Search

I've written about aspects of this before over the years, but this is the first time I'm trying to put down a synthesis of those ideas. The upshot of my thesis is this: the irony at the heart of the Prophets' existence is that the ability to see all of time as simultaneous both grants them an omniscient perspective but at the same time traps them in an existence they have a frustratingly limited amount of control over.

Let's start by looking at time from two different perspectives.

From our linear perspective, time has a beginning, and an end. Events move according to cause and effect (let's put time travel and changing history aside for now). As we progress along the line, our past fades from view, becoming inaccessible and immutable. Our future, on the other hand, is unknowable and does not come into existence until we reach it. The only point of time on which we can exert any influence at all is the present, and that is only because it has the consequence of affecting the future.

From the Prophets' non-linear perspective, however, it's a very different story. For them, time is not a line but a point - a single moment where everything in the universe, including them, simultaneously comes into being and non-being. There is no past for them, no future, only an eternal present on which they can see everything and act on everything and nothing at the same time - because despite being able to act on the present, they cannot actually change anything because cause and effect are indistinguishable from each other, and also because they know what history is supposed to look like.

It may help to think of the entirety of history from the Prophets' perspective as a stained-glass window that comes into existence (from their point of view) all at the same time and which they can see and experience all at once, every moment, while from our linear point of view, each piece is assembled in sequence. We see only pieces of the window as it forms, while the Prophets can see its final form because for them it all happens in one moment.

This is what ultimately traps them, because they find themselves committed to the pattern that they know and see. One question that we often hear being asked is why the Prophets are so concerned with the Bajoran people? The answer, from this perspective, is simple: they are concerned because linear history says they did, and if they didn't, that would create a paradox that would disrupt their non-linear existence. So the actions they perform are according to the pattern they need to conform to in order to maintain that existence, namely the shape of the window/tapestry they perceive.

That form of the window (which we see as a goal being assembled whereas they already see it as complete) is not a goal, per se, inasmuch as it's what they have to make sure it is that way because it's meant to look that way. The ultimate benefit is not so much specifically the defeat of the pagh-wraiths, but simply because that making sure the final form is what it is will maintain the existence of the Prophets' history/timeline.

For the Prophets, everything is always happening right now, and they cannot depart from their predetermined actions any more than we can stop what's happening to us this specific nanosecond because from their perspective, the past - allowing them to anticipate the present moment and the moments to come - does not exist. And because their very existence is dependent on that single eternal present, they are helpless to do anything but follow what is already in the pattern, what has always been in the pattern. Any deviation from the way that pattern is supposed to be laid down causes them harm (that's what chroniton particles do - they create chronal disruptions), which could threaten their very existence.

To put it another way, the Prophets have to keep to the final shape of the window of history because that's the form that to them has already happened and has always happened. But we poor corporeal monkeys, not being able to see and therefore not bound to that pattern have the ability to change the pieces, or place the pieces in a different sequence, which annoys and terrifies the hell out of them. Annoys because we're not following the sequence which will lead to that finished form, terrifies because the picture in the end may not be consistent with what they know should be, or worse, the whole window could shatter.

So to try and get us to reach that final shape, they give us plans, hints, clues (the orbs, the visions, the emissaries) as to how these funny linear creatures should be building the window/timeline. "Put that piece there - no, there! - and that piece is next... no, not that piece, damn it, and no, you shouldn't even be using that piece!" And they can't tell us directly what to do because that action isn't in the pattern, and thus unavailable to them.

So when Sisko did his suicide run into the wormhole, he was deviating from the assembly instructions, sending the Prophets into an apoplectic fit and explaining their angry confrontation with him. So in the end, faced with losing a vital tool that will enable them to construct that final form versus having to change the shape or picture of it, they are forced to chose to go with Sisko's request, but warn him that the new picture that will be shaped is not going to be something he likes, and that's his punishment for not doing what he's told.

Now, this doesn't mean the Prophets don't have free will. It's that their "free will" is constrained by certain hard, almost insurmountable limits. Firstly, the completely free exercise of will in the same way as linear beings do requires the space and time to exercise it, and as far as the Prophets are concerned, there's no progression of time in which they can exercise the same kind of free will that we do.

It's similar to the concepts in the movie Arrival and "Story of Your Life", the short story it's based on. If understanding the alien language of Heptapod B expands your consciousness so you can perceive the future, does ensuring that it unfolds as you foresee it mean that your free will is abrogated? Or does knowing the future create an obligation that you should act precisely as you foresee it?

(There's also similarities to the differences between Elves and Men in Tolkien's Legendarium, where Elves are doomed to fate while Men are allowed to change their destinies... but that's practically another essay by itself)

From this perspective, the Prophets do have free will - they could very well choose not to act according to the pattern even though the pattern says they will act this way because they've always acted this way. But this is dangerous, as seeing the whole of their existence in this way creates an obligation to act just as the pattern says or else their reality runs the risk of collapsing, or changing into a form which makes them cease to exist.

So to sum up: the Prophets may seem omnipotent, and they have incredible powers, but they are still trapped by their very existence and perception of time.

I like thinking of it this way because it's both mind-blowing and ironic at the same time. Mind-blowing because it forces us to consider the perspective of a species who see everything in time in one single instant and raising the accompanying questions of free will and/or determinism. Ironic because for all the power the Prophets seem to have, they can only exercise it in this fashion.

In that sense, the so-called lesser, linear races have more agency than the gods because of the former's limited perspective, and that's just too delicious for words.

>KIRK: You're bothered by your performance on the Kobayashi Maru. > >SAAVIK: I failed to resolve the situation. > >KIRK: There is no correct resolution. It's a test of character.

The Kobayashi Maru Test is one of the central themes of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. In the movie, it represents the inevitability of defeat, and teaches the lesson that how we face it - with dignity, with acceptance, with strength - is at least as important, if not more so, than how we deal with victory (to paraphrase Kirk early in the movie). As Picard would say in "Peak Performance": "It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life."

And yet, the Test is often misunderstood, especially in terms of what it's actually for, in an in-universe setting. In one interpretation, it plays the same role in a cadet's development as it does thematically in the movie: to show the cadet that there will come a time where a no-win scenario will present itself, and teach the cadet how to deal with it. But then it's not really a test, in that sense, but a lesson.

In another interpretation, the Test is to see how the cadet faces defeat, that is to say, their response to defeat. While I agree that this is certainly an important part of the test, it focuses solely on the aftermath of it and therefore makes the cadet's responses during the test itself irrelevant.

One other interpretation, as seen in the 2009 Star Trek movie, is that the Test is supposed to make a cadet face fear. I've argued before that it seems illogical that Spock would design such a test for the simple reason that fear is an emotion, and at this stage in his life Spock does not (consciously at least) find any value in emotional responses. But this again is not a test, but an experience, an extended hazing exercise with no discernable purpose on the face of it.

The Test may allow for all of these things, but that's not the actual purpose of it. The point is not whether you win or lose, or face defeat or face fear. The fact that it's a command-level exercise tells us that it's supposed to tell the instructors something about the cadet's command performance. It's not just whether a person is fit for command; there's a whole different battery of tests and exams along the way in Command School to find that out. It's about what kind of command they're fit for. While undoubtedly the Test brings in all that the cadet has learned during the course of their Academy training in a simulation, ultimately, it's the cadet's response to the Test during the course of the simulation - not after it, not because of it - that does that.

Do they go in guns blazing? Do they sacrifice their crew against overwhelming odds? Do they try diplomacy? Do they abandon the Kobayashi Maru to its fate? Do they keep trying to win, never giving up, beating their head against a brick wall to the point of insanity? Do they refuse to accept a no-win situation? Do they cheat?

I suspect most cadets would react like most people do - like Saavik did - resent the hell out of the Test and throw themselves into the gauntlet again and again trying to figure out how to beat it, not realizing that said more about them than the Test itself. And so did Kirk, for a time, until he realized that the game was rigged, that the instructors, under normal circumstances, would never allow a victory.

It's likely that the simulation adapts to whatever the cadet does and makes it more difficult on the fly. Try to eject the warp core? The ejectors are frozen due to battle damage. Challenge the Klingon captain to single combat? He refuses because you are undeserving of honor. Defeat the first wave somehow? They just keep coming. Try to run? They catch up. You get the idea. So the only real way to "win" is to reprogram the simulation so it can't adapt to whatever you throw at it.

In that sense, Kirk also missed the point of the no-win scenario, because he wanted to win. At the same time, he was philosophically opposed to the concept of a no-win scenario. So he cheated - changed the conditions just enough so it was possible to rescue the ship and win.

(As a side note, Kirk was a bit hard on himself when he said he'd never faced a no-win scenario: I'd argue that he faced it in "The City on the Edge of Forever" when he had to decide between Edith Keeler and the universe, and he passed that test admirably at great personal cost.)

But Kirk did not frustrate the intentions of the Test, nor did he provide a "wrong" response, because there really is no “correct” resolution. That was why Kirk was never sanctioned for it and in fact got the commendation for pulling off the feat in the first place. Kirk didn't seem to realize that the commendation wasn't a reward for beating the Test - it was for thinking laterally in general by going outside the simulation. The Test had already gotten what it wanted out of Kirk.

In Kirk's response, the instructors recognized a few things: a person who knew when to follow rules, to critically assess them so he knew when to question them and more importantly, when to break or circumvent them, throwing the book away and creating a new one. In his refusal to accept a no-win scenario, they also saw someone that would do whatever was necessary to push ahead in the face of overwhelming odds to search for a solution where seemingly there was none.

And in the wild final frontier of what was then 23rd Century space, which tested and claimed the lives and souls of so many of his peers - Decker, Tracy, et al., he was absolutely the kind of captain that was needed.

Since we now see Kirk as a LT in 2259-60 in SNW, thought I’d take a look back at figuring out his early service history in Starfleet. Originally posted here. Incidentally, Kirk, Tilly and Ortegas were all born in 2233.

——

Since I'm on a chronology kick, here's another analysis - my third in the series, by my reckoning (after sorting out where Uhura's service on Pike's Enterprise fits in and sorting out when each of PIC's seasons take place).

For the longest time, we have been confused about James T. Kirk's early service history. We know that he was born in Iowa, Earth on March 22, 2233, and we know that he took command of the USS Enterprise NCC-1701 in 2265, and commanded her and her successor ship, off-and-on, until his official recorded death in 2293 and subsequently his actual death in 2371. However, what happened between 2233 and 2265 was shrouded in a bit of mystery and confusion (except for his stay on Tarsus IV in 2246 - TOS: “The Conscience of the King”).

Here are the following relevant pieces of the puzzle.

??: ENS Kirk is serving on the USS Republic with Ben Finney "some years" after they first met at the Academy when Finney was an instructor. Kirk logs a mistake which draws Finney a reprimand and gets him sent to the bottom of the promotion list (TOS: "Court Martial").

??: LT Kirk teaches at Starfleet Academy - one of his students is Gary Mitchell (TOS: "Where No Man Has Gone Before").

2255: "[A] brash young LT Kirk on his first planet survey" visits Neural, 13 years prior to his next visit in 2268 (TOS: "A Private Little War").

2257: Kirk is serving on the USS Farragut, under CPT Garrovick, who was his CO "from the day [Kirk] left the Academy", when Garrovick is killed by a dikironium cloud creature, which Kirk re-encounters 11 years later (TOS: "Obsession").

If you look at these pieces, the conundrum becomes obvious. What ship was Kirk serving on when he left the Academy? When did he actually graduate? Which ship visited Neural? Was it the Republic or the Farragut? Did Garrovick command both the Republic and the Farragut in succession? When did Kirk teach Gary Mitchell?

There are all kinds of theories to try and reconcile this, and you'll find discussions on Memory Alpha about it. But recently, in the Season 1 finalé of SNW: "A Quality of Mercy", we get a glimpse of Kirk's service record. Granted, it's from an alternate timeline, but the divergent event being Pike's survival, Kirk's record precedes that, so we can be fairly sure that the Prime Kirk has the same record.

Kirk's service record in that episode states this as his assignment history:

>USS Farragut

>Starfleet Academy

>USS Republic

We'll take it as it's in reverse chronological order, as most resumés are. While production art is always a toss-up, I think this gives us a decent basis to build an hypothesis on. What this tells us is that that the Republic came first - which tracks, as that's the lowest rank we have on Kirk at the time.

We also see that a Starfleet Academy assignment comes between his Republic stint and his service on the Farragut. This offers us a way to reconcile Kirk's claim that Garrovick was his CO "from the day [Kirk] left the Academy" - namely, Kirk wasn't talking about his graduation, he was talking about him leaving his instructor post.

Now we can get down to the details: what year did Kirk graduate? It had to be before 2255, and possibly at least a year or two before that, to fit in his Academy stint and his service on the Republic. If we take it that he entered the Academy at the usual age, which would be the year he turns 19, that would be 2252 and would graduate in the normal scheme of things in May 2256 (I assume May because the standard academic year in the US goes usually from September to May/June - the US Naval Academy graduates their classes in May).

But that doesn't jibe with our chronology, which requires that he be a LT in 2255. Which leads me to the idea that Kirk entered the Academy early - perhaps at age 17. As I've mentioned before, early entry to the Academy is possible: Wesley Cruser took the entrance exams when he was 16 (TNG: “Coming of Age”), presumably to enter when he was 17. If Kirk did the same, he could have entered the Academy as early as 2250, which would mean he graduated in May 2254 as an ENS.

We see in PIC: "The Star Gazer" (which I'd previously established as September 2400) Picard giving an address to cadets. We know the audience is cadets because Elnor is there and he specifically calls Elnor out as the first Romulan cadet. After the speech, the cadets get their assignments.

If we assume that things have not changed since Kirk's day in terms of the timing, then ENS Kirk would have gotten his assignment in September 2254 to the USS Republic. Squeezing in the Finney incident and his reassignment to Starfleet Academy in later 2254 to early 2255 is just possible.

Perhaps the Finney incident earned Kirk a quick promotion to LT due to his diligence but made Kirk unpopular enough among the rest of the Republic crew that they felt it'd be better for him to be reassigned to another starship.

So LT Kirk gets put into the Academy in a holding position as an instructor where he gains his reputation as a "stack of books on legs" and seriously dates a "blonde technician" that Gary Mitchell throws his way to get Kirk off his back. Then, in September 2255, the brash young lieutenant gets his next assignment, the USS Farragut and Garrovick really does become his CO from the day he left the Academy.

Later that same year the Farragut visits Neural and Kirk makes his first planetary survey and meets Tyree. He serves under Garrovick for two years, until the latter is killed by the dikironium vampire in 2257.

That also means he was still on Farragut during the Klingon War of 2256-2257. It's reasonable to think the ship may have seen some action during this period, which could go some way to explaining Kirk's general antipathy towards Klingons in TOS even before he held them responsible for David Marcus' death.

If my hypothesis is correct, then Kirk really was a wunderkind. Early entry into the Academy at 17, a quick promotion to LT by the time he was 22, then battle-tested both in the Klingon War and in a fight that killed his captain. As a teenager younger than most of his peers in the Academy, he would have more likely thrown himself into his studies than socialized much (although he did get involved with Ruth at some point then - TOS: "Shore Leave").

This version of events would explain his reputation as a nerd, why he was an easy target for an upperclassman like Finnegan (TOS: "Shore Leave", again) and how it gave rise to his general sense of loneliness and isolation as a commander (TOS: "Balance of Terror" and "The Ultimate Computer", to give two examples) and of course his sense of responsibility and guilt tempered by the Finney incident and the death of Garrovick.

Kirk's quick promotion ahead of his peers also fits with and gives an added layer to the conversation between McCoy and Kirk in TOS: "The Corbormite Maneuver":

>MCCOY: I'm especially worried about Bailey. Navigator's position's rough enough for a seasoned man.

>KIRK: I think he'll cut it.

>MCCOY: Oh? How so sure? Because you spotted something you liked in him, something familiar, like yourself say about, oh, 11 years ago?

>BAILEY [OC]: On the double, deck five! Give me a green light.

>KIRK: Why, Doctor, you've been reading your textbooks again?

>MCCOY: I don't need textbooks to know you could've promoted him too fast. Listen to that voice.

"The Corbormite Maneuver" takes place in 2266, and 11 years puts McCoy’s reference to 2255, which tallies with Kirk's time as a LT. McCoy would know how fast Kirk got promoted, which is why McCoy is accusing Kirk of overpromoting Bailey just because he reminds Kirk of himself.

As an added note, in TOS: “Court Martial” when Kirk goes to the Starbase 11 bar and meets with some unfriendly members of his graduating class, at least two of them look older than Kirk which might also support the early entry hypothesis.

I know that none of this was intended by the production team, but sometimes I marvel how with a little imagination, it can all fit together so nicely and lend insight into previous episodes.

(Sadly, this analysis removes my previous hypothesis that Kirk and Tilly were from the same graduating class.)

Thanks for sticking with this, and any questions are welcome.

(originally posted here)

A recent post talked about the inherent contradiction between what Vulcans espouse and the way they treat other races and concluded that their culture is an open lie.

There are some excellent responses to this thesis, which I feel is a bit exaggerated and based on a misconception. Of course, Vulcans are not homogenous, and we can also go into the what I consider the very plausible fan theory that the differences between Romulans and Vulcans are down to their version of the Eugenics War(s). But I’ll save my ideas about what drove the Romulans and Vulcans apart philosophically for another time.

We know that Vulcans have emotions, but they keep a tight rein on them. Keeping a tight rein of them also inevitably means that sometimes the reins can loosen, and sometimes involuntarily.

I've recently spoken a few times in comments about Vulcan logic and how it's often misunderstood as being similar to when humans talk about logic. So this has prompted me towards writing another post which tries to synthesize most of what I've said about Vulcans over the years on Daystrom in one place - for my own edification and easy reference if nothing else. Given that it’s 8 years today since Nimoy left us, it seems appropriate.

VULCAN LOGIC ≠ HUMAN LOGIC

Diane Duane, in her excellent novels Spock’s World and The Romulan Way, among others, fleshed out Vulcan philosophy and Romulan codes of honor. I should note that Duane’s writings on Vulcan culture and history were tremendously influential on the Vulcan Arc in ENT’s 4th Season and have also made their way into more recent Star Trek series.

What Duane came up with, and I wholeheartedly endorse, is that what is logic for Vulcans is not quite the same was what we humans understand it to be for ourselves.

Human logic is a system of thinking, a method of reasoning. It is defined by clear rules, cause and effect, propositions, inferences and steps. It is a metric - rules of thumb to solve problems, and is not designed as a view of the universe. Rather, it assumes a particular view already, and works from there. Vulcan logic isn’t the same.

C’THIA AND ARIE’MNU - REALITY-TRUTH AND PASSION’S MASTERY

Duane’s idea is that Vulcan logic is more foundational and philosophical in nature. The word “logic” is our English/Federation Standard translation of the word/concept cthia, which literally means “reality-truth”. Cthia is the concept of seeing empirical reality for what it is, rather than what we wish it to be. To practice cthia is to face the universe with the utmost objectivity, without bias or preconception, emotional or otherwise, in order to promote the clearest reasoning and rationality.

This goes beyond using logic to solve problems, which of course it’s still useful for. But it is also a viewpoint that is supposed to be the basis for modern Vulcan culture: to state things plainly, without hiding behind metaphor, to put aside emotion lest it taint the cold assessment of facts. It also demands that one recognize nuance, to take in all the variables and not be rigid about it, to recognize the fact that, while you may be logical in the Vulcan sense, the universe itself may not be, and you have to deal with that, too (more on that below).

This also ties in with Duane’s other term: arie’mnu, or “passion’s mastery”, recently made canon by President T’Rina’s mention of it in DIS: “Choose to Live”. Arie’mnu is often misunderstood by non-Vulcans as the denial of emotion, but it is more about the control of it, to direct the aggression of the Vulcan psyche towards the practice of cthia, creating the conditions for the effective exercise of Vulcan logic.

We also have to recognize that cthia and arie’mnu are ideals, and not everyone manages to attain this, and the degree to which one is able to exercise this varies from Vulcan to Vulcan and even from day to day. Some eschew it entirely - like the v’tosh ka’tur, the so-called “Vulcans without logic” who embrace their emotional side, or keep a looser lid on it. Most Vulcans act cold because the Vulcan heart rages so profoundly that they are taught that to try to play fast and loose with arie’mnu is reckless and leads to a loss of control. That’s why the v’tosh ka’tur are viewed with such suspicion and treated accordingly.

Some even try to exercise what they consider the highest form of arie’mnu - the kolinahr ritual which attempts to purge all emotion from the Vulcan psyche (TMP). Again, this is something that not everyone is able to achieve. Spock tried, but failed because he could not get rid of his emotional attachment to Jim Kirk, and when Vejur called out, it called out to the human, emotional part of him. Spock managed to integrate his Vulcan and human “souls” better in later years, but that’s another story.

SURAK, THE KIR’SHARA AND THE VULCAN REFORMATION POST-2154

Cthia and arie’mnu are Surakian concepts, taught by him during the Time of Awakening, sometime around 350 CE (ENT: “Awakening”, in 2154, is said to be 1,800 years after that time), in order to stop the wars that were tearing Vulcan apart. And we have to remember that Surak’s teachings, in their original form, were lost for a very, very long time. It wasn’t until the mid-22nd century that Surak’s Kir’Shara, the artifact containing his writings, was rediscovered.

So we have to remember that the Vulcans in ENT, who are surly, arrogant, even to a degree emotional at times when dealing with humans and each other, are representative of Vulcans before Surak’s original teachings are rediscovered, so their understanding of cthia, arie’mnu, Vulcan logic and so on are necessarily imperfect. It was only after the rediscovery of the Kir’Shara that Vulcan society became closer to what Surak envisioned it to be. ENT’s Vulcans have to be seen in that context.

But even so, not every one succeeds. Even after ENT we’ve seen arrogant Vulcans, irritated Vulcans, and even angry Vulcans. We’ve seen Vulcans twist logic to their own selfish ends, or to justify repugnant positions. But this shouldn’t be a surprise, and it equally shouldn’t cause us to make sweeping generalizations about Vulcan logic. Every Vulcan is different, and to recognize that is also to practice cthia.

VULCANS LIE

Vulcans lying (and lying about lying) is a - pardon the term - fascinating subject, and I would argue that it actually does come from cthia. Objectively, while Vulcans celebrate Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations (which is also a recognition of empirical fact) the fact that they are usually the smartest people in the room and that most races - humans in particular - seem like toddlers on a drunken galactic rampage means that they naturally assume a parental stance, especially in the 22nd Century when their understanding of Surakian philosphy is inexact at best.

And it is perfectly in line with recognizing that reality that they would lie to “lesser races”, just to achieve greater goals in what they think is keeping those races safe or to maintain the peace. Spock lies quite readily in ST II and ST III but that’s always in service of a greater good. For Vulcans, the ends justifying the means, in certain situations, is logical. Rigid morality doesn’t come into it.

Now, I’m not saying they’re justified in their arrogance and condescension - as Spock put it in TOS: “A Taste of Armageddon”: “I do not approve. I understand.”

VULCAN RITUAL IS LOGICAL

If Vulcans are so logical, why do they shroud their past in ritual and custom?

Well, from a Vulcan perspective, one should first ask, "What is the function of ritual?" The usual function of rites and rituals is to preserve traditions handed down from the past, to provide a sense of continuity, to reinforce certain principles and tenets, and as an expression of those tenets and practices even if - at times - the person performing the ritual doesn't quite understand them, but the idea is that with study and repetition, they will understand in time.

In a sense, it's like military drilling, or kata in martial arts. When internalized, ritual becomes like muscle memory, a macro that carries with it all the practices and principles without the need to rationalize every step which, for whatever reason, is inefficient or unnecessary to do so. It is in this function which I think that the first Vulcan ritual we observe in TOS: "Amok Time" serves. Spock says:

> SPOCK: The birds and the bees are not Vulcans, Captain. If they were, if any creature as proudly logical as us were to have their logic ripped from them as this time does to us. How do Vulcans choose their mates? Haven't you wondered?

> KIRK: I guess the rest of us assume that it's done quite logically.

> SPOCK: No. No. It is not. We shield it with ritual and customs shrouded in antiquity. You humans have no conception. It strips our minds from us. It brings a madness which rips away our veneer of civilisation. It is the pon farr. The time of mating.

During pon farr, Vulcan stoicism and their ability to suppress their emotions breaks down and they need external help to maintain civilized behaviour. That's where the ritual of the kun-ut-kali-fee comes in, so even if the plak tow - blood fever - is at full pitch, some part of the Vulcan knows that there is a procedure to be followed which will guide them through the worst of it and out the other side. They don't need to think, to reason out in what way or why this will help them; they know that it works, and they simply need to follow this road.

So this is perfectly logical! Rather than find some way to suppress the pon farr itself, the Vulcans recognize the reality-truth - the cthia - of their biology and come up with a metric to deal with it. Rather than re-invent the wheel at every step, they take the tried and tested route.

The more you think about not wanting to do something, the more your brain has to struggle. It’s like telling someone not to think of a white elephant. So beyond pon farr, ritual allows Vulcans to more easily practice arie’mnu in their daily lives. This also allows them to appreciate music, art, beauty, even games without the attendant emotional attachments. Structure, order, symmetry, clarity: these are all part of what Vulcans find aesthetically pleasing because they reinforce the central tenets of Vulcan logic.

Vulcans are always aware of their emotional, wild heritage and how it can easily explode. So every step of their lives is perfectly ordered and laid out in order to keep this emotional self in check. The discipline is paramount, for without it they believe their civilization as it is now could not exist.

THIS IS THE VULCAN HEART, THIS IS THE VULCAN SOUL

T’Pau said it best (in reference to ritual): "This is the Vulcan heart. This is the Vulcan soul." Fiery passion and razor-sharp intellect wrapped in millennia of history and tradition and discipline to create the highest understanding. And to practice it is to bring a net positive to that passion, to improve the universe. Spock said this in TOS: “The Squire of Gothos”, a line still close to my heart:

>SPOCK: I object to you. I object to intellect without discipline. I object to power without constructive purpose.

Vulcan logic is ultimately an ideal - and on a personal note, one I think is really cool and worth examining and even emulating - in the right context, of course.

(originally posted here)

Very often I see people confidently think or claim that the Star Trek warp drive works like the warp "drive" first proposed by physicist Miguel Alcubierre in 1994. Unfortunately, this is in error (I put "drive" in quotes because Alcubierre apparently dislikes calling it a drive, preferring to call it a "warp bubble"). As Alcubierre himself says, it was Star Trek that gave him the inspiration for his metric, not the other away around.

Why there is this conflation may be because people desperately want to think that Star Trek is based on hard scientific principles, or that the same principles in Star Trek are actively being worked on in real life. I don't propose to speculate further. There are also several fan ideas and beta canon ideas in licensed fiction about warp drive (notably in the excellent novel Federation by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens) but for the sake of brevity, I'm limiting my discussion to what we see on-screen and related behind-the-scenes documents.

Background

The basic obstacle to superluminal or faster-than-light travel is Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. Special Relativity says that as the velocity of an object with mass accelerates towards the speed of light (c), the mass of that object increases, requiring more and more energy to accelerate it, until at c, that object has infinite mass, requiring infinite energy to push it past c. In fact, Special Relativity says that nothing with mass can reach c - photons are massless and can only travel at c. From there, it follows that theoretical objects with negative mass can only travel above c, hence given the name tachyons, from the Greek tachys, or “fast”.

Alcubierre wondered: if you can't move the object/ship without running into relativistic issues, why not move space instead? Alcubierre's idea was to warp space in two ways - contract space in front of the ship and expand space behind it, an effect he compares to a person on a travelator. So while the ship itself remains stationary in a flat area of spacetime between the two areas of warped space (the whole thing being the "warp bubble"), that flat area gets moved along like a surfboard on the wave of warped space. Of course, warping spacetime in this manner involves incredible amounts of negative energy, but that's another discussion.

So this is how the Alcubierre metric circumvents relativistic issues. Because the ship itself remains essentially motionless, there is no acceleration or velocity and thus no increase in inertial mass.

But that's not how Star Trek’s warp drive works, and has never been.

Warp Drive pre-TNG

There is no description on how Star Trek warp drive works on screen in TOS except perhaps for a vague pronouncement that the "time barrier's been broken" in TOS: "The Cage" (in the episode Spock also calls it a "hyperdrive" and refers to "time warp factors").

During the production of Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979), science consultant Jesco von Puttkamer, at the time an aerospace engineer working at a senior position in NASA, wrote in a memo to Gene Roddenberry dated 10 April 1978 (The Making of Star Trek: The Motion Picture by Susan Sackett and Gene Roddenberry, 1980, pp153-154) his proposal for how warp drive was supposed to work, in a way eeriely similar to Alcubierre's metric:

>When going “into Warp Drive,” the warp engines in the two propulsion pods create an intense field which surrounds the entire vessel, forming a “subspace”, i.e. a space curvature closed upon itself through a Warp, a new but small universe within the normal Universe (or “outside” it). The field is nonsymmetrical with respect to fore-and-aft, in accordance with the outside geometry of the Enterprise, but it can be strengthened and weakened at localized areas to control the ship’s direction and apparent speed.

>Because of the its non-symmetry about the lateral axis, the subspace becomes directional. The curvature of its hypersurface varies at different points about the starship. This causes a “sliding” effect, almost as a surf-board or a porpoise riding before the crest of a wave. The subspace “belly-surfs” in front of a directionally propagating “fold” in the spacetime structure, the Warp - a progressive, partial collapse of spacetime caused by the creation of the subspace volume (similar to but not the same as a Black Hole).

But there's no evidence that Roddenberry actually used this concept. In fact, Puttkamer said further in the memo that at warp, Enterprise would have "little or no momentum", which we will see is not how it's portrayed. Puttkamer was even against the now famous rainbow effect of going into warp:

>The effect should not be firework-type lights but a more dimensional, geometric warping and twisting, an almost stomach-turning wrenching of the entire camera field-of-view.

So while an interesting document, there's no evidence that Puttkamer's ideas made it into any on screen incarnation of Star Trek.

Warp Drive in TNG and beyond

In TNG, the first publicly available description of how warp drive is supposed to work came from the licensed Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual (1991). At page 65:

>WARP PROPULSION

>The propulsive effect is achieved by a number of factors working in concert. First, the field formation is controllable in a fore-to-aft direction. As the plasma injectors fire sequentially, the warp field layers build according to the pulse frequency in the plasma, and press upon each other as previously discussed. The cumulative field layer forces reduce the apparent mass of the vehicle and impart the required velocities. The critical transition point occurs when the spacecraft appears to an outside observer to be travelling faster than c. As the warp field energy reaches 1000 millicochranes, the ship appears driven across the c boundary in less than Planck time, 1.3 x 10^-43 sec, warp physics insuring that the ship will never be precisely at c. The three forward coils of each nacelle operate with a slight frequency offset to reinforce the field ahead of the Bussard ramscoop and envelop the Saucer Module. This helps create the field asymmetry required to drive the ship forward.

As described here, Star Trek warp drive gets around Special Relativity by using the warp field to distort space around and lower the inertial mass of the ship so that the shaping of the warp fields and layers around the ship can push and accelerate the ship itself towards c with reasonable energy requirements. The stronger the field (measured in units of millicochranes), the lower the inertial mass gets and it becomes easier to accelerate. When the field hits a strength of 1000 millicochranes, the ship pushes past the c barrier. Presumably at this stage it's in subspace, where Relativity no longer applies, and can accelerate even faster to each level of warp until the next limit at Warp 10 (TNG scale), or infinite speed. I'm not getting into how warp factors are defined (but see here for a discussion on the change between TOS and TNG warp scales, which also goes into the definition of warp factors, if interested).

The Technical Manual was written by Rick Sternbach and Michael Okuda, who were both technical consultants behind the scenes, and evolved from a document prepared by them in 1989 (3rd Season) to aid writers on the show in writing the technobabble in their script. (See also the history here.)

Here’s what the first, 3rd Season edition says about the way warp works, which is simply that the drive “warps space, enabling the ship to travel faster than light,” and that the ship is “‘suspended in a bubble’ of ‘subspace’, which allows the ship to travel faster than light”. This description also shows up in the 4th Season edition, and the Star Trek: Voyager Technical Guide (1st Season edition) in identical form.

While the actual text of the manual never made it on screen, there are several pieces of on-screen evidence that tell us Sternbach and Okuda's description of warp drive is followed: warp fields lower inertial mass, and the ship experiences acceleration and inertial forces during warp.

Evidence of warp fields lowering inertial mass

In TNG: "Deja Q" (1990), Enterprise-D uses a warp field to change the inertial mass of a moon:

>LAFORGE: You know, this might work. We can't change the gravitational constant of the universe, but if we wrap a low level warp field around that moon, we could reduce its gravitational constant. Make it lighter so we can push it.

Later in that episode, we see the effect the warp field has on the moon:

>DATA: Inertial mass of the moon is decreasing to approximately 2.5 million metric tonnes.

At the time "Deja Q" was broadcast, all that was said about warp drive in the technical guide was that warp drive "warps space" and the ship is in a subspace bubble with no mention of lowering inertial mass. Yet "Deja Q" shows warp fields doing exactly that, which tells us that either the writer gave Sternbach and Okuda that idea or they already had their ideas in place behind the scenes. The latter is more likely, given that the Technical Manual was published the following year.

In DS9: "Emissary" (1993), O'Brien and Dax use a warp field to lower the mass of the station so they can use thrusters to "fly" the station to where the wormhole is.

>DAX: Couldn't you modify the subspace field output of the deflector generators just enough to create a low-level field around the station?

>O'BRIEN: So we could lower the inertial mass?

>DAX: If you can make the station lighter, those six thrusters will be all the power we'd need.

Evidence of inertia during warp

We've known from TOS on that during warp speed, inertia still exists. If it didn't, then there wouldn't be the bridge crew being subjected to inertial forces when maneuvering at warp speeds and being tossed around the bridge (TOS: "Tomorrow is Yesterday", when Enterprise slingshots around the sun at warp - with the last reported speed being Warp 8 on the TOS scale).

In TMP (1979), we see Enterprise accelerating to warp speed before the engine imbalance creates a wormhole.

>KIRK: Warp drive, Mr Scott. Ahead, Warp 1, Mr Sulu.

>SULU: Accelerating to Warp 1, sir. Warp point 7… point 8… Warp 1, sir.

As noted, a ship using the Alcubierre metric doesn't need to accelerate, because it's space that's moving, not the ship. Additionally there'd be no need for an inertial dampening field (as we see in TNG and beyond) that is supposed to protect the crew when accelerating to superluminal speeds. From VOY: "Tattoo" (1995):

>KIM: Could we go to warp under these conditions?

>PARIS: The ship might make it without inertial dampers, but we'd all just be stains on the back wall.

In the 2009 Star Trek movie, Enterprise was unable to go to warp unless the external inertial dampeners were disengaged.

>SULU: Uh, very much so, sir. I'm, uh, not sure what's wrong.

>PIKE: Is the parking brake on?

>SULU: Uh, no. I'll figure it out, I'm just, uh...

>SPOCK: Have you disengaged the external inertial dampener?

>(Sulu presses a couple buttons)

>SULU: Ready for warp, sir.

>PIKE: Let's punch it.

If there's no acceleration or inertia, there's no reason why them being on would impede warp drive operation.

Closing Remarks

Taking all these pieces into account, I hope I've shown convincingly that the way the show treats Star Trek warp drive is consistent with a drive system that involves acceleration and inertial forces, and with warp fields that lower inertial mass - just like Sternbach and Okuda describe in the Technical Manual, and definitely not consistent with way the Alcubierre metric is supposed to work.

For those who want a deep dive into Star Trek warp physics, some canon and some speculative, I heartily recommend Ex Astris Scientia's series of articles on warp propulsion. I also recommend Jason W. Hinson's series on "Relativity and FTL Travel". Hinson was a regular participant in rec.arts.startrek.tech in the 90s and educated us on how Relativity worked and how it applied to Star Trek.