Talk:Alternate timeline

From Memory Alpha, the free Star Trek reference.

Contents 1 Page function 2 Shockwave 3 Voyage Home 4 Enterprise 5 Open/closed timelines, and parallel universes 6 Tapestry 7 Article needs rewrite

[edit] Page function

I'm just thinking - shouldn't this page deal more with the actual alternate timelines themselves, rather than simply stating when an alternate timeline appeared in Trek? That's what I thought it was aimed at being. After all, we've had mentions of alternate timelines popping up in the main timeline (taken directly from the Chronology, which does this as well), and it might be interesting to include things like a timeline of alternate events in say, "Twilight" or "Endgame".

In addition, some of these episodes mentioned are not alternate timelines as such, but appearances of temporal anomalies and/or time travel occurances. The Mirror Universe episodes would not be an alternate timeline in the strictest sense, since they are considered to be a separate universe of their own (same with the alternatives portrayed in "Parallels"). -- DarkHorizon 14:36, 1 Jan 2004 (PST)

Anyone? -- DarkHorizon 10:47, 20 Jan 2004 (PST)

I think we should keep the list of AT appearances, but have at least one or two sentences per entry to actually clarify what exactly the AT is in this episode, and what happened to it in relation to the "original" timeline... For example:

• TOS:COTEOF - When McCoy travels to the past, he accidentally changes the history by saving the life of Edith Keeler. This leads to [...], observed by Kirk and Spock in the present. They also travel to the past and restore the original timeline.

-- Cid Highwind 01:05, 2 Apr 2004 (PST)

And of course mention whether the time-line in question is open or closed. -- Redge 10:40, 15 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Seems to me that an alternate timeline is something in which our own universe is physically altered, whereas a parallel universe is exactly that -- a separate universe unaffected by changes in ours. To wit, in order to "return" from an alternate timeline, you have to "right" the course of history, e.g., stop a change from happening, or profoundly limit its effects. That's because if you don't, "your" universe simply does not exist; it's replaced by something else. However, with a parallel universe like the Mirror Universe, it exists elsewhere, and "your" universe still exists. It is possible to return from it without any alterations necessary. Both continue independent from each other. --DNJimerson 04:01, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shockwave

Does this episode actually include an alternate timeline? All we have is Daniels mentioning that something "shouldn't have happened that way"... -- Cid Highwind 01:05, 2 Apr 2004 (PST)

Yes, the 'destroyed San Francisco' timeline that Daniels creates by yanking Archer from Enterprise. -- Michael Warren 19:05, 15 Jun 2004 (CEST)

The beginning premise of Star Trek: Enterprise and the Temporal Cold War is an attempt by the writer's / producers to sort of find a loophole in keeping the integrity of Star Trek intact. By creating events in the first three seasons the way they did, many decades of mistakes, inconstitancies, and budget problems can thus be attributed to an "alternate timeline". Brannon Braga and Ronald D. Moore admitted as much, that they intend to "clean the slate" to make the burden of maintaining the integrity of Star Trek a little easier for them. So, don't be surprised if episodes like VOY: "Threshold" end up in another timeline in some way.--Mike Nobody 05:24, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Voyage Home

how is voyage home an alernate timeline? for that matter, how is First contact? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.43.160.6 (talk).

Off the top of my head I cannot think of one for ST IV, but First Contact had a visible alternate timeline where the Earth is entirely assimilated by the Borg. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 15:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

In Voyage Home, Kirk and his crew traveled to the past and brought two whales back, as well as a Scientist with them (whose name escapes me) --Sml 22:26, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget that very breifly in First Contact, the borg managed to assimilate Earth, this was observed as the Enterprise entered the temporal wake, or whatever the heck it was. Then the Enterprise traveled through time and blew up the sphere and helped make First Contact a reality. Then this links to the whole borg-paradox and so on and so-forth. --Curst Saden 09:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That's what Cobra already said. --Alan 17:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Enterprise

do "many fans" really think that ST:Enterprise took place in an alternate timeline? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.6.48.193 (talk).

Sadly, yes. I've run into enough on here to constitute "many", although that is partly because "many" really is not all that descriptive a number. It could mean 20 people. It isn't like the word "majority". --OuroborosCobra ^talk 04:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know -- I think that there's plenty of evidence to contradict the idea that ST:Enterprise is all just a dream (which would be the net result of it taking place in some other timeline). Obviously, the events in the final episode suggest that the crew of the Enterprise-D knew about Archer's missions. I don't think this speculation about "many fans" believing something so radical about a non-canon alternate timeline belongs in this article. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.6.37.200 (talk).

There is lots of evidence we landed on the moon, yet many people still believe we faked it. We are not saying in this article that Enterprise was an alternate timeline, only that a bunch of bat crazy people think it is. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 13:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

If the standard for inclusion in this encyclopedia is "many fans believe it" then we'll have all kinds of misinformation on every page. I can find 20 people who believe that Kirk and Spock were lovers, for example. Does that mean we should put that information on each page where Kirk and Spock are mentioned? I have no problem with this "theory" appearing on the main page for Enterprise, I guess, but it most certainly doesn't belong here on a page about alternate timelines. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.6.37.200 (talk).

Fans don't write canon. --Alan 17:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Open/closed timelines, and parallel universes

The article acknowledges that the definitions of open and closed alternate timelines given here are not from a canon source, so I assume none is available. Accepting that we have no official definitions and have created our own, I don't think I agree with them. I suggest that we need to differentiate between "alternate timelines" and "parallel universes" (with parallel universes being dealt with exclusively in the separate parallel universe article), and that, second, we drop the distinction between open and closed alternate timelines.

I would suggest that the cruicial difference between the way Star Trek stories have presented alternate timelines and parallel universes is:

• Parallel universes arise naturally due to different choices, creating a multiverse where all possible choices are naturally played out, each choice and its outcomes in a separate universe. (TNG: "Parallels" supports this)

• Alternate timelines comprise events played out within our own universe, which are then erased from existence due to interference of some kind (usually time travel-related). Although the knowledge of it may persist in the memory of one or more persons involved, no physical trace remains. (The timeline that proceeded from Ben Sisko's death but then was erased by old Jake Sisko's death in DS9: "The Visitor" is a good example of this)

As for "open" and "closed" alternate timelines, where did this distinction come from? Was the distinction ever made on screen? I don't think it is necessary, because any alternate timeline that was not erased (i.e. remained open) would become the "true" timeline from the in-Star-Trek-universe perspective, and whatever it replaced would be erased (i.e. would be closed) and would be regarded as the "alternate" events. So all alternate timelines - from the in-universe perspective - end up erased and closed, and there is no such thing as an open and alternate timeline (it is merely the "true" timeline). Taduolus 14:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree, something needs to be done with that "disclaimer" section --Alan 17:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tapestry

Wouldn't it be better to not include this episode on this page? It is mostly likely all an allusion by Q, but we can't be really sure of that. I don't know... --Sml 22:34, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Q-created reality --Alan 17:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article needs rewrite

Almost this entire article is non-canon speculation, with no examples and no citations. Rather than all this nonsense about "open" and "closed" time loops I'd suggest brief descriptions, a reference or two to time travel, and maybe some prominent examples. -- Kingfisher 04:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I have rewritten a good deal of the article. I have added some examples of alternate timelies and removed the open time-thing. I suspect that this article still will need some major revisions. I will be happy to edit this article further if anyone has some pointers, or just go ahead and fix something that I failed to enter properly. -- Curst saden 1:56 PM 5 April 2008 (UTC)