doctor?) who can take care of himself, and if we assume McCoy didn't have much time to go after that. (One recent comic has McCoy dying right after Kirk, at the age of 145 or so, after visits by Scotty and Spock- a touching story, especially considering that Kelley had just died.)

From the spoiler thread, where we were getting off topic:

Exactly how many people are there on the NX-01? I though it was 180, some people were saying 80, and I'm sure there was an episode mention somewhere, only I can't find it in the recaps.

Throughout the first two seasons, Archer referred to 78, I think (76 Starfleet plus T'Pol and Phlox). They may have picked up more when they stopped over at Earth last season, especially MACOs- there seem to be at least twenty. Or they may have dropped some off.

Startrek.com says that there are 83 crew members, 81 human plus T'Pol and Phlox, and it is divided up approximately two-thirds male, one-third female. This seems to be linked to the state as of Broken Bow to judge by that page.

There is no mention about how many MACOs they took on so it would probably be more than 83 with them included. Wasn't there some mention about crew members having to double up or something to free up room?

There was also a throwaway line in "The Expanse" that not everyone from the original crew was going. A small handful stayed behind.

A couple of times when Lt Reed and Major Hayes have had conversations, Hayes has called Reed 'Sir.' Now, even bearing in mind that Starfleet is a civilian organisation doesn't Major outrank Lieutenant? Shouldn't Reed be calling Hayes 'Sir'?

Plus, Starfleet sent off Enterprise to investigate the Xindi attack on Earth. Starfleet doesn't run the planet so by what authority did it authorise the mission? Or did Starfleet authorise it? What do we know about the Earth government at this time?

I've gotten the impression that since the MACO's are a separate entity from Starfleet, there's no direct chain of command in terms of who outranks who.

Instead, I think Major Hayes was given orders from his superiors to treat all of Enterprise's senior officers (at least Archer, T'Pol, Trip and Reed) as his superior officers in terms of the mission, regardless of where their Starfleet rank falls in comparison to his.

Very little. Someone pointed out that there's a throwaway line in a TNG ep about Australia being the last country to join the world government, about a decade from "now". Presumably, that government already exists (you don't form a world-wide government in just 10 years), although we don't really know how many countries are in it.

That world government probably authorized Starfleet to act.

<cynicism>Hmmm, can't be an Australian govt like the current one then.</cynicism>

I think it would be good to get some info on the world govt (if only to see if it contradicts that TNG episode.

The line is Crusher's, and it's phrased as a hypothetical. I never interpreted it as saying Australia was the last hold out, but rather her just pulling a single country out as an example.

Plus, Bev is a doctor, not a historian.

Yup, the problem is, the hypothetical line got construed as fact for the second volume of the Star Trek Chronology, so everyone thinks it's canon, when in fact, it's not.

Joint operations between different branches of the armed forces happen all the time in real life. In terms of military protocol between different branches of the service, in the world today, their duties would be approached as "what happens on the ship" would be under Malcolm's jurisdiction. It doesn't mean Malcolm outranks Hayes, it simply that Hayes defers responsibilty to Malcolm. Off the ship in performance of the mission my guess would be that Major Hayes would only answer to Archer who has overall responsibility for a successful mission. If the military establishment back on earth determined that they needed a Major for this mission, there is no way that a Lieutenant would be put over a Major in terms of chain of command. If they determined that Malcolm should have the overall superior responsibility, they would never have sent a Major. Even in times of war, chain of command and determination of ranks and responsibilities are spelled out. The only way (as I see it) that Malcolm would ever be considered a superior at his current rank in reference to Hayes would be if Archer, T'Pol and Trip were all incapacitated and could not command the ship. If Reed took command of the Enterprise, then he would outrank Hayes.

ETA Actually Malcolm taking command of the ship over a superior officer in another branch of the service would be a gray area, but ultimately I think that World Gov would put Malcolm in command over Hayes. It occurred to me that this would be a fantastic episode idea. I hope TPTB read these boards!!!

The official site, back when ENT was starting, said that Australia, as the last country, joined in 2050, a year before the series. So they made the same mistake, and made it part of the story.

That still doesn't explain "Royal Navy" references. Perhaps the "World Government" isn't quite what we think it is.

That would be 101 years, or it is a typo.

As long as Alabama and Texas have their own Air National Guard units 100+ years after the latter joined the Union, why wouldn't UK have its own Navy, even after it is part of a world government? It would be "Royal" because it always has been.

And the King/Queen may still even be around, for seremonial purposes.

Whoops, PGP. The site says 2150.

And that's a good point about militaries and royals. I guess I'm rather attached to the idea of sovereign nations- or some of them- that I'd like to think that Earth is still composed of them in Trek's time, and the UFP is more like the UN (or, at most, the EU).

I thought I remembered a country or area mentioned in Shuttlepod One, so I betook myself to the recap and found the above. So, nelamm, I think your theory of a (or is it an?) UN works. It seems that instead of countries, though, perhaps it's regions? So, Starfleet would be part of this UN thing which would also better explain the Medical Exchange and that Malcolm is a member of the crew but would not be considered to be "treasonous" for joining a foreign military. Wait, that's now. Well, anyhow, I think you have a good point, nelamm.

I suspect the timeline is all screwy on Enterprise, but Hatchery this week mentioned the Eugenics Wars. When are they supposed to have taken place?
Perhaps they played a role in uniting Earth. Who were the combatants? I believe Khan was involved in this to some extent, but I can't fully recall.

it happened during the 1990s. it's not the same as World War 3, which took place in the mid-21st century. I believe the Eugenics Wars novel wanks why we never noticed it happen.

ETA: it was never made clear where it happened, but Khan at one point controlled 1/4 of the planet.

Archer said it was his great-grandfather who fought in it. Assume Archer is fifty, like Bakula, and born in 2100, so his father may have been born in 2065, his grandfather in 2030, and...no. His great-grandfather would have been 15 or so maximum, certainly not commanding a group of soldiers.

I suppose Khan's 1996? departure doesn't mean that the war ended then, though I don't see Khan leaving until it was really hopeless.

But your asuming 35 as the age in which they became parents. If you play a little bit with those figures it could fit a little better.

No, I played just to get there. Imagine they were each forty-five: Father born 2055, grandfather born 2010...ok, then it works.

[soapbox]What we must all remember is that we now obviously "know" that the Trek timeline, world, and continuity would probably not do well to be laid upon the modernity. At least I wouldn't think so. There have been no Voyagers 3-6, no Eugenics wars. Star Trek can now, I think, be totally and utterly classified as fiction.[/soapbox]

frenchtoast raises a good point: how could a Brit like Reed join Starfleet without commiting treason? I have a speculation that would protect both national soverginity (that is, why Britian still has a Royal Navy for Reed not to join) and protects continuity (please forgive me if someone has already made this point, as it is late and I lack time to read the entire thread): Starfleet is a international organization. As for who owns the MACOs, I'm still unsure. I'd say the US, just because the US would logically (gaah! Application of real world situations to Trek. We really have no idea as to the balance pf power after the Eugenics Wars) have the most powerful military in 50 or so years, as it does today. However, Starfleet itself could be a subsidiary of the UN, which eventually evolved into the UFP (at which point it took control of the earth). Which would make Quantum et al. blue helmits, an idea that, while I find displeasing myself, makes a good deal of sense.

Perhaps not:

NASA is already evolving into an international organization, what with the ISS and all, and is working hand-in-hand with Russia, the ESA, and so on. The Mars ship (or was it another?) that Voyager found had numerous flags around its body. Finally, the Starfleet logo in ENT (and even beyond) closely resembles that of NASA. So I wouldn't be surprised if the idea is that the various space agencies of Earth eventually unite (with NASA as a dominating and guiding factor) into Starfleet. Space agencies always have a strong military presence (all of the Mercury seven were military, for example), thus explaining the military structure, ranks, and so on.

Hayes just mentioned training at West Point, so your idea of an American-dominated military isn't far off. Perhaps something like the current UN force, but more muscular- not just "peacekeepers"- with contributions from various militaries around the world- much as the US Army was, for many years (and, to a certain extent, still is) made up of independent militia forces from the various states.

And "West Point" would fit nicely- up until the World Wars, there was a small core of West Point-trained officers who would take command of the various state militias during a war. So perhaps Hayes is one such officer, taking command of a group of MACOs assembled from around the world.

And word to your soapbox.