Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   The worst science mistakes of Star Trek, or why any self-respecting geek should actually hate this show. Ha, "self-respecting" geek   (slate.com) divider line 192
    More: Obvious, Star Trek, geeks  
•       •       •

7635 clicks; posted to Geek » on 16 May 2013 at 1:11 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



192 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-16 03:03:32 PM  

demonfaerie: PanicMan: Pocket Ninja: Which was the episode where a bunch of the crew began to devolve and turned into giant spiders and stuff like that?

That's my favorite.

Ehem, it's called Barklay's Syndrome!  Named after the best Star Trek character ever.

[sharetv.org image 392x300]

Would like a word.


I'm always torn between Barclay, Garak, and DcCoy as favourite characters. McCoy was basically Dr. Grumpy Cat with bourbon.
 
2013-05-16 03:05:46 PM  

dangelder: ManateeGag: RexTalionis: ManateeGag: DamnYankees: The list begins and ends with Threshold.

which one was that?

Tom Paris and Janeway go beyond Warp 10 and they turn into gigantic newts and have sex with each other.

that was real?  I thought that was a Cheetos fueled hallucination.

Yes. Yes it was real.


I honestly wish I'd had a fever when I saw that episode because it left me with a combination of WTF, facepalm, and rageface at the same time. An episode where Neelix tries to convince everyone to exchange holo-Valentines would have been better. I couldn't even continue watching the show.
 
2013-05-16 03:10:09 PM  

KellyX: dittybopper: The Stealth Hippopotamus: dittybopper: The biggest science mistake in Star Trek is midichlorians.

Some people just want to watch the world burn...

Hey, Jean-Luc, may the Force be with you.

[fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net image 460x343]


That's going to be really confusing for people writing Professor X / Magneto slashfic.
 
2013-05-16 03:12:46 PM  
The only one of these that really bothers me, is when Spock watches Vulcan implode.
 
2013-05-16 03:13:23 PM  
The biggest mistake in the reboot is that the transporter was able to teleport people onto a moving starship at warp and at across great distances.  Say like beaming from Saturn to Earth in the case of the end of that reboot.  This revelation instantly makes starship travel obsolete.

No, the biggest mistake of the reboot was some punk ass kid who didn't even graduate Star Fleet Academy getting command of a frikin' Starship.

We can argue, speculate and whine about the different technologies and MacGuffins they use in Trek, but what I absolutely DEMAND is a future where people act rationally, and a Starfleet that acts like responsible adults. That, and numerous other idiocies made me write off NuTrek. To me it is Idiocracy Triumphant. Another Farker put it much better a couple days ago, NuTrek is made for the Snowflakes, who think they deserve reward/power/responsibility for just showing up....
 
2013-05-16 03:19:41 PM  

Professor Science: The fundamental mistake here is putting "science" in the same sentence with "Star Trek."  There is no science in Star Trek; it's fantasy with the magic horses and swords and wizards replaced by magic space ships and phasers and Vulcans.  Accept that, drink heavily enough to forget the ever-inconsistent application of technobabble solutions, stay well clear of the festering heap of Voyager, and enjoy the rest.


This is actually the best response, and the best way to watch any similar sci-fi.  When they start to explain the "science" behind what is happening, simply let your mind hear "magic".  The writers have no idea what they're talking about, they are just making things up that sound science-y.

Often in fantasy, the magic will be explained in some fashion, Magic crystals, or spirits of the dead, or whatever. They will proclaim this is how the magic actually works. Do you listen to that and say "nuh uh, that's not how magic works"?  Of course not.  The writers are making it up, they don't know how magic works (spoiler: it doesn't, it's fake).

So goes with the "science" in Star Trek.  Consider it "future magic" and call it a day.
 
2013-05-16 03:24:46 PM  

mark12A: No, the biggest mistake of the reboot was some punk ass kid who didn't even graduate Star Fleet Academy getting command of a frikin' Starship.


Right, that type of thing never happened in the original canon...
 
2013-05-16 03:28:18 PM  
Huh. Science fiction isn't reality. Who'd a thunk it?

I don't care if I have to suspend belief to watch something (I like Clive Barker, so I'm used to it). But don't break your own rules. A group of friends who were extras in the reboot movie took me to the premier because I was the only one in the group who was actually a Trekkie, so I could point out all the mistakes (really? Cardassian ale?).
 
2013-05-16 03:31:09 PM  

FunkOut: demonfaerie: PanicMan: Pocket Ninja: Which was the episode where a bunch of the crew began to devolve and turned into giant spiders and stuff like that?

That's my favorite.

Ehem, it's called Barklay's Syndrome!  Named after the best Star Trek character ever.

[sharetv.org image 392x300]

Would like a word.

I'm always torn between Barclay, Garak, and DcCoy as favourite characters. McCoy was basically Dr. Grumpy Cat with bourbon.


That's not a bad list.
 
2013-05-16 03:36:34 PM  

Revek: Its for entertainment purposes only.  Get over it and accept that.


The people who have been influenced by the series and helped provide technology back to YOUR life would say otherwise.
 
2013-05-16 03:43:09 PM  
My brother in law had his life saved by Star Trek

In College, he developed a rare tumor in his sinus cavity that wrapped around his optic nerve and was working its way into his brain.   No surgeon he saw, would touch it with conventional techniques

He ended up in California where a doctor used a proton laser to remove the tumor.    The Doctor is on the record as saying he went into medical research to try and develop some of the medical techniques that he saw in Star Trek

BIL is 5 years cancer free now.   His vision is slightly impaired in one eye as a result of the cancer.   He and my sister have two kids now.
 
2013-05-16 03:45:58 PM  

weiserfireman: My brother in law had his life saved by Star Trek

In College, he developed a rare tumor in his sinus cavity that wrapped around his optic nerve and was working its way into his brain.   No surgeon he saw, would touch it with conventional techniques

He ended up in California where a doctor used a proton laser to remove the tumor.    The Doctor is on the record as saying he went into medical research to try and develop some of the medical techniques that he saw in Star Trek

BIL is 5 years cancer free now.   His vision is slightly impaired in one eye as a result of the cancer.   He and my sister have two kids now.


Neat. Something that rarely happens with other big franchises like Star Wars or Doctor Who.
 
2013-05-16 03:47:01 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: Except cell phones require infrastructure; communicators didn't.


Actually, there is no evidence that the communicators didn't require infrastructure, in the form of a starship with very sensitive receivers and powerful transmitters to offset the relatively weak signal of a communicator, just like a cell-site allows you to use a relatively weak and insensitive radio called a 'cell phone'.

Communicators could be fine for relatively short range communication between themselves, but you'll note that mostly they are used for communicating with the ship.
 
2013-05-16 03:49:24 PM  
Geeks don't care about the science. NERDS do.
 
2013-05-16 03:50:01 PM  

wjllope: dittybopper: You know, I have the original, full-length version of Das Boot on DVD.

I found a director's cut of that DVD in the bargain basket at the supermarket for 4$....

/score


The full thing is better than even the directors cut.

It is, however, best seen as intended:  Over several viewing sessions, not all at once.

/I've had the theatrical release, directors cut, and the full thing.
//I like the dubbing in the theatrical release the best.
///Sexy nurses, pussy...
 
2013-05-16 03:50:43 PM  

ZeroCorpse: Geeks don't care about the science. NERDS do.


And the dorks care about the semantics.
 
2013-05-16 03:52:46 PM  

I_Am_Weasel: Does Slate realize that IT'S A SCIENCE FICTION TELEVISION SHOW!?

Fiction!  Television!  You know.  Fox News.


FTFA: My beef is usually when the plot relies on some error in science, or when the tech is used inconsistently. If you discover, say, a Fountain of Youth in one episode, you'd better establish why everyone in the Federation isn't young after that.
 
2013-05-16 03:53:26 PM  

dittybopper: ArcadianRefugee: Except cell phones require infrastructure; communicators didn't.

Actually, there is no evidence that the communicators didn't require infrastructure, in the form of a starship with very sensitive receivers and powerful transmitters to offset the relatively weak signal of a communicator, just like a cell-site allows you to use a relatively weak and insensitive radio called a 'cell phone'.

Communicators could be fine for relatively short range communication between themselves, but you'll note that mostly they are used for communicating with the ship.


I think that the ST:TNG Technical Manual mentioned something about the communicators being connected to the ship's computer, so that would require some sort of data relay and hence some sort of transmitter/receiver infrastructure.
 
2013-05-16 03:57:51 PM  

theresnothinglft: The biggest mistake in the reboot is that the transporter was able to teleport people onto a moving starship at warp and at across great distances.  Say like beaming from Saturn to Earth in the case of the end of that reboot.  This revelation instantly makes starship travel obsolete.


Oh, it gets worse. Try Earth to the Klingon homeworld with a portable transporter unit the size of a golf club bag.
 
2013-05-16 04:06:07 PM  

dittybopper: wjllope: dittybopper: You know, I have the original, full-length version of Das Boot on DVD.

I found a director's cut of that DVD in the bargain basket at the supermarket for 4$....

/score

The full thing is better than even the directors cut.

It is, however, best seen as intended:  Over several viewing sessions, not all at once.

/I've had the theatrical release, directors cut, and the full thing.
//I like the dubbing in the theatrical release the best.
///Sexy nurses, pussy...


i147.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-16 04:08:27 PM  
I particularly like how the technobabble will change from script to script (aside from "reversing the polarity of the tachyon field emitters" which had to pretty much be a setting on the turn signal stalks).
 
2013-05-16 04:08:57 PM  

RexTalionis: weiserfireman: My brother in law had his life saved by Star Trek

In College, he developed a rare tumor in his sinus cavity that wrapped around his optic nerve and was working its way into his brain.   No surgeon he saw, would touch it with conventional techniques

He ended up in California where a doctor used a proton laser to remove the tumor.    The Doctor is on the record as saying he went into medical research to try and develop some of the medical techniques that he saw in Star Trek

BIL is 5 years cancer free now.   His vision is slightly impaired in one eye as a result of the cancer.   He and my sister have two kids now.

Neat. Something that rarely happens with other big franchises like Star Wars or Doctor Who.


They obviously haven't tried reversing the polarity of the neutron flow yet. That fixes everything.
 
2013-05-16 04:11:39 PM  

FunkOut: demonfaerie: PanicMan: Pocket Ninja: Which was the episode where a bunch of the crew began to devolve and turned into giant spiders and stuff like that?

That's my favorite.

Ehem, it's called Barklay's Syndrome!  Named after the best Star Trek character ever.

[sharetv.org image 392x300]

Would like a word.

I'm always torn between Barclay, Garak, and DcCoy as favourite characters. McCoy was basically Dr. Grumpy Cat with bourbon.


I agree with you there, but I do have as soft spot for Dax. I think she was the only real interesting female character in star trek.

/Garak still my favorite though.
 
2013-05-16 04:13:55 PM  

timujin: Right... because people watch Star Trek (or Star Wars or Firefly or Battlestar Galactica) because they're looking for hard science.  People watch it because they like the setting, characters and stories.  People like to watch stories set in the future (or a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away) in the same way they do ones set in Victorian England or the medieval period.  Sure, there are those demand hard science, but just because Star Trek doesn't follow it is no reason for a "self-respecting geek" to hate it.


Yes, but researching the your subject before hand generally makes for a better story because you either find out some cool stuff that you can work into the story or you tweak the plot to match reality a bit better. For example, Rescue Me was a great show because Dennis Leary tried to be true to real life firefighters he knew. Even if some things are fictionalized, they did enough research and work to make it "feel" real. Skipping the research is just simple lazy writing.
 
2013-05-16 04:14:20 PM  

Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: I_Am_Weasel: Does Slate realize that IT'S A SCIENCE FICTION TELEVISION SHOW!?

Fiction!  Television!  You know.  Fox News.

FTFA: My beef is usually when the plot relies on some error in science, or when the tech is used inconsistently. If you discover, say, a Fountain of Youth in one episode, you'd better establish why everyone in the Federation isn't young after that.


Oh, it'll be because for some reason everyone has decided not to use it. "It ain't natural!" and so on. Or, better yet, someone who thinks like that will destroy it so no one else can use it. "Some things were not meant for mankind!" Blah blah blah.

dittybopper: ArcadianRefugee: Except cell phones require infrastructure; communicators didn't.

Actually, there is no evidence that the communicators didn't require infrastructure, in the form of a starship with very sensitive receivers and powerful transmitters to offset the relatively weak signal of a communicator, just like a cell-site allows you to use a relatively weak and insensitive radio called a 'cell phone'.

Communicators could be fine for relatively short range communication between themselves, but you'll note that mostly they are used for communicating with the ship.


Fair enough. I always assumed that they were short-range communicators with one another, and the reason the ship could communicate with them is simply because, well, it's a farking ship and has better range itself. And since, as you've said, most communications were either ground-to-ship or "local" short-range calls (either to another member of an away team or someone else on the same ship)....

I've always wondered, though, how the communicator knew who you wanted to call. I mean, yes, you said, "Riker to Data" and then it hooked you up to Data, but Data would hear you say, "Riker to Data". So either it somehow hooked you up to him before you even spoke, or it recorded and then replayed your greeting upon connection. More likely the latter, obviously, but I always thought it weird, especially since (when people didn't answer immediately) the caller would repeat the greeting, as if the person should have responded in the 0.68 seconds when they were first hearing your greeting.
 
2013-05-16 04:20:00 PM  
The one that made my brain hurt the most was the Voyager dinosaur episode.  They're trying to figure out if the alien species they've encountered in the Delta quadrant is related to dinosaurs, so Janeway goes into the holodeck and calls up a representation of a raptor-esque dinosaur.

She then says something to the effect of "Computer, show what would happen to this creature after 65 million years of evolution" and *poof* we end up with an exact match to the alien species in question.

EVOLUTION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!
 
2013-05-16 04:22:34 PM  

theresnothinglft: The biggest mistake in the reboot is that the transporter was able to teleport people onto a moving starship at warp and at across great distances.  Say like beaming from Saturn to Earth in the case of the end of that reboot.  This revelation instantly makes starship travel obsolete.

Worse the transporter also shows they can remotely manipulate objects on a quantum level.  In no way is the transporter a 1 shot fire all the atomic goo signal at the target location and it assembles itself correctly.  This goes to ask why they didn't just lock onto the red matter and transporter it into an unstable state.  Also why didn't they just transport the core of one of those torpedos on Nero's ship outside of its casing?

And even better yet, if the transporter is all that great then why does the scanner technology suck to the point where they can't tell if a room is a cargo bay or not from 6 billion miles off?


1. The advanced transport tech was invented by future Scotty after the end of Nemesis, so we don't know what it did to the galaxy. It may well changed how people traveled in space, but we just didn't see it on screen. It's possible old Spock made him hold off on making it public knowledge until the time is right because he doesn't want to screw up the new timeline any further.

2. You can't transport through shields. That's why you don't see boarding parties happen until the shields are down generally, unless it is like Best of Both Worlds where they took the shuttle inside the Borg shield before they transported on to grab Locutus.
 
2013-05-16 04:26:04 PM  
eyeq360:
aerojockey: My favorite is whenever people from Star Trek get upset that with all their technology they still haven't solved Fermat's Last Theorem.

That episode was made before Andrew Wiles actually solved Fermat's Last Theorem.  And I think that the writers of ST:TNG would even want to delve into higher-level mathematics like Galois transformations, eliptical functions, or the Taniyama conjecture, let alone any other kind of mathematics that might even have remotely been useful.


Did he really solve Fermat's Last Theorem? I thought the Fermat margin note that started it mentioned "I have a solution that is too big to fit in the margin here", and Wiles' proof was 100 pages long. Was Fermat just being modest? Maybe Fermat never did have a solution, and he was joking? Or he had a solution and it was wrong... Also, Wiles' proof took 7 years. If Fermat spent any significant time on something wouldn't he leave some sort of evidence behind?
 
2013-05-16 04:33:00 PM  

Mad_Radhu: 1. The advanced transport tech was invented by future Scotty after the end of Nemesis, so we don't know what it did to the galaxy. It may well changed how people traveled in space, but we just didn't see it on screen. It's possible old Spock made him hold off on making it public knowledge until the time is right because he doesn't want to screw up the new timeline any further.


It gets 'confiscated by Starfleet', where, apparently, they have Top. Men. working on it - or they dropped it down a plot hole.
 
2013-05-16 04:33:29 PM  

Serious Black


They obviously haven't tried reversing the polarity of the neutron flow yet. That fixes everything.


Of course it does: if things are hosed up, doing the OPPOSITE of what you were doing should set everything straight.


rectally-extracted theory #682
 
2013-05-16 04:41:12 PM  

StopLurkListen: eyeq360:
aerojockey: My favorite is whenever people from Star Trek get upset that with all their technology they still haven't solved Fermat's Last Theorem.

That episode was made before Andrew Wiles actually solved Fermat's Last Theorem.  And I think that the writers of ST:TNG would even want to delve into higher-level mathematics like Galois transformations, eliptical functions, or the Taniyama conjecture, let alone any other kind of mathematics that might even have remotely been useful.

Did he really solve Fermat's Last Theorem? I thought the Fermat margin note that started it mentioned "I have a solution that is too big to fit in the margin here", and Wiles' proof was 100 pages long. Was Fermat just being modest? Maybe Fermat never did have a solution, and he was joking? Or he had a solution and it was wrong... Also, Wiles' proof took 7 years. If Fermat spent any significant time on something wouldn't he leave some sort of evidence behind?


He found a proof for it though probably not Fermat's.

Or so I'm told.
 
2013-05-16 04:46:06 PM  

Pocket Ninja: Which was the episode where a bunch of the crew began to devolve and turned into giant spiders and stuff like that?

That's my favorite.


Genesis.

Season 4, I think?
 
2013-05-16 04:51:09 PM  
 
2013-05-16 04:52:18 PM  

Sliding Carp: No  "Gentlemen, this computer has an auditory sensor. It can, in effect, hear sounds. By installing a booster, we can increase that capability on the order of one to the fourth power. The computer should bring us every sound occurring on the ship. " ?


Well, that's a math fail right there.
 
2013-05-16 05:05:20 PM  

Mad_Radhu: theresnothinglft: The biggest mistake in the reboot is that the transporter was able to teleport people onto a moving starship at warp and at across great distances.  Say like beaming from Saturn to Earth in the case of the end of that reboot.  This revelation instantly makes starship travel obsolete.

Worse the transporter also shows they can remotely manipulate objects on a quantum level.  In no way is the transporter a 1 shot fire all the atomic goo signal at the target location and it assembles itself correctly.  This goes to ask why they didn't just lock onto the red matter and transporter it into an unstable state.  Also why didn't they just transport the core of one of those torpedos on Nero's ship outside of its casing?

And even better yet, if the transporter is all that great then why does the scanner technology suck to the point where they can't tell if a room is a cargo bay or not from 6 billion miles off?

1. The advanced transport tech was invented by future Scotty after the end of Nemesis, so we don't know what it did to the galaxy. It may well changed how people traveled in space, but we just didn't see it on screen. It's possible old Spock made him hold off on making it public knowledge until the time is right because he doesn't want to screw up the new timeline any further.

2. You can't transport through shields. That's why you don't see boarding parties happen until the shields are down generally, unless it is like Best of Both Worlds where they took the shuttle inside the Borg shield before they transported on to grab Locutus.


These points don't apply to Abram's universe because he rewrote it.  It would have been more compelling if Abram's writers stuck to the original points regarding the transporter:
1.  Thing fails half the time until next gen and later, then it's fairly reliable.
2.  40,000 Km max range (I might be wrong with this number but it seriously wasn't any further than the earth to the moon)
3.  Transporter signal can't go through shields or most dense metals.  It definitely can't go through ionized atmospheres unless it's convenient for the plot or you have pattern enhancers on you.
4.  How the hell does it beam a Q onboard in Voyager and yet they can't stop said Q with a lvl 10 force field?  (ok i digress there)

In Abrams universe the Transporter (as of the first episode in the reboot) had a range of 6  billion KM (Saturn to earth) minimum (I'm reading that they teleport from the Qo'nos to Earth which has to be several thousand light years).  This means at close range it will definitely have the power to penetrate shields.  This is especially true if the beam is anything like normal light in that it loses power with the square of the distance from the source.

IMO just from what JJ did in the reboot with the transporter he is better off shelving it at 2 and starting over again.  It is impossible to have any compelling plot argument after the transporter becomes the main method of travel.  All privacy and economy break down.  Starships are useless and travel is instant.  Travel might as well happen between galaxies too since a suitcase sized unit can get between stars several lightyears apart.


I'll shut up now cause I'm still going to see Startrek into darkness tomorrow night and want to keep from spoiling it for myself.
 
2013-05-16 05:07:31 PM  
OO big edit to above:  Earth to saturn is 1.4 billion KM.  The point's still valid though and they coulda beamed from vulcan onto nero's ship.
 
2013-05-16 05:27:44 PM  

dittybopper: The biggest science mistake in Star Trek is midichlorians.


6/10

you may get some bites. But it was pretty obvious.
Try harder next time
 
2013-05-16 05:30:19 PM  
The daftest thing about the barrier at the edge of the galaxy is that it appeared to be two dimensional - a ring rather than a sphere.  That means you could just fly over or under the damn thing.
 
2013-05-16 05:31:53 PM  
I also never understood why they chose to make Warp 10 an asymptotic limit.  Once you hit Warp 9 you're just add lots of decimal places and it becomes meaningless.
 
2013-05-16 05:42:46 PM  
My problem with the transporter is the fact that two particles of matter can't exist in the same space at the same time. In WoK Bones is worried about being transported into solid rock, but being transported into air (yes, air is still matter) would be just as disastrous. If it were possible, that is. The signal would just bounce off. The only way the transporter could work is if they put a force field around the landing area and pumped all the air out first.
 
2013-05-16 05:46:52 PM  

fusillade762: My problem with the transporter is the fact that two particles of matter can't exist in the same space at the same time. In WoK Bones is worried about being transported into solid rock, but being transported into air (yes, air is still matter) would be just as disastrous. If it were possible, that is. The signal would just bounce off. The only way the transporter could work is if they put a force field around the landing area and pumped all the air out first.



I accept your solution.  Problem solved.
 
2013-05-16 05:49:55 PM  
I'd like to point out here, due to all of the talk about the ReTrek's transporters, that when Roddenberry was developing TNG, his original plan was to have the transporters work over interstellar distances and to do away with starships altogether. Thankfully, he was talked out of this.
 
2013-05-16 05:51:56 PM  

PanicMan: Ehem, it's called Barclay's Syndrome!  Named after the best Star Trek character ever.


I like to think that they named it Barclay's-a-Stupid-F*ckup Disease. Nobody on that ship liked Barclay.

/Also very pleased that the list started off with 'Threshold'
 
2013-05-16 05:52:54 PM  

The Bad Astronomer: Of course there were. My point (not written out as such in the article, but there) is that Star Trek popularized it, made it common among the public.


What?  No it didn't.  Star Trek was made in 1966, and other planets (populated earth-like ones, at that) around other stars had been a staple of science fiction since the 1920s.  There was even an entire subgenre based on the idea (space opera).

Star Trek didn't really create much that was new, it mostly tapped into existing popular SF tropes.  Nothing wrong with that, it's how TV usually works.
 
2013-05-16 05:53:20 PM  

fusillade762: My problem with the transporter is the fact that two particles of matter can't exist in the same space at the same time. In WoK Bones is worried about being transported into solid rock, but being transported into air (yes, air is still matter) would be just as disastrous. If it were possible, that is. The signal would just bounce off. The only way the transporter could work is if they put a force field around the landing area and pumped all the air out first.


Did you forget that there is still a lot of empty space inside solid rock?
 
2013-05-16 06:01:31 PM  

dittybopper: The biggest science mistake in Star Trek is midichlorians.


dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-05-16 06:06:20 PM  
Annnd back from the movie.  I rather enjoyed it.
 
2013-05-16 06:06:26 PM  
KellyX: [fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net image 460x343]

Dammit
 
2013-05-16 06:08:11 PM  

demonfaerie: FunkOut: demonfaerie: PanicMan: Pocket Ninja: Which was the episode where a bunch of the crew began to devolve and turned into giant spiders and stuff like that?

That's my favorite.

Ehem, it's called Barklay's Syndrome!  Named after the best Star Trek character ever.

[sharetv.org image 392x300]

Would like a word.

I'm always torn between Barclay, Garak, and DcCoy as favourite characters. McCoy was basically Dr. Grumpy Cat with bourbon.

I agree with you there, but I do have as soft spot for Dax. I think she was the only real interesting female character in star trek.

/Garak still my favorite though.


Garak and the Doctor.
 
2013-05-16 06:09:30 PM  

IC Stars: fusillade762: My problem with the transporter is the fact that two particles of matter can't exist in the same space at the same time. In WoK Bones is worried about being transported into solid rock, but being transported into air (yes, air is still matter) would be just as disastrous. If it were possible, that is. The signal would just bounce off. The only way the transporter could work is if they put a force field around the landing area and pumped all the air out first.

Did you forget that there is still a lot of empty space inside solid rock?


Sure, but you're bound to have atoms attempting to be in the same space. Or is the human body going to be squeezed into the little pockets where there is empty space? And wouldn't the same problem still exist with air?
 
Displayed 50 of 192 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report