<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BA Review: Star Trek</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/</link>
	<description>I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:46:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lore</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-10/#comment-467299</link>
		<dc:creator>Lore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 19:11:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-467299</guid>
		<description>Wonderful review of the movie. I caught on to many of the things you talked about in your article, although I didn&#039;t know the science of it. Despite it all, I absolutely agree with you. It&#039;s an amazing movie and I hope they continue with just as impressive sequels. A series would be nice too :)
Thank you for explaining the science behind the scenes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wonderful review of the movie. I caught on to many of the things you talked about in your article, although I didn&#8217;t know the science of it. Despite it all, I absolutely agree with you. It&#8217;s an amazing movie and I hope they continue with just as impressive sequels. A series would be nice too <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Thank you for explaining the science behind the scenes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JS</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-10/#comment-466373</link>
		<dc:creator>JS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-466373</guid>
		<description>So the drill appeared to be dangling on the end of a long chain.  Why didn&#039;t the reaction force from the drill send it hurtling straight up into the mothership?  (Inertial dampers, I guess?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So the drill appeared to be dangling on the end of a long chain.  Why didn&#8217;t the reaction force from the drill send it hurtling straight up into the mothership?  (Inertial dampers, I guess?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bri</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-10/#comment-466224</link>
		<dc:creator>Bri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 13:15:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-466224</guid>
		<description>To read all this information was really awesome. I only took a college intro course in astronomy, so that G w/e star going super nova was probably the only thing I really caught onto. lol. 

I grew up on TNG (mostly reruns), DS9 (still not a fan of that one), Voyager, and Enterprise...but had not seen the original when I saw this movie a few years back being born in 1990. But I have to say I loved it. Even my mom, who did grow up with Kirk/Spock, loved it...I think she had seen that movie so many times now. She will love what you&#039;ve written here! 

Also now I&#039;m very proud to say I&#039;m mostly through re-watching all of the shows. From Star Trek to Enterprise. It really has made me a true trekky and very much interested in real astronomy. It would be really cool for another Star Trek TV show to come out too. Some day I can only hope!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To read all this information was really awesome. I only took a college intro course in astronomy, so that G w/e star going super nova was probably the only thing I really caught onto. lol. </p>
<p>I grew up on TNG (mostly reruns), DS9 (still not a fan of that one), Voyager, and Enterprise&#8230;but had not seen the original when I saw this movie a few years back being born in 1990. But I have to say I loved it. Even my mom, who did grow up with Kirk/Spock, loved it&#8230;I think she had seen that movie so many times now. She will love what you&#8217;ve written here! </p>
<p>Also now I&#8217;m very proud to say I&#8217;m mostly through re-watching all of the shows. From Star Trek to Enterprise. It really has made me a true trekky and very much interested in real astronomy. It would be really cool for another Star Trek TV show to come out too. Some day I can only hope!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: so...</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-10/#comment-439448</link>
		<dc:creator>so...</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 23:56:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-439448</guid>
		<description>ok, dear astronomers, an open letter to those who just can&#039;t get around the &quot;the sound in space fetish.&quot;

skip it.... 

Nobody would be that stupid to use a general condensor microphone in space, 
Of course  our imaginative future camera man (or spectator in suit) would  choose a system like a laser based vibration pickup system to record the sound.

The sad thing is: 
how many of your people complaining about the sound in space thing, do have watched some nature documentary footage wich displays chewing insects, without wondering about that sound ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ok, dear astronomers, an open letter to those who just can&#8217;t get around the &#8220;the sound in space fetish.&#8221;</p>
<p>skip it&#8230;. </p>
<p>Nobody would be that stupid to use a general condensor microphone in space,<br />
Of course  our imaginative future camera man (or spectator in suit) would  choose a system like a laser based vibration pickup system to record the sound.</p>
<p>The sad thing is:<br />
how many of your people complaining about the sound in space thing, do have watched some nature documentary footage wich displays chewing insects, without wondering about that sound ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mrz80</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-437880</link>
		<dc:creator>mrz80</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:10:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-437880</guid>
		<description>Ok, I&#039;ve just burned my lunch hour reading hundreds of comments...  I have to chime in with my own brief blurb:

1.  The Enterprise.  I was SO looking forward to this movie, just to see the original, unrefitted Enterprise more or less straight out of TOS.  AFter all, didn&#039;t they just recreate all those glorious sets for the mirror universe episode of &quot;Enterprise&quot;?  The ship itself was,thus, a terrible disappointment for me.

2. The whole Kirk goes from Cadet First Class to Captain in one fell swoop?!?!  Is Starfleet really THAT hard up for senior officers that they&#039;ve gotta take a butterbar, no matter how demonstratively competent he was in one isolated crisis) and hand over the keys to a starship?  I don&#039;t think so.  A MUCH better way to handle that would&#039;ve been to have COMMANDER Kirk at a promotion and change-of-command ceremony, getting his 2-1/2 stripes and relieving Pike, prefaced by a &quot;THREE YEARS LATER...&quot; subtitle.   Remember when Pike told Kirk after the bar brawl he could become an officer in 4 years, command a ship in 8.   That&#039;d be 4 years of the Academy, then 4 more years to command.  Next morning, Kirk tells Pike, &quot;I&#039;ll do it in three.&quot;   Maybe Kirk could whisper to Pike , &quot;Told you I&#039;d do it in three...&quot; and grin at him as they shook hands, with Pike shaking his head and muttering &quot;Show-off&quot; or somesuch.

3.  &quot;And yet, you can be in two places at the same time.&quot;  - one of the better lines in the whole flick.

4. Amusing moment - when Uhura walking out of the Transporter room after playing tonsil-hockey with Spock, Scotty just sort of stares at her.  In the later of the first batch of ST movies it became apparent that Scotty was developing a &quot;thing&quot; for Uhura.  And the &quot;So her first name&#039;s Nyota?&quot; &quot;I have no comment on the matter.&quot; was the BEST bit of dialog in the flick. :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, I&#8217;ve just burned my lunch hour reading hundreds of comments&#8230;  I have to chime in with my own brief blurb:</p>
<p>1.  The Enterprise.  I was SO looking forward to this movie, just to see the original, unrefitted Enterprise more or less straight out of TOS.  AFter all, didn&#8217;t they just recreate all those glorious sets for the mirror universe episode of &#8220;Enterprise&#8221;?  The ship itself was,thus, a terrible disappointment for me.</p>
<p>2. The whole Kirk goes from Cadet First Class to Captain in one fell swoop?!?!  Is Starfleet really THAT hard up for senior officers that they&#8217;ve gotta take a butterbar, no matter how demonstratively competent he was in one isolated crisis) and hand over the keys to a starship?  I don&#8217;t think so.  A MUCH better way to handle that would&#8217;ve been to have COMMANDER Kirk at a promotion and change-of-command ceremony, getting his 2-1/2 stripes and relieving Pike, prefaced by a &#8220;THREE YEARS LATER&#8230;&#8221; subtitle.   Remember when Pike told Kirk after the bar brawl he could become an officer in 4 years, command a ship in 8.   That&#8217;d be 4 years of the Academy, then 4 more years to command.  Next morning, Kirk tells Pike, &#8220;I&#8217;ll do it in three.&#8221;   Maybe Kirk could whisper to Pike , &#8220;Told you I&#8217;d do it in three&#8230;&#8221; and grin at him as they shook hands, with Pike shaking his head and muttering &#8220;Show-off&#8221; or somesuch.</p>
<p>3.  &#8220;And yet, you can be in two places at the same time.&#8221;  &#8211; one of the better lines in the whole flick.</p>
<p>4. Amusing moment &#8211; when Uhura walking out of the Transporter room after playing tonsil-hockey with Spock, Scotty just sort of stares at her.  In the later of the first batch of ST movies it became apparent that Scotty was developing a &#8220;thing&#8221; for Uhura.  And the &#8220;So her first name&#8217;s Nyota?&#8221; &#8220;I have no comment on the matter.&#8221; was the BEST bit of dialog in the flick. <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Ejercito</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-435792</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Ejercito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 02:49:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-435792</guid>
		<description>The &quot;black holes&quot; were not as such, but an entirely new phenomenom created by red matter, and the name happened to be the closest approximate term the 24th century Fed people could use.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;black holes&#8221; were not as such, but an entirely new phenomenom created by red matter, and the name happened to be the closest approximate term the 24th century Fed people could use.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronald Stepp</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-368153</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronald Stepp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 22:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-368153</guid>
		<description>1) working time machine, repeat, a Working Time Machine!

2) same problem as in First Contact.  In that one the Borg sent a cube to Earth and after a gigantic space battle, the Borg go back in time to assimilate the Earth in the past, with Picard in hot pursuit.

The problem here is why wouldn&#039;t the Borg send their Cube to some nearby unimportant star system, launch their sphere, go back in time and assimilate the Earth at their leisure?  They get the biological distinctiveness of the humans without pesky interference from Picard or Starfleet.  Oh, they could even have beamed some Borg down to the Cochrane&#039;s Earth and assimilated it too, we saw how hard it was to stop them on a modern starship, scattered all over an earlier tech Earth, lights out.

Why did I bring all this up?  It&#039;s a really good reason why having a WORKING TIME MACHINE basically renders plot points moot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1) working time machine, repeat, a Working Time Machine!</p>
<p>2) same problem as in First Contact.  In that one the Borg sent a cube to Earth and after a gigantic space battle, the Borg go back in time to assimilate the Earth in the past, with Picard in hot pursuit.</p>
<p>The problem here is why wouldn&#8217;t the Borg send their Cube to some nearby unimportant star system, launch their sphere, go back in time and assimilate the Earth at their leisure?  They get the biological distinctiveness of the humans without pesky interference from Picard or Starfleet.  Oh, they could even have beamed some Borg down to the Cochrane&#8217;s Earth and assimilated it too, we saw how hard it was to stop them on a modern starship, scattered all over an earlier tech Earth, lights out.</p>
<p>Why did I bring all this up?  It&#8217;s a really good reason why having a WORKING TIME MACHINE basically renders plot points moot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim de Graff</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-364235</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim de Graff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 22:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-364235</guid>
		<description>For anyone who enjoyed this movie, I urge you to read through &quot;Star Trek by the Minute&quot; by Buck Field at 

http://structureddream.blogspot.com/2009/06/my-take-on-star-trek-2009-001.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For anyone who enjoyed this movie, I urge you to read through &#8220;Star Trek by the Minute&#8221; by Buck Field at </p>
<p><a href="http://structureddream.blogspot.com/2009/06/my-take-on-star-trek-2009-001.html" rel="nofollow">http://structureddream.blogspot.com/2009/06/my-take-on-star-trek-2009-001.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tanvirul</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-357075</link>
		<dc:creator>tanvirul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 05:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-357075</guid>
		<description>also if the place where the older spok was viewing the death of his planet from was a moon, which im pretty sure it would have to be, why didnt it fall out of orbit, since the planet it orbited was destroyed the gravitational pull that kept the moon in orbit around that planet would be gone, the moon would not stay in orbit, it would just simply be attracted to something else, so i thought that was a huge blunder in the movie. moons are satellites they orbit a bigger mass, the bigger mass would be vulcan.... well just thought i should mention</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>also if the place where the older spok was viewing the death of his planet from was a moon, which im pretty sure it would have to be, why didnt it fall out of orbit, since the planet it orbited was destroyed the gravitational pull that kept the moon in orbit around that planet would be gone, the moon would not stay in orbit, it would just simply be attracted to something else, so i thought that was a huge blunder in the movie. moons are satellites they orbit a bigger mass, the bigger mass would be vulcan&#8230;. well just thought i should mention</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Messier Tidy Upper</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-335453</link>
		<dc:creator>Messier Tidy Upper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:35:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-335453</guid>
		<description>How this movie should have ended? 

Click my name here &amp; find out! ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How this movie should have ended? </p>
<p>Click my name here &#038; find out! <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GeekMom &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Five Ways to Teach Science With Star Trek</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-331225</link>
		<dc:creator>GeekMom &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Five Ways to Teach Science With Star Trek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 20:59:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-331225</guid>
		<description>[...] that Star Trek always got the science right. For the most recent movie’s rights and wrongs, read Bad Astronomer Phil Plait’s play-by-play. And NASA has a section of their site devoted to Star Trek. You can read up on technologies from [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] that Star Trek always got the science right. For the most recent movie’s rights and wrongs, read Bad Astronomer Phil Plait’s play-by-play. And NASA has a section of their site devoted to Star Trek. You can read up on technologies from [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Natalie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-293567</link>
		<dc:creator>Natalie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 23:19:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-293567</guid>
		<description>Good movie, and a great review!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good movie, and a great review!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Star Trek Review (with Spoilers) &#124; Multi-Genre Fan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-264506</link>
		<dc:creator>Star Trek Review (with Spoilers) &#124; Multi-Genre Fan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 21:22:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-264506</guid>
		<description>[...] whole galaxies &#8211; solar systems yes, but never galaxies. Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy wrote a review of Star Trek in which he detailed all the bad science of the movie. However, what he also did was point out some [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] whole galaxies &#8211; solar systems yes, but never galaxies. Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy wrote a review of Star Trek in which he detailed all the bad science of the movie. However, what he also did was point out some [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zenzmurfy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-257484</link>
		<dc:creator>zenzmurfy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 04:26:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-257484</guid>
		<description>spoiler:
                    
About point #2, if one drop of that stuff is able to make a planet sized black hole and Spock had maybe 30 gallons of the stuff, how many worlds could he wipe out had he wanted to? Is there even more of the stuff where Spock came from? 

6) Time travel happened a lot in the old Trek universe and this reboot of the franchise establishes that its possible right away. If they know it&#039;s possible, I would think a concerted effort by the worlds with no concern to how much time and money it takes, to go back in time to stop the future mining ship.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>spoiler:</p>
<p>About point #2, if one drop of that stuff is able to make a planet sized black hole and Spock had maybe 30 gallons of the stuff, how many worlds could he wipe out had he wanted to? Is there even more of the stuff where Spock came from? </p>
<p>6) Time travel happened a lot in the old Trek universe and this reboot of the franchise establishes that its possible right away. If they know it&#8217;s possible, I would think a concerted effort by the worlds with no concern to how much time and money it takes, to go back in time to stop the future mining ship.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zenzmurfy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-257211</link>
		<dc:creator>zenzmurfy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Apr 2010 05:13:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-257211</guid>
		<description>Some comments about the Star Trek reboot I haven&#039;t heard others mention(not in any order  of importance): 1)Doesn&#039;t the crew seem a little bit too young for their senior positions? especially for the flagship of the fleet? In TOS, becoming captain was a really tough position to get and thats for any ordinary starship let alone the Enterprise. It was a big deal that Kirk was captain at an unusally young age. 2) if one drop of red matter is such a big deal, why is Spock in possession of more than 30 gallons of the stuff? 3) I wonder if pon-far still exist in trek anymore(looking at Spock), or it&#039;s going to be big trouble for the Vulcans if it did. 4) That Porsche in the 23th(?) century must&#039;ve been an insanely valuable antique, a museum piece. Also it&#039;s strange that the flying bike couldn&#039;t outrun an antique car driven by someone who couldn&#039;t have had much experience driving one of those things. 5) I miss the old beam weapons. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some comments about the Star Trek reboot I haven&#8217;t heard others mention(not in any order  of importance): 1)Doesn&#8217;t the crew seem a little bit too young for their senior positions? especially for the flagship of the fleet? In TOS, becoming captain was a really tough position to get and thats for any ordinary starship let alone the Enterprise. It was a big deal that Kirk was captain at an unusally young age. 2) if one drop of red matter is such a big deal, why is Spock in possession of more than 30 gallons of the stuff? 3) I wonder if pon-far still exist in trek anymore(looking at Spock), or it&#8217;s going to be big trouble for the Vulcans if it did. 4) That Porsche in the 23th(?) century must&#8217;ve been an insanely valuable antique, a museum piece. Also it&#8217;s strange that the flying bike couldn&#8217;t outrun an antique car driven by someone who couldn&#8217;t have had much experience driving one of those things. 5) I miss the old beam weapons. <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Betty</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-254614</link>
		<dc:creator>Betty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 13:19:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-254614</guid>
		<description>What Star Trek movie is this from?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What Star Trek movie is this from?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stuff: Legobrille, World-of-Warcraf-Gamer-Hütte, Superheldenfilme=Antikriegsfilme und mehr&#8230; &#171; murmelbahn inc.</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-251381</link>
		<dc:creator>stuff: Legobrille, World-of-Warcraf-Gamer-Hütte, Superheldenfilme=Antikriegsfilme und mehr&#8230; &#171; murmelbahn inc.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 11:17:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-251381</guid>
		<description>[...] Star Trek Beitrag: Eine Sehr nerdige Review vom neuen Film auch wissenschaftlicher Perspektive von BadAstronomy! hannes um 16:27   cologne  design  kunst  lego  sonnenbrille  star-trek  superhelden  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Star Trek Beitrag: Eine Sehr nerdige Review vom neuen Film auch wissenschaftlicher Perspektive von BadAstronomy! hannes um 16:27   cologne  design  kunst  lego  sonnenbrille  star-trek  superhelden  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sci-fi-entifically illiterate &#171; Cubik&#8217;s Rube</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-250273</link>
		<dc:creator>Sci-fi-entifically illiterate &#171; Cubik&#8217;s Rube</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2010 23:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-250273</guid>
		<description>[...] John Scalzi was way more put out by the bad science in the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie than was astronomer Phil Plait. These are both guys who know a thing or two about a thing or two, but it&#8217;s clearly possible [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] John Scalzi was way more put out by the bad science in the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie than was astronomer Phil Plait. These are both guys who know a thing or two about a thing or two, but it&#8217;s clearly possible [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JMW</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-248067</link>
		<dc:creator>JMW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 01:29:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-248067</guid>
		<description>Re: the view of the rings...

Okay, I did the math, and assuming I got it right...

According to Wikipedia, the rings start at about 6,600 km above Saturn&#039;s surface, and extend out to about 120,700 km above the surface, making them about 114,000 km wide.

Titan orbits Saturn at a distance of 1,221,870 km (semi-major axis), and has a diameter of 2576 km.  Assuming that the Enterprise rises up out of Titan&#039;s atmosphere at Titan&#039;s pole, the big E is about 1288 km above or below the plane of the ecliptic of Saturn&#039;s planet/moons system.

At that range, the rings would be about .01 degrees wide.  Pretty near edge-on.  Assuming I&#039;m right, the outer edge would be at an angle of about 89.93 degrees, and the inner edge at 89.94 degrees as measured from an axis normal to Saturn&#039;s ecliptic at Enterprise&#039;s vantage point.

What does the moon cover from Earth&#039;s surface?  About 0.5 degree?  So the rings would be 1/50th the size of the moon?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: the view of the rings&#8230;</p>
<p>Okay, I did the math, and assuming I got it right&#8230;</p>
<p>According to Wikipedia, the rings start at about 6,600 km above Saturn&#8217;s surface, and extend out to about 120,700 km above the surface, making them about 114,000 km wide.</p>
<p>Titan orbits Saturn at a distance of 1,221,870 km (semi-major axis), and has a diameter of 2576 km.  Assuming that the Enterprise rises up out of Titan&#8217;s atmosphere at Titan&#8217;s pole, the big E is about 1288 km above or below the plane of the ecliptic of Saturn&#8217;s planet/moons system.</p>
<p>At that range, the rings would be about .01 degrees wide.  Pretty near edge-on.  Assuming I&#8217;m right, the outer edge would be at an angle of about 89.93 degrees, and the inner edge at 89.94 degrees as measured from an axis normal to Saturn&#8217;s ecliptic at Enterprise&#8217;s vantage point.</p>
<p>What does the moon cover from Earth&#8217;s surface?  About 0.5 degree?  So the rings would be 1/50th the size of the moon?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ten Great Science Movies From the 2000s &#124; Surprising Science</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-233211</link>
		<dc:creator>Ten Great Science Movies From the 2000s &#124; Surprising Science</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:09:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-233211</guid>
		<description>[...] movie where there is silence in space, a rarity in science fiction films. So the movie makers got much of the rest of the science wrong. Who cares? We really like the reinvented Star Trek universe, especially the new [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] movie where there is silence in space, a rarity in science fiction films. So the movie makers got much of the rest of the science wrong. Who cares? We really like the reinvented Star Trek universe, especially the new [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Darkantos</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-232121</link>
		<dc:creator>Darkantos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:26:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-232121</guid>
		<description>JakeR @ 423

                      So in the first encounter, Kirk’s daddy could have put his ship into warp speed and rammed it down the throat of the Romulan mining ship, putting an effectively infinite mass through its center and vaporizing it. Problem solved and no movie needed.

The warp engines were one of the first things taken out by the Romulans, along with LR communications and transporters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JakeR @ 423</p>
<p>                      So in the first encounter, Kirk’s daddy could have put his ship into warp speed and rammed it down the throat of the Romulan mining ship, putting an effectively infinite mass through its center and vaporizing it. Problem solved and no movie needed.</p>
<p>The warp engines were one of the first things taken out by the Romulans, along with LR communications and transporters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ent0r</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-224348</link>
		<dc:creator>ent0r</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 07:28:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-224348</guid>
		<description>Hi,
first of all, thank you Phil Plait  for your efforts to teach us in a rather amusing way.
I would write more praise, but I don&#039;t want to bloat this unneccasry.

Here&#039;s a question:
If you would use a &quot;gamma ray burst&quot; as  a plot device to be  a threat.
Wouldn&#039;t it be kind of a stretch, since a planet must collide with it, which is kind of hard, since the 2 gammaray bursts would erupt at the suns poles?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,<br />
first of all, thank you Phil Plait  for your efforts to teach us in a rather amusing way.<br />
I would write more praise, but I don&#8217;t want to bloat this unneccasry.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a question:<br />
If you would use a &#8220;gamma ray burst&#8221; as  a plot device to be  a threat.<br />
Wouldn&#8217;t it be kind of a stretch, since a planet must collide with it, which is kind of hard, since the 2 gammaray bursts would erupt at the suns poles?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Damon</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-215368</link>
		<dc:creator>Damon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:13:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-215368</guid>
		<description>Finally caught a screening of this gem at a $5 theater with my girlfriend on a whim last night. Can&#039;t believe I waited so long. I&#039;m glad someone finally came along and decided to have some fun with the Star Trek universe. And I&#039;m glad it was J.J. Abrams. Great movie.

The accuracy of the science in this and other films is irrelevant, because it&#039;s Science Fiction. Sci-Fi is about taking variables we are comfortable and familiar with, in hard science as well as the everyday world, and altering those variables to see what happens. If astronomers ran Hollywood then no movie would ever get made and those that did would be boring, soulless black-and-white snooze-fests, devoid of any fun (see: variables) and replaced (blotted out) by  elitist probabilities and by-the-numbers formulas. Like a movie about someone counting enough digits of Pi to fill two hours. Any iota of &quot;fun&quot; would be stamped out. 

I prefer to get my boring science from where it belongs-- old, dusty volumes stacked disinterestedly on my bookshelf. Your article is still pretty cute though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Finally caught a screening of this gem at a $5 theater with my girlfriend on a whim last night. Can&#8217;t believe I waited so long. I&#8217;m glad someone finally came along and decided to have some fun with the Star Trek universe. And I&#8217;m glad it was J.J. Abrams. Great movie.</p>
<p>The accuracy of the science in this and other films is irrelevant, because it&#8217;s Science Fiction. Sci-Fi is about taking variables we are comfortable and familiar with, in hard science as well as the everyday world, and altering those variables to see what happens. If astronomers ran Hollywood then no movie would ever get made and those that did would be boring, soulless black-and-white snooze-fests, devoid of any fun (see: variables) and replaced (blotted out) by  elitist probabilities and by-the-numbers formulas. Like a movie about someone counting enough digits of Pi to fill two hours. Any iota of &#8220;fun&#8221; would be stamped out. </p>
<p>I prefer to get my boring science from where it belongs&#8211; old, dusty volumes stacked disinterestedly on my bookshelf. Your article is still pretty cute though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vader</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-208477</link>
		<dc:creator>Vader</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:22:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-208477</guid>
		<description>I thought the casting was good ... with the exception of Pine as Kirk. Or maybe it was just the characterization of Kirk in the script.

Pike rocked, though. I want to see the series where Pike is the captain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought the casting was good &#8230; with the exception of Pine as Kirk. Or maybe it was just the characterization of Kirk in the script.</p>
<p>Pike rocked, though. I want to see the series where Pike is the captain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: L.E. Greys</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/comment-page-9/#comment-202053</link>
		<dc:creator>L.E. Greys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/08/ba-review-star-trek/#comment-202053</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve seen the film, and it was a spectacular, but it wasn&#039;t Star Trek.  I don&#039;t know what happened to &#039;exploring strange new worlds&#039; and &#039;boldly going where no man has gone before&#039;, but it disappeared long before this.  Still, you could still call it Star Trek because they tried to keep at least some of the positive aspects of it going.  This film was just a Sci-fi action movie, and there have been thousands of those.  It was a good one, but it wasn&#039;t Star Trek.
Don&#039;t get me started on the science.  Hollywood is Hollywood is Hollywood, and they won&#039;t change.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve seen the film, and it was a spectacular, but it wasn&#8217;t Star Trek.  I don&#8217;t know what happened to &#8216;exploring strange new worlds&#8217; and &#8216;boldly going where no man has gone before&#8217;, but it disappeared long before this.  Still, you could still call it Star Trek because they tried to keep at least some of the positive aspects of it going.  This film was just a Sci-fi action movie, and there have been thousands of those.  It was a good one, but it wasn&#8217;t Star Trek.<br />
Don&#8217;t get me started on the science.  Hollywood is Hollywood is Hollywood, and they won&#8217;t change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk

Served from: blogs.discovermagazine.com @ 2012-02-14 16:05:18 -->
