Does anyone know what the current year is in Star Trek? It has to be 2378, because the crew keep on mentioning their meeting for the first time in 2371. But, didn't "Unimatrix Zero" take place in late 2376?
------------------ Delta Flyer
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Coming to the close of 2377.
------------------ "I�ll never fall in the arms of someone sincere I fall just the same And like before, it's just too hard." ---Kim Leaman, "Sincere"
Every season of "Voyager" corresponds to the year 237#, where '#' is the season number.
------------------ "Although, from what I understand, having travelled around the Mid-west quite a bit, apparently Jesus is coming, so I guess the choice now is we should decide whether we should spit or swallow." -Maynard James Keenan
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
So Voyager started right after the end of the -60's, then?
------------------ Don't kill me, I'm charming!
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Perhaps late 2360's, maybe 2270. Current is mostl likely to be 2377 maybe early 2378.
Its been 14 years since the first season of TNG so if we can get an acurrate date for the first season of TNG. Also everyone thinks that Voyager was lost after the last episode of TNG, but why can't we think that Voyager was lost during TNG? Is there any cannon evidence aside from books that doesn't support this?
------------------ Signature for sale! For a mere price of $20 per letter you get this wonderful little space to say your own things. Get it now while there's still space!
-All you base belong to infinity. -infinity11
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Yes, they're called stardates. As well as little things like insignias & pennant changes.
Voyager was lost in mid-2371. We're coming to the close of 2377. End of fact.
------------------ "I�ll never fall in the arms of someone sincere I fall just the same And like before, it's just too hard." ---Kim Leaman, "Sincere"
Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
Thank God. I was afraid none of you owned Chronology.
------------------ "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."
-Eleanor Arroway, "Contact" by Carl Sagan
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Changing penent and com. badges don't mean anything. It could have been before TNG ended, its not like one day everyone decided to change the whole look of Starfleet. Such as at 1243 hours suddenyl everyone switched uniforms and com. badges. No, it is a subtle thing when ships come into spacedock when the news is finally brought to a planet based base. Stardates don;t mean anything either. In the first season of TNG we had Yar die and then come back to life to wave everyone good bye then disappeara according to stardates.
If stardates were linear yes, but sometimes they're not.
------------------ Signature for sale! For a mere price of $20 per letter you get this wonderful little space to say your own things. Get it now while there's still space!
-All you base belong to infinity. -infinity11
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Bad stardates could be attributed to misstatements by the characters saying them. The current stardate system is meant to correspond to years. Remove the last three digits of the non-fractional part of the stardate and add what's left to 2323, and you have the year.
'Course, this is canonically contradicted in "Data's Day", but what I've described is apparently how they're intending it to be.
------------------ "Although, from what I understand, having travelled around the Mid-west quite a bit, apparently Jesus is coming, so I guess the choice now is we should decide whether we should spit or swallow." -Maynard James Keenan
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Well, the "Data's Day" thing can be very easily explained away by saying Data was referring to an earlier milestone date in the development of the Enterprise than the actual day of pomp and circumstance and champagne-bottle breaking referred to on the commisioning plaque. Like the first time it left spacedock, or the first time every single system was brought online at once. Didn't he use the term "operational days" or somesuch?
And I think a good rule of thumb is that Data doesn't make misstatements.
------------------ "And as it is, it is cheaper than drinking." -DT on arguing with Omega, April 30
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
I wonder if the stardates actually have any relevence on the stars. In Trekdom, Starfleet wouldn't call it stardates for nothing. Perhaps its related to the "Time Barrier" in some way. Lets say that with out breaking the Time Barrier, time speeds up considerably and then slows down. The E=MC2 thingy. I'm just wondering if those would be related somehow. Different time zones in the galaxy if you will.
Just wondering that's all.
------------------ Signature for sale! For a mere price of $20 per letter you get this wonderful little space to say your own things. Get it now while there's still space!
-All you base belong to infinity. -infinity11
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I'm sure they needed a name for it, so they figured "starship", "stardate"...
And I know Data doesn't make misstatements. That's why I brought up the "Data's Day" thing, since that one couldn't be explained away the same way...
------------------ Lister: "Cat, what are you doing?" Cat: "I'm courting." Lister: "Courting who?" Cat: "Whoever shows up!" -Red Dwarf, "Me�"
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
SPOILERS BELOW: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . According to tonight's episode "Homestead", the exact date of the episode is April 5th, 2378. We know this because Neelix is having his "First Contact Day", and says it's the 315th anniversary of the April 5th, 2063 First Contact.
------------------ "No, 3 & 6 are mandatory, so you only have to do them if you want"
Alex, fellow classmate, trying to explain an assignment (2/2/01)
[This message has been edited by The359 (edited May 09, 2001).]
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Oh, fuck them for following "normal" time.
------------------ "I said 'You are, you are, The only one who sees.' I said, 'You are, you are' The only strength I need.'" ---Kim Leaman, "Mary"
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Okay then, was an *actual* stardate included in that same episode? 'Cuz if not, then Neelix's departure could be slapped in just about anywhere in the year (as long as the other Neelix episodes are also undated).
Mark
------------------ "Why build one, when you can have two at twice the price?"
- Carl Sagan, "Contact"
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
The episode had a stardate of 548xx.x. I don't remeber the specifics, but I remember it beginning with 548. That I am positive about.
------------------ "No, 3 & 6 are mandatory, so you only have to do them if you want"
Alex, fellow classmate, trying to explain an assignment (2/2/01)
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Hmm... then it seems that Voyager may be speeding up time somewhat. Perhaps that explains why Naomi claims to be so much older in this ep?
------------------ "How do you define fool?" "I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination." - CJ Cherryh, Invader
Um, Wes, dare I say, read the whole post next time?
And it was 315, not 350. If it were 350, the current Voyager year would be 2413...way off
------------------ "No, 3 & 6 are mandatory, so you only have to do them if you want"
Alex, fellow classmate, trying to explain an assignment (2/2/01)
Posted by akb1979 (Member # 557) on :
According to the Star Trek Enyclopedia, Voyager was lost in 2371, stardat 48***. I don't recall the stardate, but added it anyways. Whoever said that the last number of the year matches the number of seasons is correct. Therefore if it is season 7 we are talking about then it would be 2377, or stardate 55***.
There, that's my 2p on this discussion.
Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :
In the episode "Non Sequitor", there is a sign announcing a festival in SF in August. I believe the stardate is 490xx. If this is correct, then the stardate year is from summer to summer, not winter to winter. This corresponds to the seasonal cycle of tv shows.
