Eh....just kinda playing around.
Figuring out how blogs even worked.
Laying down the foundations.
Pumping out links to, and stories of, everything that'd happened up until then.
Trying to grow enough content that it counted as a full-fledged blog to my mind.
By the time of that post, it felt like it was starting to happen.
We busted into the 2010's during that time.
Things were forming, but...didn't quite have a clear direction yet.
Looking back, I kinda had it under my nose....but it was blurry to me for some reason.
But, I was excited to move forward.
Um, I'll fess up, I thought I'd lost my way.
I dunno, I'd pounded out a lot of work like a demon, a lot of it was even good, I'd gotten some positive accomplishments done, like completing Dark Designs, but....after that, it felt like I was "lost in the wilderness".
I was kinda flailing there for awhile.
And, you even see in that post, I was making myself buckle down.
Well, I think this year really delivered on that promise.
Holy crap, where to begin??
"The year of Hell", kinda stretched from winter to winter.
Glad that's over. :(
Not a good start,...no...
Although, in hindsight, it was probably why the 3rd anniversary was so bittersweet....
Found Hyla, and that's led to a buncha stuff, not the least of which, is we're buds again.
Have been keeping up meticulously on the holidays section, because that was severely neglected, and that was bugging me; and when I get bugged in the back of my mind for a couple years, I get compulsive.
So, I'm gonna slaughter that this year.
Aaand, yeah, wouldn't have guessed based on how the year started, but...pretty goddamned good year for ol' Shmeggy.
Coming up next for year 5?
Well, there are 3 more Harry books coming up the pike.
I definitely plan on those all being out in time for Harry's 24th birthday, so that will be a proper bash.
Someday, I do wanna sort out the technical issues, and get the Kindle editions out there for you folks.
Hopefully that'll be worked out this year.
Got a brand spanking new thing I wanna do after all the Harry stuff is squared away, dunno for sure if that'll be this year, but hope y'all like it.
Think ya will.
Yeah, the vision is coming together now.
Where I am now, is about where I fuzzily envisioned being in year 2, even though I didn't know how in the hell to get there.
But yeah, it's coming into focus.
I'm really fucking excited now.
Think there'll be some stuff to chest-pound about next time this anniversary rolls around.
Pretty sure of it.
So, it took me three parts (1, 2, 3) but I've broken it all down to wormholes.
Now, we toss in the next ingredient.
Tangent timelines, and alternate realities.
I figure, they're exactly the same thing.
And, that anything that has said otherwise has been some smoke and mirrors.
But, let's start with looking at how Trek has tackled the subject over the years....
Well, of course, there was the mirror universe from Classic Trek's "mirror, mirror", that was the first.
Then, in "The Tholian Web", there was a "spatial interphase", where the fabric of space overlapped with an unknown amount of parallel universes (I seem to recall either "unlimited", or "infinite", being in there, but none of the usual sources will confirm it).
Then, it would later turn out that the interphase from "Tholian Web", connected to the mirror universe, and in the past, in Archer's time in "In A Mirror Darkly".
Then, in TNG's "Parallels", Worf became unstuck from reality, and encountered...well, a shitload of parallel timelines, and Geordi techno-babbled forth the theory of quantum time.
So...if "unlimited", or "infinite", was indeed mentioned in "Tholian Web",...they kinda nailed it decades ahead of time.
So, if there are all these parallel timelines, and they all have their own mirror universes, and the mirror universes have their parallel timelines....well, it all cancels out, doesn't it?
"The mirror universe", is but one of many parallel quantum-timelines.
And "Tholian web", set that all up.
Also, any altered timeline created by time-travel in Trek is an alternate timeline.
Trek can't have it both ways.
Time can't fraction when they need it to, but be changeable when they want it to.
The way I look at it, every time our heroes create a timeline alteration in their favor....they split off into a tangent timeline, and vanish forever from their timeline of origin.
Spock can't help to create the JJ-timeline, but then also think when he saved the whales, he came back to the exact same Starfleet.
In fact, every Trek time-travel story from "the naked time", onward has to be re-examined.
...but don't worry, I'm not going to do that here.
Have fun with that your own self.
But...when I do my own quick calculation on it...the only way I can see that the characters square it....is to just not care.
Like, in Voyager's "Deadlock", when Harry Kim died, but also got replaced by a time-copy.
Everyone was basically like "eh, good enough".
The Starfleet officer attitude to time-travel seems to be, deal with the universe you find yourself in...but if you manage to create one you find beneficial...go with it.
Of course, this conflicts with the vaunted "temporal prime directive", and the existence of the department of Temporal Investigations.
But...a lot of bullshit about Starfleet as an organization is just plain screwey, so...fuck it.
Anyway, if Kirk and company don't seem to care that there's a universe where the whale-probe killed everyone they ever knew....why should we sweat it?
Let's move on.
But, what about exotic alternate universes?
Well, seems to me, in an infinite web of alternate quantum-timelines, you wouldn't just see timelines where Elvis lived, Hitler won, and Van Gogh got put on lithium, but...ones where when the very laws of reality formed at the moment of the big bang, they went askew, creating radically different universes.
And in these, you'd have wacky things like The Q Continuum, the world of the clicky-things from TNG's "Schisms", that universe filled all up with honey from Voyager's "Scorpion", and wherever the fuck Lazarus from "The Alternate Factor", ended up.
If fractional time can make all those, and fractional time is part of "the multiverse", and "universe", really describes everything that is, then, the multiverse is the universe, and there are no "other universes".
So, timelines and "universes", are the same thing.
But, any timeline that splits off of Trek is part of the Trek multiverse too.
And, bammo, Trek has vicariously connected to Transformers, G.I Joe, and Ghostbusters, via "Infestation".
Now, let's tackle wormholes, and you can start to see where I'm going with this.
Well, let's go with the standard description of a wormhole that you've probably heard a jillion times by now, but in the off chance this thing is in front of the eyeballs of a newbie, let's do it anyway....
If you imagine space as a piece of paper bent into a "c", and you want to get from the top to the bottom of that "c", then, you can either go around the curve, or, stab a pencil through the paper (making a "¢") , and zip down in a straight line that way.
The pencil represents the wormhole.
So called, because in the earliest formation of the idea, the bent paper was instead an apple, and the pencil, a worm munching through to the other side.
So, basically, it's a magic shortcut tunnel through space that gets you there as quickly as if you had warp/hyperdrive.
Or, even faster.
And, ever since TNG's "the price", Trek has been infatuated with the things.
And, leave it to good old Voyager, episode writers just couldn't resist trying to top wormholes with a zoo of even faster space tunnels, and more "impressive", names.
Well, they're all bullshit.
First, let's look at one way to conceivably construct a real wormhole.
Well, to manage/direct this construction project, it would take already having some kind of FTL drive, or, at least FTL communication, but, you could create a black hole (no small feat in itself) at the one end of space you want to depart from, and another at the point in space you want to end up, and manage to have the singularities touch each other, and theoretically, the infinities of the singularities would cancel out, and make a safe tunnel to pass through.
Of course, Stephen Hawking says vacuum flux would either rip you apart, or prevent the wormhole from ever forming to begin with....but in Trek, they've pulled it off, so let's go with it.
Anyway, DS9 describes the Bajoran wormhole as "a tunnel through subspace".
Well, there you go, now we know. Subspace is singularity-land.
Which, given my description of "dimension zero", actually sounds about right.
So, given that a wormhole is "a tunnel through subspace", and given what I've said about all the other "____spaces", being a bullshit re-labeling of subspace, then, a tunnel through those bullshit spaces must also be bullshit, and they're all just fancily renamed wormholes.
Borg temporal vortex?
Vaadwaur underspace corridor?
Course...if slipstream is a wormhole, and it's also a big transporter...then, the transporter...is a mini wormhole?
Well...yeah, if the "annular confinement beam", is a fuckin' tube through subspace.
Course, at that point, I don't know why you need to atom-smash the person, when you can just zip them whole-bodied down on a wormhole...
To stubbornly and blindly maintain Roddenberrian tradition, I guess.
Anyway, in Classic Trek, Gary Seven's (from "Assignment: Earth") magic vault is described as being like a kind of transporter, but...the smoke tunnel we see him step out of is more visually consistent with Voyager's various magic tubes.
So, yeah, I'm totally going with transporters at least having a wormhole ingredient.
The only point to the matter-conversion part of it I can see anymore is magical medical rescues for crappy writers.
Of course, this wormhole is "unstable", and starts scrambling everyone's atoms, and voices (vacuum flux mayhaps?).
But....aside from that little hiccup...I don't see where it was too much different from warp.
They seemed to cover the same amount of ground as if it had been a "proper", warp field.
Indeed, when you think of what warp is supposed to do...bend space around the ship so that the destination becomes closer relative to it...gee, wouldn't the connecting point between those ends of space...kind of be...a wormhole in everything but name?
I'm actually seeing less of a difference there, than between transwarp and quantum slipstream.
In fact, the whole deal with juggling around "warp bubbles", is goddamned cumbersome in comparison to a straight-out wormhole.
Why do they bother with it?
Like the transporter being an atom-splitter, probably "Roddenberrian tradition".
Or, at the very least, an inability to backtrack with existing canon.
Well...JJ-verse has no such baggage.
Okay, even within Roddenberry-canon, you can dump it.
I mean, look, you've got the whole deal with "instability", that artificial wormholes either collapse, or scramble your atoms.
Well, okay if the latter's really the case, and the transporter is a mini-wormhole projector, then, I could see how having an atomic un-scrambler to compensate would be handy, and why it's part of the system.
Just...not for the reasons we were always told.
BUT...other alien cultures manage the whole wormhole deal just fine.
Whatever the wormholes are called.
How hard would it be, for some generic Starfleet schmoe to tricorder scan/hack the info out of the alien's database, look it over, go "oh, that's how it's done", turn a few screws, and crack the problem?
They do it with other shit.
All the time.
Shit, the transporter's molecular scanners would seem to be that very magic compensation system!
And, for awhile at least, it was on the frigging Excelsior! They had it!
Then, they bullshitted it back to warp.
Why? Search me.
The reasons for not doing it never really washed.
What, you'd get across the galaxy too fast?
Who says just because it's a wormhole, it has to make it across the galaxy?
We're just talking about making the techno-babble comport with updated science, so that things look less stupid.
And...even if you could now jump to all four quadrants of the galaxy, or even to other galaxies, so fucking what??
The format would still be "planet of the week".
Hell, it wasn't until my teens when I understood Trek was stuck in our galaxy.
I always thought Kirk explored the universe.
The whole fucking universe.
Didn't "ruin", a damned thing for me before or after figuring this out.
No, this is a story handcuffing that's not only bullshit, but when you nitpick the fuck out if it, is a wasted effort, because they have wormholes anyway, and the real labor on their part has been obscurantism to keep you from seeing it.
But, it's obscurantism that just gets in the way, it's white noise, it's mosquito buzzing, so, pppt, out it goes.
Warp, transporters, all of it.
Wormhole-o-matics, the whole lot.
A wormhole, is a wormhole, is a wormhole, is a wormhole.
And they're nifty and handy enough, without having to be "improved",
So kiss the fourteen years of TNG and Voyager babble goodbye too. Especially the fuckin' Voyager babble.
A wormhole is a wormhole.
This is going to be important when we get into the other crossover universes.
And speaking of...
All right, so, last time, I took care of subspace, and the rainbow of other fancy-shmancy spaces.
Hmm, what now?
Oh, I know, let's break down transporters, and transwarp.
That might be handy to have on hand...
All right, as soon as I heard the term "transwarp", in "Search For Spock", for the first time, I immediately imagined it as somehow a mix of transporting, and warp.
To my way of thinking, it's simply what the name conjures up.
Well, after all these years, I think I've got enough clues together to point to that it probably is.
Okay, first, for fun, let's see if we can't make a transporter-drive ship out of junk laying around in Trek episodes and movies....
We will need....
1. A part that can make a transporter beam itself.
2. A frikking huge transporter.
3. Something that makes transporting go faster than warp to make this feat worth it.
Shitty flick overall, but, it introduces Data's emergency rescue transporter.
A little badge sized thing that pops out of his arm, can stick to another person like a comm-badge, and beams Picard away from danger whilst the transporters aboard Enterprise-E are down, so, it's clearly self-contained, and beams itself.
Of course..."how in the hell could something beam itself?", you may ask.
I mean, once it starts taking itself apart, then it no longer exists for it to put itself back together.
Hell, it would probably break, or blow up, half way through even completing the self disintegration.
So, now that we have something that beams itself, now we need step #2...turning this thing into a frikkin' huge thing that can beam a whole ship along with itself.
Well, first, we have to ask ourselves "can transporters interlink to each other, and to other devices, and can/does this interlinking impart the proprieties of the linked thing to the transporter?".
Well, we see pad-to-pad beaming in "The Menagerie", and "Star Trek: The Motion Picture", and this could only be accomplished with an interlinking of transporter units, so...yep, they can interlink.
In TNG's "Rascals", Crusher links a desk-sized replicator into the transporter to help restore the adult DNA patterns of Picard, Keiko, Ro, and Guinan.
And, in Voyager's "Jetrel", they hook a doohickey to the transporter designed to make the patterns of dead victims of some kind of super-duper-atom-bomb re-emerge and re-integrate.
This thing can do this by itself on a small scale, but hooking to the transporter gives it a boost.
And this thing is alien equipment.
Gotta figure Starfleet tech all running off the same OS will network even better.
So, then you gotta ask "will networking a transporter to another transporter boost its own properties?".
I think so.
Just look at "ST: The Voyage Home", when Scotty beams up the whales, and several tons of water.
If you think he squeezed all that through one transporter pad, you're smoking something.
All the pads of a single transporter have to be able to network, and work as one big transporter.
So, that's a transporter boosting itself.
Also, in TNG's "power play", O'Brien beams down through a storm by getting a boost off all 8 pads, then, setting up pattern enhancers on the surface, and beaming back up.
So, it's not even vague, it's official onscreen canon.
So, if pads of a transporter can network, and transporters can network, then...why can't multiple transporters network to get a size boost as well as a distance boost? Or, instead of?
I mean, it would take cutting the object up amongst the transporters...but it's already getting cut up into jillions of atoms in the first place.
And, getting cut up amongst the pads of the Klingon cargo transporter didn't leave the two humpback whales, George and Gracie, worse for wear.
Also, and this is the clincher, in TNG's "Masks", the replicators network together, and start transforming the whole friggin' ship.
Well, replicators are like mini-transporters, and they networked into a big transporter just fine.
So...yeah, gotta go with networking transporters makes a bigger transporter.
And, Data's emergency transporter hooks into the innards of his arm, and then his brain can hook into the ship's computer, so, the ship can access his transporter, so, by transitive property, the rescue transporter can just hook into the ship, and thus, the other transporters.
And, like Jetrel's doohikie, and Crusher's replicator, it should be able to property-transfer-transmit it's self-beaming trick through the big transporters.
And then, the transporters, cargo transporters, shuttlebay transporters, shuttle transporters, and replicators, all networked together, boosted by the backup computer core, and channeled through the deflector, should be able to beam the fuggin' ship.
So, there, we've got the big fuggin' transporter.
Now, we just need #3, speed/range to make it worth it.
And, all we need there, is Scotty's transwarp beaming equation from JJ Abrams Trek.
And, bammo, not just transporter drive, but transwarp transporter drive.
It can be done.
But...HAS it been done?
I gotta go with...YEAH.
In Voyager's "hope and fear", and "timeless", they both discover, and utilize "quantum slipstream drive".
Now, the exact workings of this monstrosity are left rather vague, but inside "slipstream space", is also referred to as "a matter stream".
Well, a matter stream is exactly what's in a transporter beam.
So, either they're somehow creating a transporter effect around the ship, and riding it like a log flume, or, the ship is transporting itself.
I...see it as a difference without distinction.
It's transporter drive.
And, Seven Of Nine in "hope and fear", points out that Quantum Slipstream is very similar in principle to Borg transwarp technology.
So, transwarp conduit, is a slipstream, is a transporter beam.
And, while the Borg do have a pre-established network of conduits, Borg transwarp coils can create a conduit too.
In Voyager's "dark frontier", they swipe a Borg transwarp coil, and shave 20,000 light years off their trip.
So, it can be a self-contained drive.
And, in Voyager's "threshold", Tom Paris broke the transwarp threshold, and re-emerged from, yep, you guessed it, subspace.
Yeah, there's references in these episodes to "slipstream space", and "transwarp space", but...as the last entry showed, that's all a bunch of bullshit.
Not just for the reasons I pointed out there, but...also, allegedly (according to TNG's "schisms"), there are an infinite number of subspace realms.
Well...infinite wouldn't seem to leave much room in the universe for all these other bullshit-spaces, would it?
So, I'm going with that all these other bullshit sub-subspaces are actually sort of like frequency bands along the continuum, like AM, FM, UHF, VHF, "sat-band", and "bluetooth", to us.
And, where transwarp once denoted a drive system, and now has come full circle to a type of beaming, I gotta go with that transwarp itself is simply subspace travel on a higher "band".
Anyway, that's it, transwarp is beam-drive, is slipstream, is transwarp conduit, is transwarp drive.
And "threshold", seems to make it clear that it's what Excelsior had in prototype form in "Search For Spock".
And, if it was indeed a big transporter, one could indeed gum it up by sabotaging the computer, as Scotty does, since a big computer is what you'd want for essentially e-mailing your ship through space.
So...if that one made your eyes glaze over, you might wanna bail on this series of posts.
Hmm, okay, to tie all those worlds/franchises together, let's start with Trek, because, their techno-babble is second to none.
Let's start with breaking down "subspace", and "hyperspace".
I contend that there's really no difference.
Let's start with subspace.
Okay, brushing aside all the bullshit subspace has been used for, and made to justify over the years, let's just start from scratch with my own particular definition.
Let's break down the word itself.
Below atomic. Ergo, below space.
So, let's break down space.
Space is really part of "timespace", which has four dimensions.
Three of space (length, width, depth), one of time.
So "below space", would conceivably be minus some of those.
Let's call it "dimension zero".
Let's take away spatial dimensions first.
Take away depth, things become flat.
2-D, that's pretty easy to visualize.
Now, take away width, and you're left with a line.
But...that doesn't really cut it....
Even a line has tiny width.
Absolutely NO width..would mean a sort of infinite implosion along the "line".
Now, take away the length, you can almost sort of conceive of it as a dot, but even a dot has length and width, so, that would be a hard to conceive of infinite implosion.
Except....length, width, and depth define where that point singularity is.
So, it's everywhere, and nowhere.
But nowhere is part of everywhere, so, it's just everywhere.
And if you have something that's instantaneously everywhere, you've pretty much got the conditions described in achieving Warp 10 in Voyager.
Except, it takes infinite energy (or a magic super-dilithium) to push a ship into that state/realm.
And, energy, say, in the form of a human sized transporter beam, considerably less (see the transwarp beaming in JJ Abrams Trek).
And energy in the form of a radio transmission, even less.
Indeed, subspace radio seems to occupy a state of warp 9 and a crapload of decimal places.
So, even light waves have trouble cracking warp 10 via subspace.
And light has no fucking mass.
But okay, basically, subspace itself is in a natural state of warp 10, and cramming anything from our dimensions into that state, even photons, takes some doing.
What about hyperspace?
Ignoring the internal mechanics of how it's supposed to work, if you've got a dimensional realm that pops you in and out of this universe in such a way as to seemingly surpass light speed, and this realm co-exists with ours, and is instantly everywhere...well, sounds like subspace to me.
Sounds like different names for the same thing.
The hyperspace jump-gates on B5, and the wormhole on DS9 seemed identical in every way that mattered to me.
It's a difference that doesn't make a difference.
And, thus, the mechanics don't really make a difference.
Whether it's "dimension zero", or "a higher dimension", or "dimension curled up along the superstrings", it all gets the exact same result.
Making magic spaceships go.
And if there's no real difference between the big SF grandaddys, hyperspace, and subspace, then, what could possibly matter all these young whippersnappers like "sidespace", and "transpace", and "interspace", and "quantum slipstream"?
Jack and shit.
It's just the new kids trying to sound impressive.
Putting a new hat on Malibu Stacy.
That'll be backed up in future installments.
Speaking of "quantum slipstream", I'll break this BS even further down in an upcoming chapter entitled "a wormhole is a wormhole".
As for the time dimension I set aside earlier, I'll get to that in its own thing too.
But, I'm just putting down this bit to link to for later, cuz it's gonna come up again.