I am off to SpaceFest today to hobnob with Moonwalkers! I don’t know how much time I’ll have to blog over the next couple of days, but I’ll do what I can to let ya’ll know what’s going on. This should be a HUGE amount of fun. Check my Twitters, too, since that might be an easier way for me to update.
Don’t forget to check Damaris’s blog for Shuttle tile updates.
And just to keep you occupied with silliness… from skippy the bush kangaroo comes one of the greatest Trek video mashups of all time.
I am proud embarrassed able to admit I recognized almost all those scenes.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:02 am
Pretty cool! I am personally of the opinion that transferring matter from now to the past will prove improbable, since that would require that matter co-exist with itself and would alter the energy content of the universe. Having said that, I expect we may someday be able to retrieve energy patterns from the past and move them to our time. This would allow us to view the past in “real” time, or maybe even retrieve the energy pattern of consciousness. Then we could bring Einstein to our “now” and reinstall him in a synthetic body,,,but probably not until we have created a type II civilization.
Gary 7
August 16th, 2007 at 10:24 am
To Gary 7: Riiight….. and we will get Jesus and install him in a monster robot with laser eyes and hold the world at ransom for 1 million Italian Lire.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:53 am
“Say, do any of you guys know how to madison?”
I’m going to Rocky Horror this saturday, I’ll be sure to wear my Vulcan ears this time. . .
August 16th, 2007 at 10:54 am
I drive to Phoenix in the morning for Spacefest, so I will see you there. Let’s see, what sort of obnoxious, difficult to answer nit-picky question can I ask after you Moon Hoax talk
Rob
August 16th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Gary
I’m not entirely up to date on the math, but last I looked, there were several indications that travel to the past is *mathematically* possible. Whether we could assemble the energies and structures needed is another matter entirely.
Travel to the future, on the other hand, is still via the local bus. We’ll get there when we get there. No taxis or even a cross-town available.
As for pulling an “energy pattern”… I can’t see it, myself. Wouldn’t pull Einstein, anyway – maybe a young Newton or Aristotle. But that’s personal preference.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:17 am
Oh, I almost forgot – I, too, recognize most of the scenes in that clip. I’m checking myself in to the mental ward in the morning.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:35 am
The Trekkie Horror Picture Show.
I wonder what could be done with ‘Sweet Transvestite’.
J/P=?
August 16th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Its all geek to me! Excellent!
August 16th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
See you at spacefest
Can’t wait, this weekend is going to rock.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Lurchgs
Let’s not forget about high relativistic speeds. It’s a crude but possible way to travel to the future faster than you normally would. Of course, getting up to those speeds isn’t exactly the easiest thing to accomplish, but it’s within the realm of possibility.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
I like (and relate to) what BA said about being ‘able’ to recognize most of those scenes.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:42 pm
Lurchgs,
Aristotle? Why? The man seemed to have a vague idea of the structure of good fiction, but he was absoloutely idiotic when it came to the science of his day. He knew nothing of physics, and the near-deification of his ideas by later civilizations retarded science for centuries.
Archimedes, on the other hand, was brilliant, but because he did not write huge volumes of brainless tripe about things he could not comprehend, he is seldom mentioned as the vast superior to Aristotle that he was.
August 17th, 2007 at 8:26 am
Actually, I was prepping a spoiler for the SciFi show, Eureka. It’s the obvious solution for the poor guy who lost his woman to an explosion. He discovered the hard way that ya can’t monkey with the past. Too many paradoxes but retrieving her “mind”(a euphemism for soul, I suppose, though I prefer “organized, dissipating energy field”)and bringing it forward to a cloned body seemed a logical way to save the poor gal. I just hate the idea of losing a really good character,,,and she was way cool.
GAry 7
August 17th, 2007 at 10:31 am
Trek & Rocky!
Catch me I’m Swooning!!!!
August 17th, 2007 at 11:51 am
No shame in recognizing almost all of those scenes. I think we are in good company.
- W
August 17th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
It would have been harder to admit intimate knowledge if it had been made with scenes from Space: 1999 (especially season 2) and music by Yello.
August 17th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Thomas:
Major problem with retrieving Jesus, is separating one from all the others. Apparently, at least from a historical viewpoint, at that time/place, Jesus was like Joe, as in, “Did ya see what Joe just did?” and the stories just grow. I think of the progenitors of religion as fishermen(kinda like Peter) who are always talking about the giant one that got away,,,
Gary 7
August 17th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
Hey, cool, did someone mention Space: 1999? (Says the guy who knows way more about S:99 than he does about Star Trek…)
And Yello? Interesting choice. Which song? (Though I’m not a hardcore Yello fan, and have some ignorance of some of their stuff, I do have a few of their albums–on vinyl and on cd–and know that ‘Oh Yeah’ wasn’t the only song they ever made.)
So, does all this info I’m babbling about make me the geekiest one here?
August 18th, 2007 at 3:00 am
To CR: I would suggest the song ‘The Race’ with samples from ‘I Love You’ thrown in (that song remind me of the good old days playing Llama on my Amiga (and no! she was not my Mexican girlfriend)).
August 18th, 2007 at 3:04 am
To Gary 7: We will get them all!
‘Hey Joe, where are you goin’ with that gun in your hand?’
August 18th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
To Thomas Siefert:
August 19th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
To all: A slightly off topic question.
Could Trek Fandom be considered a religion? Consider these things Star Trek has in common with religion in general, and Christianity (or what it has lately become) in particular:
1.) Both have a wide range of followers, from casual fans to the extremely devout.
2.) The most devout often dress in the traditional clothing, even in public.
3.) Both will ignore currently known scientific laws in the name of telling an interesting story or making a moral point.
4.) Both will ignore their own canon of events for the same ends mentioned above.
5.) The most devout of each are quick to come up with off-the-cuff explanations for why science or canon appears to be violated.
6.) Both have larger-than-life characters who always seem to do the right thing and save the day.
7.) Both have “higher beings” as in angels and demons, profits and pah-wraiths, saints, demi-gods and of course Q.
8.) Both repeatedly make the point that humans shouldn’t try to be higher beings, just really good humans.
9.) The most devout Trekkies are as against getting into other sci-fi franchises as the most devout christians are against exploring other religions.
10.) Both have old and new parts and offshoots to the canon. Trekkies who only like the original series are like jews, who only follow the old testament. A lot of trekkies seem to feel about Enterprise the way a lot of christians feel about the book of mormon.
11.) In both it’s still considered a novelty to have a woman in charge.
12.) Both preach about morality and brotherhood and caring for one-another, but they always end up blowing stuff up anyway.
Anyone have anything to add? Lets discuss.
August 19th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
13.) Having a bridge set (alter & Cross) in the bedroom and pretending that twirling the knobs gives meaning.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:56 am
Thanks for that one. I bet someone out there actually did remake a bridge setpiece and place it in his bedroom.
I guess I posted this too late for anyone to care, so I’ll repost it in a later Trek-related entry.