Star Trek time travel poll

[Ocicat]

So, Spock (and Nero) traveled back in time, and changed the future.  But did they also change the past?  If the original Spock were to find a way to travel further back in time, back to Earth in the 1930's, would he find a younger copy of himself and (original) Kirk there, from the episode "The City on the Edge of Forever", trying to build a device to peer into the future using stone knives and bear skins?

Or when the new timeline was established, did it also change that part of the past?

[eytanz]

Oooh, great question. I like.

[Russell Nash]

I need a little more information.  We have time A, standard future Star Trek time; time B, time when first change was made; and time C new trip to past.  I need dates for time B and C. 

[Ocicat]

I need a little more information.  We have time A, standard future Star Trek time; time B, time when first change was made; and time C new trip to past.  I need dates for time B and C. 

Not quite sure I understand the question.  You want want stardates for some points A, B, and C?  Or are those supposed to be different timelines?

Basically, you have Star Trek, the original show.  Spock goes through that, including a side trip back to the 1930s, and the 1980's to get a whale, etc... all without making (major) changes to the timeline.  Then he gets older and goes through TNG timeframe, eventually ending up on Romulus.  Sometime after the Voyager timeframe, Romulus is destroyed, and Spock and Nero go back in time.  Then you have the new Star Trek movie.

All I want to know is if the new timeline has a copy of the older Kirk and spock in the 1930's (and 1980s, and 1960s...).  So say that old Spock works for a few years to build a time machine, while young Kirk and Spock go off on the Enterprise and have *different* adventures.  Old Spock then (a few years after arriving) goes back to the 1930's again.

If he found himself from TOS there, maybe he could even restore the timeline!  Just take himself aside, and tell him how to save Romulus.  Kinda makes your head hurt, doesn't it?

[Listener]

I would say MAYBE. Because it's entirely possible that the same circumstances that led the Enterprise to the Forever world will happen again.

I would posit that becase Kirk is (I believe) 32 at the start of TOS, and Kirk is 21 at the end of Star Trek 11, someone else might be captaining the Enterprise at the time of the Forever world incident... or a different ship might be sent.

In all probability, Kirk & co are not in the 1930s right now... but it's likely SOMEONE is.

[Planish]

I voted "Other time paradox theory that I will explain below..."

Every trip into the past splits off a new timeline and, therefore, a new universe. That's why it should be real hard to do.

If a "grandfather paradox"-type event occurs during a trip back in time, that new timeline is not a bifurcation, but a pinched-off bubble universe sort of thing.

[izzardfan]

There was a story on the 365 Tomorrows site that started a similar discussion on their forum.

[Praxis]

Answer - B/No

Although, from the events that happen in the latest film it turns out that two ships came back from the future and, after a bit, wiped out a planet and had some battles, this was always going to happen from the point of view of the universe/timeline in which the film occurs.

So, later in this this universe/timeline's future, there likely would not be Kirk et al going back to 1930's anywhere (although there could of course be other time-travellers).

Basically, if it is possible for time-travel to the past to change events then either
a) there is no linearity-restrictions such that past events have to cause the correct future ones (i.e. paradoxes can occur, in which case....well, anything can happen so who cares?)  or
b) changes in the past create new universes or timelines  or
c) you can go back but the same events will still occur, whatever you do when you travel.

(And c) is a non-starter since clearly things have changed.)

[Planish]

c) you can go back but the same events will still occur, whatever you do when you travel.

(And c) is a non-starter since clearly things have changed.)

I think that (c) is merely a cautionary tale. It's a variation of the "don't mess with Mother Nature" or maybe the "you can't cheat the Devil" type, invented by unimaginative writers ... lazy writers ... oppressive parents ... conservative writers.

[Ocicat]

I think the old Kirk and Spock have to be there, in the 1930's... and here's why:

Time travel has to always work the same way.  In "City on the Edge of Forever" Kirk and Spock did change time, they created a new alternate reality.  It just wasn't *very* alternate.  When they went forward again, everything looked more or less the same. 

The old Spock in the movie comes from this new timeline.  When he goes back, the establishing moment of the timeline - Bone's encounter with Edith Keeler - has to still be there.

Look at it this way: what a year after the events of the movie, new Kirk goes back in time a year, to the middle of the film.  While there, he changes things so that Vulcan doesn't get blown up.  So, now we have yet another timeline.  But this new reality still has old Spock from TOS in it.  Otherwise it just doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.  He can't go back and suddenly find himself in the TOS past, where his father never died.  That reality is inaccessible, just like the 1930's without Kirk and Spock now is.

And yes, this pretty much means we should see time travelers from hundreds of alternate futures around.  Which is actually kind of like the X-Men comics, when you think about it.