Kearn Grisdale
@kearnmg.bsky.social
I am a Treky, comic reading dyslexic, autistic astrophysicist. My opinions are my own.
However in the classic timeline Romulan ships are powered by artificial black holes, so the Romulans could have stopped it by themselves with no loss of life.
The SN shockwave is also shown to be TFL which violates nothing material travelling at warp rule of TOS-TNG.
The SN shockwave is also shown to be TFL which violates nothing material travelling at warp rule of TOS-TNG.
October 23, 2023 at 5:48 PM
However in the classic timeline Romulan ships are powered by artificial black holes, so the Romulans could have stopped it by themselves with no loss of life.
The SN shockwave is also shown to be TFL which violates nothing material travelling at warp rule of TOS-TNG.
The SN shockwave is also shown to be TFL which violates nothing material travelling at warp rule of TOS-TNG.
(I’m going nerd out so apologies)
The hole plot of ‘09 (& thus the Romulan plot in Picard) revolves around Spock going to Vulcan to get a way to make a black hole to stop the Hoob SN destroying the Romulan son.
The hole plot of ‘09 (& thus the Romulan plot in Picard) revolves around Spock going to Vulcan to get a way to make a black hole to stop the Hoob SN destroying the Romulan son.
October 23, 2023 at 5:45 PM
(I’m going nerd out so apologies)
The hole plot of ‘09 (& thus the Romulan plot in Picard) revolves around Spock going to Vulcan to get a way to make a black hole to stop the Hoob SN destroying the Romulan son.
The hole plot of ‘09 (& thus the Romulan plot in Picard) revolves around Spock going to Vulcan to get a way to make a black hole to stop the Hoob SN destroying the Romulan son.
They like to claim it is but there are way to many issues for it to fit.
The biggest is that it reference the destruction of Romulus, which had to happen in a difference timeline, “2009”. It’s hard to go into detail here.
The biggest is that it reference the destruction of Romulus, which had to happen in a difference timeline, “2009”. It’s hard to go into detail here.
October 23, 2023 at 5:13 PM
They like to claim it is but there are way to many issues for it to fit.
The biggest is that it reference the destruction of Romulus, which had to happen in a difference timeline, “2009”. It’s hard to go into detail here.
The biggest is that it reference the destruction of Romulus, which had to happen in a difference timeline, “2009”. It’s hard to go into detail here.
Luckily that didn’t happen in the classic-TNG timeline so good/real Trek is safe from the monster that is JJ-Kurtzman
October 23, 2023 at 3:43 PM
Luckily that didn’t happen in the classic-TNG timeline so good/real Trek is safe from the monster that is JJ-Kurtzman
I normally try to read the pdf version, as it’s easy to download, annotated and keep for reference. I tend to think of the official version as whatever the Journal provides access to (pdf or otherwise)
September 29, 2023 at 3:32 PM
I normally try to read the pdf version, as it’s easy to download, annotated and keep for reference. I tend to think of the official version as whatever the Journal provides access to (pdf or otherwise)
I must be to possessive of the text in my papers, as I’ve refused to use anything like Overleaf. If I’m 1st author, I send out the pdf and ask for comments on that and the reverse when I’m not. I am the odd one here?
September 22, 2023 at 6:39 AM
I must be to possessive of the text in my papers, as I’ve refused to use anything like Overleaf. If I’m 1st author, I send out the pdf and ask for comments on that and the reverse when I’m not. I am the odd one here?