SF-LOVERS Digest           Tuesday, 12 Jan 1993        Volume 18 : Issue 28
 
Today's Topics:
 
                   Television - Deep Space Nine (5 msgs)
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Date: 9 Jan 93 22:33:47 GMT
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: DS9 was very BAD
 
Seems that the biggest complaint of the DS9-bashers is about the aliens who
don't perceive linear time.  How dare an SF TV show come up with an unusual
idea, and not explain it to their satisfaction!
 
"Ah!" say the self-appointed paradox-spotters.  "If they didn't follow
linear time, then how come they didn't know everything that was ever going
to happen through the episode, et cetera et cetera?"
 
Well, here's a thought for you.  The aliens DID follow time of a sort.
Maybe time's arrow doesn't point in the same direction for them, or it's
some weird other dimension involved as well, but they do have an order to
their existence.  (A little thought shows you that they have to -
otherwise, that entire sequence in the wormhole would have been over in a
nothingth of a second.)
 
The point of the show was not that the alien(s) didn't follow time - it's
that they didn't UNDERSTAND it.  They had no concept of it, just like we
had no concept of gravity before old Isaac got bonked by an apple.
 
And this makes sense, because how can you perceive time if you have nothing
to measure it by?  After all, they're in the middle of a wormhole.  There's
no matter there.  They're incorporeal, remember?
 
The episode is really about the psychology of the aliens - a different
concept of the universe entirely.  They live entirely in the present tense.
Perhaps instead of Past and Future, they have concepts of Known and Not
Known Yet.  But the idea of Time is not completely outside their grasp.
Which explains how they picked it up from Sisko; if they really weren't
time-bound, Sisko's explanations would be as incomprehensible as those of a
being from inside a singularity trying to explain their physical laws to
us.
 
You know, one of the things I like about DS9 so far is that it actually got
me to think about that.  Hardly any SF TV shows, not even TNG, ever get me
to ponder like "Emissary" did.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 10 Jan 93 12:25:47 GMT
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: DS9 was very BAD
 
jblum@hamlet.umd.edu writes:
>Seems that the biggest complaint of the DS9-bashers is about the aliens
>who don't perceive linear time.  How dare an SF TV show come up with an
>unusual idea, and not explain it to their satisfaction!
 
Unusual?  Original?  Try, stupid.  Try, "Why don't they try consulting
with a freshman physics major before they dump this crap on TV.
 
>"Ah!" say the self-appointed paradox-spotters.  "If they didn't follow
>linear time, then how come they didn't know everything that was ever going
>to happen through the episode, et cetera et cetera?"
>
>Well, here's a thought for you.  The aliens DID follow time of a sort.
>Maybe time's arrow doesn't point in the same direction for them, or it's
>some weird other dimension involved as well, but they do have an order to
>their existence.  (A little thought shows you that they have to -
>otherwise, that entire sequence in the wormhole would have been over in a
>nothingth of a second.)
 
Typical ST fan reasoning.. "Well maybe.. well, we could have all these
other concepts that violate physics.. and that would explain the doozy..
see...
 
>The point of the show was not that the alien(s) didn't follow time - it's
>that they didn't UNDERSTAND it.  They had no concept of it, just like we
>had no concept of gravity before old Isaac got bonked by an apple.
 
Yeah, right.  Perhaps on YOUR planet.  I think we humans have been quite
aware of the concept of gravity for as long as we've been human.  Look,
drop it and it falls.  Do you think this was some sort of great discovery?
 
I can see your version of Newton now.  "If you drop it, it falls!  If you
drop it, it falls!  Yeehaw!"  (Townspeople: "what a loser")
 
>Yet.  But the idea of Time is not completely outside their grasp.  Which
>explains how they picked it up from Sisko; if they really weren't
>time-bound, Sisko's explanations would be as incomprehensible as those of
>a being from inside a singularity trying to explain their physical laws to
>us.
 
This was the whole point of the criticism.  The episode was inconsistent
with what they were claiming.
 
>You know, one of the things I like about DS9 so far is that it actually
>got me to think about that.  Hardly any SF TV shows, not even TNG, ever
>get me to ponder like "Emissary" did.
 
Uh-huh.  Methinks you should apply to be a ST writer.  People who haven't
thought before are *exactly* what they seem to be looking for.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 10 Jan 93 16:52:06 GMT
From: MRM122@psuvm.psu.edu
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: DS9 was very BAD
 
Many people are saying that the "non-linear time" thing was a foolish idea
- - that it conflicted with physics as we know it.  They say things like "Why
don't the writers talk to some physics students!"  To that, I have this to
say: We as of this point in our history are FAR from understanding all that
there is to understand.  Saying such a thing is "impossible" is silly,
since as far as we know, breaking the light barrier is impossible, making
all these shows completely pointless, true?  And, may I point out that you
all have as difficult of a time understanding a non-linear perspective as
the aliens did in understanding a linear perspective.  Who are you to say
how "time" must be perceived by all creatures, even non-corporeal creatures
living in the completely alternate environment of a wormhole.  You can't
comprehend it- thus you declare it impossible.  Much like the people who
wanted to burn Gallileo for saying the Earth goes around the sun, not the
other way around.  Very interesting...
 
Marsh
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 10 Jan 93 18:21:04 GMT
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: DS9 was very BAD
 
MRM122@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>Many people are saying that the "non-linear time" thing was a foolish idea
>- that it conflicted with physics as we know it.  They say things like
>"Why don't the writers talk to some physics students!"
 
That's right.  Even a high school chemistry student could tell them that
most of the technical terms they're throwing around are being used
incorrectly, or are just plain made up.
 
There is NO NEED for them to do so.  Why make things up when you can dig
out something real and use it instead?  Why?  Because the writers are
obviously woefully ignorant and are too arrogant to be bothered with little
things that might make their already dumb plots even dumber.  For instance,
take the episode of TNG where they had a society of clones who were
undergoing something called "replicative fading".  It takes maybe 6 seconds
of thought to figure out that the whole idea of "replicative fading" is
absurd.  In short, why would you clone the clones, when you have the
original genes available (and don't tell me some nonsense about having
"used it up" - we can nearly fashion DNA from scratch today.  If they were
as advanced as they are, they'd have computer records as to the content of
the original DNA (or within one or two generations) and just duplicate from
there, no copies of a copy nonsense).
 
>To that, I have this to say: We as of this point in our history are FAR
>from understanding all that there is to understand.
 
True, but we understand pretty damn well what elements there are, yet ST
writers almost impulsively come up with new elements (elements that are
supposed to be, no less, stable, non-radioactive elements which means they
come in on the low end of the periodic table, and we've *filled that up
already*).
 
We also understand laws of motion.  For instance, I'm willing to give them
warp speed and such, because without it the series would be dull and
boring.  But they also propose that they have some sort of inertial
dampening system.  This would make one hell of a defensive weapon - to be
specific, it would be pretty simple to take something that can create
artificial gravity and selectively eliminate interia and turn it into a
projectile-proof defensive shield.  (Phaser proof, too, in fact, proof to
*ANY* particle/mass weapon).  They don't so this because it would be
boring, but it's still inconsistent.  Then we have transporters, which I
also forgive them for, because they make the show interesting.
 
So I'm not complaining that they sort of bend the rules of physics, I'm
complaining that they constantly violate the ones they pretend to obey, and
make a travesty of buzzwords that they *clearly* do not understand the
meaning of.
 
At the very least, what the hell is the point of a streamlined (not even
*properly* streamlined, at that) spaceship that cruises around like some
sort of airplane?
 
>Saying such a thing is "impossible" is silly, since as far as we know,
>breaking the light barrier is impossible, making all these shows
>completely pointless, true?
 
There are things, as I said above, that I'm perfectly willing to forgive
(even though it's not entirely necessary - the Man vs.  Kzin wars books
[Larry Niven?] did a pretty good job of an interstellar war w/o cheating
the light barrier for awhile).  Things I am not willing to forgive are
internal inconsistencies.  Take the clone example above.  Here they are
implying that these people have this super high technology, yet are too
stupid to figure out that they should just replicate from the original
genes, or furthermore, use some form of genetic engineering.  You can find
this kind of stupid inconsistency in almost every episode of TNG.  It
happens because these writers don't seem to care one whit whether their
plot lines are solid or even moderately thought out.
 
>And, may I point out that you all have as difficult of a time
>understanding a non-linear perspective as the aliens did in understanding
>a linear perspective.
 
This is stupid.  The whole idea of *life* in a non-linear time sense is
absurd.  The reasons why are so numerous that only a total numbskull
accepts the idea as anything more than a fanciful chance for some writer to
take a poke or two at his/her shallow philosophy of human nature.
 
>Who are you to say how "time" must be perceived by all creatures, even
>non-corporeal creatures living in the completely alternate environment of
>a wormhole.  You can't comprehend it- thus you declare it impossible.
 
I comprehend it quite well, and I have considered the IMPLICATIONS of what
they are getting at.  Obviously, you and they do not understand this.
 
There are two possible ways to look at something that might exist in
non-linear time.  The first is the simple one - i.e., everything is in a
single fixed state.  The world of a non-linear environment of this sort is
equivalent to a single frame of a motion picture (perhaps a black frame
might be more apt, since light, gravity, etc.  only apply if you have
time).  In other words, from a vantage point INSIDE the frame, no form of
cognition whatsoever, in fact, no kind of interaction, even between dumb
matter, can occur.
 
The other possibility relies on what most of modern physics has to say
about time.  In this case, non-linear time covers everything from the birth
to the end of the universe ALL AT ONCE.  (There was no "time" before the
big bang, so don't try that one).  In this case, interaction, information,
cause-effect are all completely ruled out.
 
The whole idea is preposterous.  I don't mind when they break the rules
that they need to to make the show interesting.  I don't terribly mind when
they break rules that are probably pretty solid (no backwards time travel)
when it makes for a fun plot, but I certainly mind when they break as many
as they want and then propose some inconsistent new laws to replace them.
 
>Much like the people who wanted to burn Gallileo for saying the Earth goes
>around the sun, not the other way around.  Very interesting...
 
Paralleling Gallileo (who actually studied his subject) to the hack writers
who write for ST (who, likely, have never studied any more science than you
get in your typical comic book) is pretty pathetic.  These people aren't
visionaries, they're deluded egomaniacs who can't be bothered with checking
their work.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 10 Jan 93 19:08:01 GMT
From: vincent@cad.gatech.edu (Vincent Fox)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: DS9 was very BAD
 
MRM122@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>Many people are saying that the "non-linear time" thing was a foolish idea
>- that it conflicted with physics as we know it.  They say things like
>"Why don't the writers talk to some physics students!"
 
Some have said exactly this, others criticized it another way...
 
>To that, I have this to say: We as of this point in our history are FAR
>from understanding all that there is to understand.  Saying such a thing
>is "impossible" is silly, since as far as we know, breaking the light
>barrier is impossible, making all these shows completely pointless, true?
 
According to my physics (years old) accelerating up to and past light speed
is impossible since apparent mass increases and your fuel needs would grow
unbelievably the closer to light speed you wanted to get. Fred Pohl's
solution was to "go inertialess", make the mass disappear. A massless
vehicle would have no such barriers.  Now physics says nothing about
shortcuts around *past* light speed as far as I can recall.  But you've
done your intended task, dragged me from from one impossibility to another.
Because SF assumes some odd things means we must be expected to swallow
that 2+2=5? Maybe those senators will one day succeed and legislate pi into
being 3.0.
 
>And, may I point out that you all have as difficult of a time
>understanding a non-linear perspective as the aliens did in understanding
>a linear perspective.  Who are you to say how "time" must be perceived by
>all creatures, even non-corporeal creatures living in the completely
>alternate environment of a wormhole.  You can't comprehend it - thus you
>declare it impossible.  Much like the people who wanted to burn Gallileo
>for saying the Earth goes around the sun, not the other way around.  Very
>interesting...
 
You just haven't been paying attention to the *REAL* objection here.
 
Clear indications are given that the hypothetical godlings *DO* understand
linear time. Things such as the fact that they are conversing and learning
from our linear commander in a linear fashion. Non-linear beings with
access to the future present an impossible paradox. In at least one sense
it reduces the universe to a Newtonian clockwork-universe, not the chaotic
thing it actually is. They also discuss destroying him. How can this be
reconciled with the later confusion they evidence about an end to linear
existence? It's like one guy wrote up the framework and a few opening
lines, and some other hacks came along and shoddily tacked on some other
stuff. There's no internal consistency. Maybe it was rewritten through
three different sets of monkeys 30 times or something.
 
An idea can be as outlandish as you want in my book, as long as it doesn't
conflict with *itself*. I object not so much to non-linear beings (no
matter how silly that is), but to how the idea is developed.  I visualize a
production meeting like in that movie with Tim Robbins, I think it was
called The Player?
 
Asst-Producer:  Okay, how about we use some god-like beings that have to
                talk down to our stupid level.
Producer:       Sounds good, throw in some confusing gobbly-gook to make
                it really apparent these aliens ain't like us. Can we
                get Tom Selleck to do one of the aliens?
Exec-Asst:      He's unavailable, let's just re-use the same actors from
                earlier in the episode. It'll be cheaper, and we can
                explain it as them communicating through people from his
                memories.
Head Writer:    Gentleman, we've used godlike aliens one too many times
                don't you think?
Producer:       You're FIRED! Get my drop-out nephew on the line, let's
                make him the new head writer. A universe just can't have
                too many godlike aliens you nincompoop.
 
But really, other than the wormhole sequence I liked it okay. ST seems to
have an annoying tendency to want to *FULLY* introduce you to all the main
characters in the first episode. Some of those explanations about say for
instance Odo's past seemed really wedged in there.  At least they weren't
as bad or as blatant about it as in TNG's Encounter at Farpoint.
 
------------------------------
 
End of SF-LOVERS Digest
***********************
