Talk:Second Sight (episode)

From Memory Alpha, the free Star Trek reference

Contents 1 Episode talk page 1.1 Maintenance links 2 Fenna 3 "Four year anniversary" 4 Genesis Device? 5 dead star = white dwarf? 6 Some observations and plot holes

[edit] Fenna

Is Fenna really supposed to 'bear a strong resemblance to his (Benjamin Sisko)'s wife Jennifer Sisko? Aside from being an extremely attractive woman with dark skin, there is no basis for this argument.--Seleya 02:34, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Seems kind of racist, so I am removing it for now. It is here if needed

..., who bears a strong resemblance to his wife Jennifer

Jaz ^{talk | novels} 04:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Four year anniversary"

Just a question: how can early 2370 mark the fourth anniversary of an event which took place in late 2366/early 2367? Definitely something odd here... --From Andoria with Love 05:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Answer: bad writing. --OuroborosCobra 05:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think it's most likely that the Battle of Wolf 359 didn't take place in the time we think it did. ;) --From Andoria with Love 05:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

People here are too literal with stardates. It seems to me that the stardates on these episodes are non-canon. The year 2370 is not mentioned in the episode anywhere. Is there any indication, for example, that New Year's on Earth correpsonds to, say, stardate 47000.0? SlowLoris 03:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

On DS9 they use the length of a Bajoran day 26 hours, maybe it's been 4 Bajoran years. Also, I agree, no one has ever definitively said 1 season=1 year=this stardate. 67.64.41.123 22:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Genesis Device?

Is it established that Seyetik´s terraforming technique is based on Dr Marcus' work? I don´t think so. It is more like the terraforming procedure seen in TNG: "Home Soil". --Captain Wiesel 08:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

That's actually from the Companion. I've added some info to it though to explain the reference in a little more detail. – Bertaut ^talk 22:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

It´s always nice to learn something new :-) --Captain Wiesel 15:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] dead star = white dwarf?

is this a white dwarf star? --76.25.113.223 02:54, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

No. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 02:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The Star is what they call a Carbon star. Its hard to describe but the hydrogen, helium oxygen and other layers have been burned away and the Carbon layer was either left or encountered. Check out Wikipedia for a better description of a Carbon Star. Magnumserpentine 22:04, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

It isn't called that either, and it is established that this star still contains oxygen. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 22:12, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Some observations and plot holes

1. The Captain of the USS Prometheus is a Lt. Commander. This is not uncommon in the United States Navy. A person of the rank of Lt. Commander maybe more experienced than someone with the rank of Captain. Several Nuclear Subs in the US Navy are commanded by a Lt. Commander.

2. is there a Sick Bay aboard this huge Nebula Class Starship?

You would think that there would be a Chief medical officer and a fully staffed Sick Bay for the 1000 crew Members of the USS Prometheus. However when the Scientist Wife is ill, where do they take her? to their Quarters and who do they call to care for her? Lt. Dax, Not the Chief Medical Officer. This is a huge plot hole.

3. Only the Scientist in charge of the mission left the USS Prometheus.

My Grandmother answered this one. Maybe the mission was so important that no one was granted Shore Leave at DS 9.

4. Comments.

I realize these are minor points but they do sort of bother me. Some others are, in the first scenes on the Bridge of the USS Prometheus, its hard to tell who is in command, Sisco or the unnamed Lt. Commander. For a while I thought no one was in command but then I saw the Lt. Commander seated in the Captains Chair. And as I said earlier, its not uncommon for a Lt. Commander to be the Captain of a Navy Ship or a Star Ship.

Comments?

Magnumserpentine 21:56, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Are you posing these statements because you want them in the article? Per this policy, we generally do not note nitpicks or production errors unless they are discussed by someone involved in the production.

If you are just interested in discussing those points, please keep in mind that article talk pages are only for discussing improvements or problems with the article, and are not for general discussion.--31dot 22:02, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Ah my apologies. I was just wanting other peoples opinions on this. So, where should I post this where people will encounter it. If I put it on a personal talk page it will probably sit there forever and no one will see it or give me feedback. Magnumserpentine 22:06, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

If you have specific questions you want answered you can try the Reference Desk.--31dot 22:11, September 12, 2009 (UTC)