NCIEO Home Page (Map): Continuing Communications: Ask the Chief:

ASK THE CHIEF
10/10/97

(Also available from Starland mirror site)

The old fingers are flying across the keyboard this morning so expect typos! First, some comments from previous columns . . .


Money and the Federation
Beginning with Jeffrey M. Muscato's comments in the 9/25/97 column

Elio Arteaga of Hialeah, Florida: I believe the first reference to the Federation not using money may have come from the TOS episode "Catspaw", where Sylivia offers Kirk a plate full precious gems. Kirk tells her the gems mean nothing to him because the transporters on the ship could replicate them in huge quantities. When I first heard him say that so many years ago, I began to get the impression that money was not used in the Federation because their technology could give its citizens anything they needed.

In the episode "Charlie X", Kirk and a crewman had a conversation about replicated turkey/meatloaf for Thanksgiving. This would also support the position that food is replicated and that the ship would not need to stock large quantities of food at every Starbase. (Note from Phil: Not sure about this one. I'm a bit fuzzy on the conversation because I haven't seen the episode in a while but I think there's an inference in there that the Enterprise is actually using ovens!)

In the episode "Mark of Gideon", Kirks tells the girl that the ship renews its fuel, leading us to believe that there is no need to manufacture starship fuel. (The matter/antimatter fuel is collected by the Bussard collectors as the ship travels through space, right?)

Given a universe where all the basic needs of humanity (and humanoid life) are provided by technology, it would not be a stretch to believe that people would devote their lives to exploration, philosophy, and learning in general. If I had all my living paid for, I would be a professional student at a university, gathering more degrees than a thermometer!

My question is: What do you feel is the collective goal of humans in the 20th Century? And what do you feel it would be if all their needs were met by technology?

Phil: We have no collective goal! And, unless there is some radical reprogramming of the human brain--or unless there is the emergence of some world-wide threat--humans will never have a collective goal. It's simply a matter of how the human brain is wired. This is a huge discussion and I don't have the time to really hit it but here's the short version. The human mind spends it's entire existance creating patterns of recognition. Part of the function of these patterns is to assess threat. This threat assessment gets a much higher priority in the human brain than pretty much everything else (including reproduction--few people have intercourse in a "burning house" . . . to corrupt a saying from "Day of the Dove"). Without a common, immediate, identifiable threat, humans drop back to threats that are smaller and less immediate in scope. In other words, if you do away with physical "threats" like poverty, hunger and unemployment, humans start bickering over stuff like status and achievements. I do not believe that there is utopia in our future if we are left to our own devices and I think that's quite evident by simple comparison. North Koreans are starving. For the most part, the citizens of the United States are not. Yet, the US has just as many societal problems (crime, divorce, unwed mothers, debt load) as North Korea has hungry people. The problems aren't eliminated, just shifted.

So . . . yes, I think it's stretching to believe that people would devote their lives to higher purposes if they had their needs met. After all, humanity doesn't have a great track record on this. Look at the number of people who do have their needs met in our society. Would you say that the rich are typically known for the wholesomeness of their souls? ;-) Besides, wanting to have our needs met to move to higher purposes is just an excuse not to operate on a more noble plain, now. Mother Teresa did just fine for decades--helping the poor--with virtually nothing and I would suggest that this world would be a far better place if we lived as her.

Scott Vogt: Thought I'd throw my 2 cents in. I've felt it worked like this. Earth, however they managed to do it, are self-sufficient. There is no poverty, crime, war, etc. And they don't use money. Grampa Joe's restaurant proves nothing. Whatever you do is motivated by a love for the profession. Joe loves cooking. No one has to pay. Joe has no bills to pay, employees work for works' sake, to be productive. A concept alien to the 20th Century.

But when we get off-world, of course we need mediums of exchange, be it trade or money. For travelling starships, I believe most allied worlds, and some non-aligned worlds, give SF credit. As Crusher did on the Bandi homeworld. She had the fabric placed on her account. Why? Surely she could replicate any kind of fabric she needed. I say, SF encourages it's people to spend. They are just helping the local economy. Whatever the crew charges up, the aliens know SF is good for it. The aliens can even pad the bill, because who cares, we don't use money. What the rate of exchange is I can't say. Now, as for paying people. I always assumed Bajor has money. Kira and Odo are paid by the government. Odo should have quite a little nest egg. He doesn't eat, buy clothes, pay rent, etc. What would he spend his money on? I wonder how much Quark charged him for the baby changeling? Now, since the SF officers here are stationed here and not mobile like a starship, they get paid by SF. All of them do. And they don't get paid by what race they are, but by where they are. So, they all get some accepted currency, be it the Bajoran kind or maybe latinum, that seems to be a more widely accepted medium of currency. Anyway, they are probably paid very little, but so what? They don't pay for quarters, food, or clothing unless they choose to, by going to Quark's or Garak's or whoever. Which SF encourages, to help the locals. And SF people don't care, because money is not the driving force in peoples' lives. But they have to get an income. Quark's ain't free. When he thought they were dead, he said Bashir and O'Brien always paid their bar bills on time. I'm sure he even pads O'Brien and Bashir's bill all the time. They don't know and wouldn't care anyway. Dax might care, she likes money. Now how SF trades is still a mystery, but like the UT, let's just wink and say it gets done. But I just wanted to say, SF gets paid by where they are stationed. Don't think 20th Century, think 24th.

Phil: So does Grandpa Joe have someone to bus tables? Someone who feels that it's the best way that they can fulfill themselves? Or is there some poor little robot that does this? And what if I want to build a house or put on another addition? Do carpenters just come and do it for free? And plumbers? And electricians? And when something breaks, are there so many technicians that there is always someone available to come? Or, if there isn't, is everyone just content to wait until someone is available? My problem with this whole "There's No Money, Just Enrich Yourself" is that there will always be jobs that people don't want to do! (Unless there is some radical reprogramming of the human brain and I see no evidence of that in Trek.) These jobs will have little or no status and they won't be fun. (For example, That crumudgeonly old guy in "The Child" who had to watch over the Federations worst geneticially engineered pathogens probably had his days when he didn't feel like the job was enriching him.) In our society, we are able to get these jobs done because there is a medium of exchange whereby an individual can trade what they do not enjoy for something they do. If in the 24th century on Earth, anyone can have anything they want just by asking, what motivation is there to do the jobs that are less desirable? (And they do exist. Trust me. They do.) Does everyone in the restaurant stand up and cheer when the teenager clears the dishes off a table?!


Admirals in Gold Uniforms
Beginning with Kevin Weiler's comments in the 9/25/97 column

Tim Thompson of Fayetteville, AR: Unless I am mistaken, Leonard McCoy was an admiral in "Encounter at Farpoint." Since I find it hard to believe that Bones switched branches and went back to Command School at the age of 70 or so, I can only assume that Scott Wasilewski's comments about admirals outside the command track are correct. Then again, "Farpoint" also says that Data graduated in "'78" so I guess that episode happened in some parallel universe.


Nomad "Weighing" 500 Kilos
Beginning with Wells P. Martin's comments in the 9/25/97 column

Phil: Aargh! I was going to look up this dialogue this week and I ran out of time.


Animaniacs Visit Star Trek
Beginning with Paul Lalli's comments in the 9/25/97 column

Mike Leionff of Queensbury, NY: Under your Star Trek Parodies on TV section, I'd like to add a couple. Garfield and Friends once did a parody called Swine Trek: Adventures in Space. On an episode of The Critic, someone flipped to a broadcast of Rescue 911. William Shatner came on and said, "Tonight we'll be discussing, accidents involving, James Caan... CAAAAAAAN!!"

Anne Magee of Fredericton, NB: Are you familiar with a show called ReBoot? Half-hour CGI animated show, produced in Canada. It's available in Canada on YTV, and seasons 1 and 2 were available in the US on ABC. I don't know if season 3 is available in the US (yet). It's set inside a computer and the characters are sprites, binomes, viruses, etc. TV shows, computer games, and movies are frequently parodied on this show.

So far in season 3, a binome strongly resembling Captain Picard was deleted by the evil virus Megabyte, and an entire episode (Where No Sprites Have Gone Before) was a parody of the original series, as well as superheroes. (ReBoot usually layers its parodies.)


The Tribble in "When The Bough Breaks"
Beginning with Amber Heinzel's comments in the 9/25/97 column

Mike Cheyne: This is a response to the "Tribble" question. It said that the Klingons wiped out the Tribbles, right. Now Starfleet doesn't condone extinction. So why doesn't Kirk get right on Scotty's back after Scotty says he beamed the Tribbles to the Klingon vessel in "The Trouble With Tribbles"? Scotty must know that Klingons hate Tribbles (that's why he beamed them there), so doesn't he know the Klingons will massacre the poor, cuddly little things? (Kirk probably just made Scotty read more technical manuals in his quarters)

Phil: Presumably, the great Tribble hunt occurred after this incident. Although . . . this incident may have inspired it!

Murray Leeder: Sure, it doesn't make sense to have a toy tribble in a cage. But then again, it doesn't really make sense to have a Cabbage Patch Kid with a birth certificate!

Phil: My point exactly. Pet Rock, anyone? (Thanks to Chet Cox for sending along the same sentiments.)

Gilles Duchesne, Jonquiere, Quebec: I saw a rerun [of "When the Bough Breaks"] last week, and that thing is definitly NOT a tribble. If you look carefully when Wesley talks to the kids about rebelling, you can clearly see a nose (when, I don't know the english word, you know, what a dog use to smell...), and I think there's a tail, too, though it could just be a strap.

Bob Canada: Just read the Ask the Chief column, and in the part where I was asking if tribbles were extinct or not, I noticed that I said "It was making the usual purring sounds, but there was a cage on the floor next to her, implying that it was a live animal." I meant to say "It WASN'T purring." Oops. But it was still next to a little futuristic cage. It never occured to me that it could be a toy tribble. I guess that would make sense, and clean up the nit, although it seems a little odd to keep a toy in a cage.

Michel M. Albert, Moncton, NB: I gather all the comments on the tribble in "How the Bough Breaks" is intended to show how Tribbles existed regardless of the Great Tribble Hunt. Well, nitpickers who believe in the toy-tribble theory have only to look to Keiko's school on DS9 for proof. Remember that beautiful screen in the front of the class? The one that shows the anatomy of various animals/species from Trek past. There is not only a Horta, but also a Tribble. Now, do today's classrooms include anatomical graphics of dodos or Smilodons? Nope, they have pictures of cats, horses and fish: CURRENT LIVING ANIMALS. So the Tribble isn't extinct right?

Only tryin' the help by muddling the issue further ;-)


The Changling Face Of Cochrane
Beginning with Boeba's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Matt Nelson: The response you gave, Phil, acutally makes more sense here. As I recall, didn't the Companion find Cochrane dying in that episode? Almost certainly she would want to restore him to the peak of his fitness and health as a young man. In reality, this does not create much conflict at all!


B5 Nitpicker's Guide
Beginning with Jack Hallard's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Kevin Loughlin: You said you'd consider making a B5 guide in your latest ATC column, but said you'd wait for strip syndication. Well, CFMT in Toronto has been showing B5 weekday nights for a few weeks now, and I hear an american network (TNT or something) will be doing the same starting Jan. 1998. Just thought I'd let you know.

Phil: Acutally what I said was after B5 experience the kind of fan growth that Classic Trek did, I would be able to do a guide! ;-)


Enterprise-E Saucer Separation
Beginning with Jason Barnes's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Matt Nelson: Actually, a recent issue of Communicator answers this. The E-E can indeed separate its saucer (and according to The Art of Star Trek, so could the original 1701!); and it looks a little weird. The body looks like a freakish boomerang, while the saucer looks like the biggest Frisbee you ever saw. Methinks the artist had childhood catch games on his mind while drawing it.

Phil: Thanks to Dewitte Baisch, Murry Leeder, Brian Straight for sending this information along as well!


Uzis and the Borg
Beginning with Mick Hogben's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Robert Cook of Anacortes, WA: Mr. Hogben asked why the crew didn't replicate more projectile weapons to use against the Borg in ST:FC. They probably wouldn't have worked; in previous Borg appearances, a particular weapon works once on a Borg, but they next time you try it, they've adapted a defense and the weapon is no longer useable. No doubt the same thing would have happened with any new machine guns.

Of course, you'd think that the Borg would at *some* point have run into a race that employed projectile weapons, so maybe there is no good answer.


The TV Ratings System
Beginning with Sydney Carton's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Shane Tourtellotte: NextGen reruns broadcast from New York have had the ratings for a while, but their application has been spotty. It was TV-G for a while,then swtiched to PG, then back to G. This had the odd effect of giving episodes with overt sexual themes ("The Host", "The Perfect Mate") milder ratings than, say, the sex-'n'-violence-less "Cause and Effect". The few Classic reruns I've seen here lately have all been G.

One might also note that "Revulsion", which got a TV-PG-(D) for suggestive dialogue, had its share of violence and even gore, but got no V appendix for violence. Gotta go with you on this one, Phil. It's a little too arbitrary to trust, at least for today.

Mike Leionff of Queensbury, NY: Shows are rated by an independent rating board, but I don't know its exact name. Children's shows are rated either Y (for all kids) or Y7 (for kids seven and older). Everything else is an adults' show, with the mildest possible rating at TV-G. I saw bits and pieces of a DS9 episode involving Sisko as the Emissary. (Yeah, I know, I wish I could do better!) It was rated G and there was a fair peppering of mild expletives. This was before the more descriptive letters were added. But just so we're all clear, a TV-G rated program isn't a kids' show.

Sydney Carton: I'm beginning to adopt your viewpoints on the TV Ratings system. I may not have children but I do have a young sibling. Recently, while babysitting her, I told her we could watch together a tape of a sitcom she had missed and wanted to see. The show was TV-PG, so it would be harmless enough, right? I had to stop the thing 5 minutes into the episode due to, er, 'references' she was much to young to hear, and when I watched the rest after she had gone to bed I saw a lot of the show was like this. So, this gets a PG, and another show with lesser 'content' gets a 14... Whoever invented the rules for these ratings must be masters at fizzbin. I doubt I'll trust a TV rating again.


Tap-Dancing In The "Guinan" Days
Beginning with Bill Kruse's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Kevin Loughlin: I don't know what kind of novel Bill Kruse is referring to, but if it's a western it may make sense. Apparently TNG's Guinan was named for a bartender named 'Tex' Guinan.

Murray Leeder: Guinan was named after the famous bartender Texas Guinan. In an odd coincidence, one day a story about him was on the cover of the very same newspaper reporting on the adventures in the Marinias Trench of one Jacques Piccard.

Shane Tourtellotte: There was a nightclub owner some years ago, Mary Louise Cecilia, who operated under the pseudonym of Texas Guinan. Her establishment was so brazen about fleecing its patrons that she greeted them upon arrival with the salutation, "Hello, sucker!" A *very* interesting connection to the hostess of Ten-forward, I should think. Anyway, I'm pretty sure her club had some tap-dancing, so there's your answer, Bill.

Phil: Hmmm. It's a him, it's a her . . .

Joshua Truax: According to the Star Trek Encycopedia and Omnipedia, Whoopi Goldberg's character was named after one Texas Guinan, a notorious "speakeasy" proprietor during Prohibition. (For those of you living outside the U.S., who may not be familiar with this rather dubious chapter of American history, bars which continued to operate "underground" despite the ban on alcohol in the 1920s came to be known as "speakeasies." Don't ask me why...)

Phil: But was he a he or was him a her?

John Bibb: The character Guinan was named after "Texas" Guinan, a popular nightclub owner and hostess. I think she operated in the 1920's during Prohibition, but I'm not sure. There was an article about her a few years ago in the Dallas Morning News, but unfortunately I didn't save it. I haven't read the novel Bill Kruse is refering to, but I would bet that it refers to this period.

Phil: If I had to guess, I'd say the "shes" have it! ;-)

Desmond L. Warzel of Cranberry, PA: I'd like to point out the novel The Journeyer by Gary Jennings, a fictitious account of the journeys of Marco Polo. It contains the word Ferengi with that exact spelling, calling it a Mongolian word meaning literally "Frenchman," but used generically to refer to any European. I don't know if that's true, but I believe the novel predates ST:TNG and so this may be a possible origin.

Phil: Perhaps! We covered other "terrestrial" orgins for Star Trek names a few months ago.


NextGen Syndication
Beginning with Kathy Warren's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Phil: Kathy Warren wrote this week to say that another station in her area has picked up NextGen.

Shane Tourtellotte: In my area, NextGen's recently been stepped up to two episodes a week from one, and Classic Trek's gone from zero to twice weekly(though at terrible early morning hours). I'd be heartened, except I'm pretty sure Classic Trek's going to the Sci-Fi Channel in a few months. Could this be a "use it before you lose it" strategy applying to NextGen as well? Stay tuned ...

Michael Ash: My local Trek station has also stopped showing reruns of TNG in favor of showing DS9 reruns. Now, as I prefer DS9, I am very happy about this change, but it's still strange. Since other people have also written in (Ask the chief, 10-3), it's looking like *something* is in the works.

David S. Mueller: In Los Angeles, NextGen is no longer in syndication. Until just a few weeks ago, reruns were airing Sunday at 7 PM.

Hawaiians are in luck. I was there this summer, and they get LOTS of Star Trek. TNG & DS9 reruns at 12 noon and 1 PM (I forget which was which) Monday through Friday, as well as current DS9 and Voyager. You may want to check with a member in Honolulu (I'm assuming there is one) about the current schedule. They air on UPN affiliate KFVE 5.


A String Hanging in First Contact
Beginning with Karen Barker's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Eddie Marshall of Hampshire UK: From the Pan and scan version I've seen in the UK, this looks like the yellow criss crossed tapestry cloth that picard had over his chain on the Enterprise D. Unfortunately since the movie is only out in rental in the UK at the moment I can't confirm this, can any nitpickers with VHS/Laserdisk copies in the US take a look ?


Particles and Physics in Star Trek for Greg
Beginning with Phil's comments in the 10/03/97 column

Todd Felton: One instance of this can be found in one of the "Redemption" episodes (part I or II) as Geordi comes up with the Tachyon detection net/grid.

Mike Leionff of Queensbury, NY: Phil, I may be able to help your physics professor-friend. Somewhere, there's a book called The Physics of Star Trek. It's really "Star-Trekkie" and also really "Physics-ie." Your friend would love it.

Phil: Hadn't thought of that! I'll recommend it.

Philip McGachey: Are you looking for simply episode names, or sound and movie files?

Phil: Just need the episode names and the scenes where physics stuff is mentioned. Greg can do the sound files.

Sydney Carton: Go to http://www.midwinter.com/~koreth/particles/. I found this site just now and it supposedly lists all the particles ever mentioned in ST (I haven't checked every single one :). It does list chemicals and other ficticious elements or materials in it (the first entry is, I believe, ficticious and the second is acetylcholine, a neurochemical) but it does list episodes where the particles are mentioned (ex: Under antineutron, it says "Movie: IV: Voyage Home - Computer prompts Spock to 'adjust the sine wave in the gravity envelope so that antineutrons may pass but antigravitons cannot'"... How's that for a quote for your friend? :) so it might help as a guidepost to find what your friend's looking for! I don't think it lists quarks or the like, but there are many entries for all the specific antimatter particles. Hope this helps!

Phil: It does!

Lisa Shock: In answer to your challenge about technobabble for your friend:

Disaster - when they explain the quantum filament
Clues - they talk about wormholes
The Pegasus - Phasing matter
Paralells - quantum fissure in the space/time continuum
Force of Nature - tetrions,verterons and the warp speed limit
Phantasms - Data uses an interphasic pulse from his positronic network
The Loss - cosmic string
The Naked Now - collapsing star
Time squared - energy vortex
The Next Phase - chroniton distortions
Starship Mine - Baryon particles
Timescape - singularity, black holes

Phil: It does!


On to the questions . . .

Matt Nelson: The subject of toy collection has come up on the "ATC" column before, but I was wondering something. What do you think of the common toy manufacturers' practice of shortpacking figures, and in specific Playmates' INTENTIONAL low production runs on ALL their Star Trek figures, obstensibly to "cater to collectors". I just think they're being big stinkers.

Phil: One of the rules of business is that things are successful until they aren't. If Playmates Toys didn't think they could increase purchases by shortpacking, they wouldn't do it! And, even though it may make collectors mad in the short run, what is the ultimate result? Are the collectors scrambling around as soon as the first batches of the new toys come out trying to find the rare ones--thereby purchasing more, and purchasing sooner? Or are they getting disgusted enough to stop collecting altogether? Surprisingly enough, there is a proven marketing strategy in creating a product shortage. I once had a successful business man tell me a fabulous marketing story. He was just getting started. Owned a little motel. Got a great deal on new TVs. Bought them thinking he would have no problem unloading the old ones. Put an ad in the paper listing seventeen TVs at a good price. People called but no one bought. Then, he tried a new tatic. When they called, he would tell them that they were all sold but he might be getting a few more in. In a few days, he would then call them back and have them come look at only two or three. He sold every single television in short order. (He even dropped one on the way to the buyer's car and the buyer bought it anyway!) This is human nature. If someone tells us a thing is rare, it makes us feel special to have it and we are usually willing to expend more time and effort to get it! (By the way, I didn't say the story about the television was an honest story, I said it was a marketing story)

Merritt Stone: I do have an equipment question regarding Voyager. Aside from the obvious aesthetic reasons, why is Seven of Nine wearing a skintight silver jumpsuit? Won't this make her a liability (or a target) if she goes on Away Team missions? (And, knowing the writers, she WILL go)

Phil: No doubt she feels more comfortable in a catsuit because it's so efficient! And, as she said in "The Raven," "Borg do not sit." So it all makes perfect sense! (One wonders if Ryan got the new catsuit in this episode specifically because the script called for her to sit down.)

Andy Bay: What would happen if the Borg attacked the Dominion. Specifically, the Founders.

Phil: Have no idea but it ain't gonna happen because Voyager gets the Borg and DS9 gets the Dominion!

Murray Leeder: Does it bother anyone else that not even the slightest attempt at communication is made in "The Doomsday Machine"? I mean, the crew don't know what this thing is... it could be just an automated machine, but for all they know, it could be manned or even intelligent! I realize that this episode was made in a different time... we can't expect the "Silicon Avatar" treatment. But the fact remains that if a giant space cigar is eating your planets, a good way to stop is to ask it not to!

Phil: Hey! We're talking Kirk here. A man who knows good from evil. If Kirk thinks it's evil, it's evil and no amount of spineless chatting is going to make any difference. I say, "SHOOT IT!"

Simon de Vet: Forgive this question, as it does not relate to trek, nor really nitpicking. Do you have, pardon the expression, a "real job"? Do you really make a living by watching Star Trek all day long? If so, WOW! You must have the greatest job in the world. If not, what else do you do?

Phil: For now, this is what I do! I am desperately trying to get some fiction published but that is a really tough proposition with so many other "talented" writers in the field like Dennis Rodman and Cindy Crawford. (Heavy sigh)

Jesse Adams of St. Louis, MO: What do you consider valid Sci-Fi? Besides from Trek, X-Files, and B5, do you consider shows like "Xena: Warrior Princess" or "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" as Science fiction? And possibly do a guide on them? Keep in mind that This has no bearing on my opinion whatsoever. Personally, I can't stand either of those. Also, Will you be doing another Trek Guide next? Or Something else? Or does it depend on the success of your X-Files guide.

Phil: Actually, there's very little "real" sci-fi on TV. I heard a term that I prefer: Speculative Fiction--and that would include Xena! There has been no decision on the next Guide. We are watching to see how the X-phile Guide does. The whole Trek franchise is a bit wiggy right now and we're wanting to see how the nitpicking thing transfers to other properties. I'll keep you posted. (See Below for Xena.)

Sydney Carton: Are they working on the next Trek movie yet? I'm beginning to suffer from withdrawal of TNG (my fav of the four Treks)

Phil: It's in the works! Lots of rumors flying around but I usuall don't deal in rumors so they aren't going to get posted here!

Sydney Carton: I've seen ads on UPN lately for "Gene Roddenberry's Earth: Final Conflict". What exactly is this? I know it can't be a 'new' idea since, well, you know... Anyway, is it a series or TV movie, and given that it's Roddenberry's work will we nitpick it? :)

Phil: Majel Roddenbery found on old pilot script that Gene did for this series and decided to give it a go. Interestingly enough, they wrapped up something like 80% of the US markets on the strength of Roddenberry's name alone. From the sounds of it, the script was fairly heavily rewritten. (The Powers-that-Be worded their response very carefully when asked this!) But, Roddenberry did always have a knock for putting together a good mix of characters. And, yes, if you want to send in nits, send away! Not sure what I'm going to do with them but send away!

Michael Gurwitz: In "A Time to Stand," the Federation ship Centaur was pursuing Sisko (in the salvaged Jem Hadar ship). Both ships were travelling in warp speed, yet the Centaur continued to fire on and hit Sisko's ship. So the question is, do phasers and/or photon torpedos move at warp speed? If so, can they go at a faster warp than the pursuing or pursued ship? If they go slower than the attacking ship, then that ship will get shot down by it's own weapons. What's the word, Chief?

Phil: Phaser supposedly do not work at warp but photon torps do because they have their own warp drive!

Jason Barnes: I was reading on the Prodigy BB this week that there are a lot of people out there that are not happy with the way Rick Berman is taking Star Trek. They say that he once said there would be no more time traveling in Star Trek and then, wa-la, First Contact is a time traveler. They also said that he is just doing big names now by casting James Cromwell and not Glen Corbet as Cochrane. Plus, allowing a lot of the technobabble to flourish in Trek has sort of brought Trek down a ways from the interpersonal things of original Trek ( I tend to agree with this a bit. The Technobabble sometimes really bites.) What's your opinion?

Phil: Well, I think it's really easy to figure out what somebody else is doing wrong! Ultimately, the Trek franchise will be judged on one thing and one thing alone. How much money does it make? And the thing that directly impacts the amount of money Trek can make are the ratings that the shows generate because the ratings will determine how much Paramount can charge advertisers. If Trek's revenue steam has increased under Rick Berman's management, then it has been successful. If it hasn't, then it hasn't! We're talking television here, not art.

Michael Burr: Do you know where I could pick up some of the music for Star Trek, not on tape, sheet music for an instrument?

Phil: We covered some of this a while ago for the music from "The Inner Light" but I don't have time this morning to dig it back out. Do I recall correctly that Hal Leonard publishes some Trek stuff?

Liz Ling: I'm sure someone has asked this before; we're rather behind the times in the UK! In "First Contact" Worf stops his space suit from depressurising once it's been ripped by the Borg by tying a tube "borrowed" from one of our metallic friends around his leg. What happens to the bits of his body on the other side of the tourniquet? Shouldn't they explode and make a nasty mess? And how does the Enterprise sail off into the sunset without a deflector grid? I'm bemused.

Phil: Not sure how the Enterprise got by without a deflector dish! Maybe they had a spare?!? Are far as Worf's leg exploding in a vacuum, that only happens in the movies. Real life is much less dramatic. Turns out, skin makes a pretty good space suit too!

Mike Deeds: When will the Nitpicker's Guide for Deep Space Nine Trekkers Vol. II and the Nitpicker's Guide for Voyager Trekkers come out? I look forward to the Nitpicker's Guide for X-Philes. Please consider doing a Nitpicker's Guide for Xenites (Xena: Warrior Princess).

Phil: Don't know on DS9 II or Voyager. Have to see how the ratings do! Believe it or not, Dell has an interest in a Xenite Guide! (My wife's not such about this one! She's not thrilled about me watching a leather-clad, bustiered, sword-wielding vixen all day! ;-)

Rene Charbonneau: More like an observation [than a question]: In DS9's "A Time To Stand", near the beginning, Bashir tells Sisko he has word from the seventh fleet : Only 14 ships came back from 100-something. But, in TNG's "Best Of Both Worlds",when the Borg destroy 40 ships, everyone acts like this is the entire fleet. At the end of part 2, Commander Shelbey states that it will take over year to get the fleet back up (implying that those 40 ships was the entire fleet). Am I missing something here?

Phil: I call this "writer-creep". What comes later always has to be bigger and better than what came before!

NOTE: SPOILERS AHEAD FOR "THE RAVEN"

Donald Carlson: 7o9 spent the better part of 3 months without eating, using the Borg regeneration booth to obtain energy. Fine. But, what about water? Do Borg's need to drink? A big part of fluid intake is to replace fluids lost to perspiration and elimination of wastes. Unless the Borg don't sweat, don't exhale water vapour in their breath, or don't eliminate toxins through urination, then they're gonna have to drink water sometime. In 7o9's case, this would present a serious problem with her sprayed-on clothing when it came time to "de-assimilate" fluid, no?

Also, Borg shields apparently are subcutaneous. This is interesting... a network of implants that generate a force field is pretty cool. My question -- where's the power source? A shield that can fend off multiple phaser blasts is really powerful, which implies a strong power source. So where does 7o9 hide hers? (He asks, setting up the obvious joke....)

Phil: Ahem! ;-) Too easy, too easy . . . I'll pass on the second question but as to the first. From, "I Borg" we learn that Borg get their nutritional needs directly from energy. Remember the scene where La Forge makes a wall socket for Hugh? One could speculate that Borg implants trun energy into the nutrients needed for the "biological components." One could also speculate that waste materials are disposed of by reprocessing at the cellular level or reconversion to energy. Granted, this would take an incredibly sophisticated technology but we are talkin' Borg here!

Have a great weekend, everybody!


If you would like to submit a question or comment, send it to: chief@nitcentral.com with "Question" in the Subject line. (Remember the legalese: Everything you submit becomes mine and you grant me the right to use your name in any future publication by me.)

Copyright 1997 by Phil Farrand. All rights reserved.