Softpedia
 

NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
Home > News > Editorials

April 21st, 2007, 11:08 GMT · By Lucian Dorneanu

Star Trek: Science vs. Fiction

SHARE:

Adjust text size:


Star Trek - USS Enterprise E
Enlarge picture
The following article is an excerpt from work by David Allen Batchelor, available online here.

Generally, Star Trek is pretty intelligently written and more faithful to science than any other science fiction series ever shown on television. Star Trek also attracts and excites generations of viewers about advanced science and engineering, and it's almost the only show that depicts scientists and engineers positively, as role models. So should we forgive the show for an occasional misconception in the service of an epic adventure?

Well, as for the science in Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry and the writers of the show have started with science we know and stretched it to fit a framework of amazing inventions that support action-filled and entertaining stories.

The writers of the show are not scientists, so sometimes they do get science details wrong:

Holding your breath in space

There was a show in which Dr. Crusher and Mr. LaForge were forced to let all of the air escape from the part of the ship they were in, so that a fire would be extinguished. The doctor recommended holding one's breath to maintain consciousness as long as possible in the vacuum, until the air was restored. But as underwater scuba divers know, the lungs would rupture and very likely kill anyone who held his breath during such a large decompression. The lungs can't take that much pressure, so people can only survive in a vacuum
if they DON'T try to hold their breath.

Warp Interstellar Drive

This must be the crowning achievement of Federation technology! Despite its fundamental role in the show's plot, it violates known physics to an extent that can't be defended. The detailed explanation of the warp field effect in the ST: TNG Technical Manual only raises more questions than it resolves. It is said to involve huge discharges of energy and subspace fields that aren't understood in today's science. However, barring a very unlikely demolition of Einstein's theory by future, revolutionary discoveries in quantum physics, warp drive can't exist. Physicists of today understand the space-time continuum rather well, and there is very good reason to think that no object can move faster than the speed of light. This doesn't stop scientists like the great expert on relativity and quantum theory, Stephen Hawking, from enjoying the fun of the TV series, however.

Matter-Antimatter Power Generation

This is one of the best scientific features of Star Trek. The mixing of matter and antimatter is almost certainly the most efficient kind of power source that a starship could use, and the way it's described is reasonably correct -- the antimatter (frozen anti-hydrogen) is handled with magnetic fields, and never allowed to touch normal matter, or KA-BOOM! This much is real physics. Let's not bother about the dilithium crystals part... sorry, but that's just imaginary.

Androids

Well, an important research organization for robotics is the American Association for Artificial Intelligence. At a recent conference on cybernetics, the president of the Association was asked what is the ultimate goal of his field of technology. He replied, "Lieutenant Commander Data." Creating Star Trek's Mr. Data would be a historic feat of cybernetics, and right now it's very controversial in computer science whether it can be done. Maybe a self-aware computer can be put into a human-sized body and convinced to live sociably with us and our limitations. That's a long way ahead of our computer technology, but maybe not impossible.

Transporter

We don't have a clue about how to really build a device like the transporter. It uses a beam that is radiated from point A to point B where it STOPS at just the right precise place - even passing through some barriers along the way - and reconstructs the person it carries on the spot. Or it captures a person's pattern, dematerializing him or her, and brings the person to some other point. All of the rematerialized atoms and molecules are somehow in the precisely correct positions, with the right temperatures and adhering together just as if the transportee had not been dematerialized. Rematerializing, why doesn't everything fall to pieces if a gust of wind or just normal gravity disturb the reappearing atoms?

Holodeck

The same applies to this one. Holograms are apparent images with three dimensional structure. Although virtual reality rooms have been created, we can't imagine a way to assemble matter in the same way as the light in a hologram.

Universal Language Translator

As this is used on the Star Trek shows, it's just a fictional device to enable characters to get through the stories. It would be too tedious and repetitious in a one-hour show for the characters to overcome real language barriers in a realistic manner in every show. The way the Enterprise crew can encounter an alien spacecraft, "hail them on standard frequencies," and establish instant telecommunications on their viewscreens is a preposterous shortcut to keep the plot from faltering. We can certainly dismiss the possibility of such an invention ever being built.

So, the bottom line is: Star Trek science is an entertaining combination of real science, imaginary science gathered from lots of earlier stories, and stuff the writers made up week-by-week to give each new episode novelty. The real science is an effort to be faithful to humanity's greatest achievements, and the fanciful science is the playing field for a game that expands the mind as it entertains. The Star Trek series are the only science fiction series crafted with such respect for real science and intelligent writing. That's why it's the only science fiction series that many scientists watch regularly...

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK:

13,488 hits · 10 comments · Link to this article · Print article · Send to friend · Subscribe to news

MUST-READ RELATED ARTICLES:

1

Could Cold Fusion Be Possible ?

The Deepest Cosmic Puzzle for the Next 20 Years

Silicon-based Life?

We Could Find Earth's Twin

READER COMMENTS:


Comment #1 by: Gabriel. on 14 May 2008, 04:52 UTC reply to this comment

Without science fiction and philosophy to inspire us as a human race, we would not have the technology we have now. Whatever happened to bright eyed romanticism that we can achieve all things?


Only if we would have listened to all the "experts" through out time, where would we be? No television-vision (it is scientifically impossible to transmit vision across the world) no telecommunication. (Talking to someone across the atlantic!? ! Are you mad!? that is beyond all scientific capability) and lets not forget about how it has been proven to be mathematically impossible to exceed or live past 100 mph, break the sound barrier, Go to the moon (I won't even suggest that one, as i would be declared a heretic and put in an asylum)


Before knocking some great vision because YOU are not able to explain it, or rationalize it means nothing, if very little, keep fueling us oh wise ones with enough indignation to prove you wrong as mankind has through all of the ages, for exploring, searching, discovering and creating is the totality and and infinite nature of our being. We will forever dream - and through that we have, and will achieve.


With Reverence and Respect,
Gabriel.


Comment #2 by: sandy on 22 Jul 2008, 16:28 UTC reply to this comment

this article was the better of the best articles, I have ever read. I liked it so much that I have printed out 50 copies of that. I


Comment #3 by: Graham Smith on 26 May 2009, 00:09 UTC reply to this comment

I love Star Trek, but I must agree that a large part of the "science" in it is outrageous. One aspect the author doesn't mention is the way "artificial gravity" is generated on the starships. If it were possible to do this, (which we cannot conceive of as we know what gravity does, but not what it is!) then why aren't the starships moved by anti-gravity drives? I was happier with Babylon 5 in which the artificial gravity on the Babylon Station was created by the perfectly reasonable method of spinning the whole thing.

Anyway - how about these other aspects of Star Trek that defy known physics (and I mean really defy! We understand the physical world well enough now to know the parameters within which we must operate):
* Replicators that can create complex materials out of pure energy.
* Hand phasers containing enough energy to vapourise a large object
* Plug-and-play compatibility of electronic apparatus from totally unrelated sources
* Surgical instruments that can, for example, heal a broken limb without even touching it - and speaking of surgery.....
* "Genetically altering" a person so that he can pass as one from another race, then changing the person back again

I could go on.....


Comment #4 by: Andrew on 03 Dec 2009, 22:36 UTC reply to this comment

This article makes it sound like Star Trek makes only the occasional scientific slip up. The truth is that almost everything presented in any given episode is egregiously false. Even the most fundamental elements, such as the way space travel is depicted, display total ignorance on the part of the writers. Fortunately for them, 99% of the audience is equally ignorant.

Star Trek is fantasy with starships and space elves. Nothing more.


Comment #5 by: partypeepers on 18 Jan 2010, 14:47 UTC reply to this comment

oke first of the warpdrive or alcubierre drive is wel none in physics and dose not violate any rule's in physics. as for the hologram a japanese company was able to display a point on nothing but air in 3D so that would by very close


Comment #6 by: Dutchguy on 08 Feb 2010, 21:35 UTC reply to this comment

I like to point out that Google is researching a program that can overcome language barriers when calling to another country as we speak. I almost instantly had to think about the universal translator from Star Trek.

Google is attempting to make a program that enables you to speak (on the phone) with (let's say) someone in China while both talking in your own language.

source: http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Technology/Google-Says-It-Is-Developing-Live-Voice-Translation-Technology/Article/201002215544574?f=rss


Comment #7 by: teddy on 21 Sep 2010, 09:01 UTC reply to this comment

The article written basically says its just not ever possible that anything in the star trex world could ever be built. I disagree. Just take a look at the mind bending complexities of the human body. Our existance(whatever that is) inside a vastly complex biological entity is definately star trex material so to speak. Just look in the mirror and you will see something that makes DATA look like a 4th grade level science project. A living human is way more complex than DATA. If a human is possible than building DATA is completely within reason. Ever have a dream that "seemed so real"? How could something like the holodeck be considered impossible when we humans dream. A dream is a "real" human experience so we will figure out how the brain works someday and be able to give it an experience similar to the holodeck. I believe most of star trex is possible. I just dont think we are smart enough to get there anytime soon. Data and the holodeck will probably be availiable somewhere around year 2810 maybe a little later but we will get there. teddy G , vegas

Comment #7.1 by: number 1 on 04 Nov 2010, 21:03 GMT

Hate to bust ur bubble...but ur ranting. Technology right now, could be as advanced as in the Star Trek universe but it would run into too many problems to be applied commercially. First, we have people called terrorists...imagine what would happen with someone yelling "jihad" and hopping into a transporter?!?
Also, there would be no world peace where everyone coellest and were all peacelike...religion divides us all. War begins and ends with religion. Notice in Star Trek, that no one mentions God or religion? It's because science reigns supreme and humans need no God or explaination as to why humans are so superior(In the first movie the subject is grazed upon).
Then, there's the idea that the NASA is shifted all the way over to San Francisco. That's wrong in so many ways. There WILL be a major earthquake in California and if it didn't occur in the Star Trek universe, then when did it occur? Not to mention, the reason NASA is located in Florida is because it is easier for any space fairing ship to escape Earth's gravitational pull without expending too much fuel, if it is closer to the equator. Simple Science. Sci-Fi creators defy every aspect of known science for the shear ability to wow the audience with mind blowing special effects.
Oh, also not that I'm a proponent of the issue, but have you realized that Star Trek has managed to erraticate starvation, poverty, and last but not least every homosexual, lesbian, or trans-gender in all their movies? They could at least have a scene poking some fun, but apparently everyone in the future is completely straight, unretarded, and doesn't have the foggiest clue what drugs are.


Comment #8 by: Number 1 on 25 Oct 2010, 20:26 UTC reply to this comment

There are some other things not mentioned. For example, why is that Hollywood must kept a uniform and organized idea of space travel? Whenever two space ships approach each other...they are ALWAYS right side up and level with each other. In space there is no up, down, left, right, north, south, east or west. Also, approaches to planets is handled the same. Some occasions, the shows focus on a ships spacial aspect as far as to showcase the need for a crew to right their ship before it "flips" over. We're not navigating the ocean folks...and there are no great special effects benefits from this...
Also, there would be no explosions in space...space itself is a vacuum with great pressures enforced on the object that travel through it. Ships would not explode...they would implode. There may be minor explosions in the compartments containing air...but fire needs air, that simple. There is no air in space.
Last, our planet is diverse in life...but when aliens visit us in movies...they are always one race, species, or whatnot...and they are from planets with the same alignment. Are sci-fi creators that dim with their foresight? M-class planets don't come with one form of climate...and probably have more than one life form...YA THINK?!


Comment #9 by: Roose on 01 Dec 2010, 08:27 UTC reply to this comment

Warp drives are/were being researched:

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/060308_exotic_drive.html

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/warp/warp.html

This site gives a good explaination of what Partypeepers mentioned, the Alcubierre drive:

http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=1881

... and these:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/364496.stm

http://news.discovery.com/space/warp-drive-spaceship-engine.html

Interesting material here:

http://www.prlog.org/10241294-warp-drive-demonstration-part-of-advanced-physics-lecture-at-marcon-convention.html\

Copyright © 2001-2012 Softpedia. Contact/Tip us at

WindowsGamesDriversMacLinuxScriptsMobileHandheldNews

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   UPDATE YOUR SOFTWARE   |   ROMANIAN FORUM