PNA (obsolete)Edit

please help with this piece. It is lacking details on the Enterprise's mission to Penthara IV, as well as a references list. Thanks! --Werideatdusk 01:43, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Who knows, we could be telling our grandkids how we were there when they were editing the article on Penthara IV. Tired_ 21:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Number of colonists (obsolete) Edit

The article says that "Simultaneously, the Enterprise is trying to fix extreme weather problems on the planet Penthara IV, where a few thousands colonists are hosted." The number of colonists is wrong. Picard clearly says that there are "20 million" colonists on the planet. I will change the reference. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Of time ships and New Jersey Edit

Could the solution at the end of "A Matter of Time" explain the odd technological advances that just appear out of no where at the end of Enterprise's 2nd season? Since they never bothered to A) close the door to the time pod, or B) remove their 24th century stuff, inlcuding a tricorder that probably had all sorts of technical data on it. and since 22nd century NJ was obviously within Starfleet's sphere of influence, could someone have noticed the time pod and maybe taken the initiative to invent a few of the things that probably shouldn't have existed yet? Like Enterprise's oddly complete transporter, or their phase-pistols, or heck, even their 'photonic' torpedoes which Reed had never even heard of when he found them on a Klingon ship, and less than a year later, apparently someone at starfleet has 'invented' them already.... they don't say exactly when in the 22nd century Rasmussen was from, but his pod could have materialized at just the right moment-- 22:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

On a side note, The article:Berlinghoff Rasmussen suggests that someone else may have actually thought of this, but I don't really like that note very much, since it implies that Archer got into MIT which more or less contradicts with the 4 seasons worth of the not so spectacularly bright Captain Archer we've come to know-- 22:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

All of the 24th century gadgets were removed before the time ship returned to the 22nd century (Worf is seen carrying them out prior to the ship's disappearance). As for any adverse effects of a 26th century ship capable of time travel, none have yet been mentioned, although it wouldn't be the only time that such a ship ended up in that century. --From Andoria with Love 04:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and they did have warp drive at that time. In fact, by 2151, they had a warp five engine. --From Andoria with Love 04:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The Flaw in Rasmussen's Plan Edit

There is a fatal flaw in Rasmussen's plan to "invent" one of his stolen do-dads about once a year.

Suppose I took a trip back in time to, say, 1800 - and took my cell phone with me. Let's also suppose that I inadvertently left my cell phone in 1800. While it would certainly be a curiosity to whomever may find it, it would be entirely useless to anyone living in that time. Anyone trying to reverse-engineer my cell phone would soon be confronted by a point of irreducible complexity - in other words, without the technology to produce microchips or any of the other digital technology contained therein, there would be no means for the finder to claim they had invented the device, or to profit from its production and/or sale. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Insley (talk • contribs).

Oh? Look at Henry Starling, who, in the late 20th Century, managed to make a billion-dollar industry using technology from the 29th Century.--UTS DeLorean 20:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


I removed:

  • Geordi's VISOR appears in Berlingoff's shuttle even though Geordi was just wearing it while on the planet. It may be that he has more than one VISOR; although some other episodes seem to allude to him only having one, the continuity details in TNG: "Identity Crisis" indicate that he has had older versions which he might still possess.

This is more of a curiosity than a mistake in continuity, especially when we don't know all of the facts; which would otherwise seem to indicate that he has more than one. --Alan del Beccio 20:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed:

  • Discussing La Forge's VISOR, Rasmussen says, "I have a picture of you wearing that, Lev". This was evidently a slipup as the chief engineer's name is not LeVar Burton. He does not appear to say "Laf", as a diminutive of La Forge.

Rasmussen does not say “Lev.” He mumbles, “in my office.” Not sure where “Lev” came from. --Baldengineer (talk) 20:03, February 27, 2018 (UTC)

Some issues Edit

Worf states that there were no phasers in the 22nd century (2100s), however, on Star Trek: Enterprise, which is set in the year 2151, they had phasers they were experimental, but they were phasers.

Why did Data allow Rasmussen to go into the time pod first to retrieve the stolen objects? He could've very easily set the pod to leave with him and Data in it, and there may not have been a way for Data to find out how to bring the time pod back, regardless of incapacitating Rasmussen or not. Not to mention Rasmussen may have had weapons/tools from other time periods he could've used against Data.

Picard asks Rasmussen when historians will use time travel for their studies, which means they don't do it up to his current time. Except they did it in the original Trek episode "Assignment: Earth."--Reginald Barclay 10:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

No, they weren't. They were phase-pistols. They were a predecessor to the phaser, but they were not phasers.
There's no evidence that Rasmussen visited any other time periods. The only devises in the timepod were those he stole from the Enterprise. As for the other part, you should remember that Rasmussen did not expect to be discovered and thus had the timepod set to return to the 22nd century at a specific time. Had he set the timepod to automatically depart to the 22nd century upon their entry, though, I'm sure Data is resourceful enough to figure out how to return.
They used it in "Assignment: Earth" through a very complex and dangerous way – the slingshot effect. Starfleet likely doesn't make too much use of this method given the dangers of it, as stated in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. --From Andoria with Love 12:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Honestly, what more bothers me about this episode is the possible temporal repercussions of Rasmussen not returning to his own time - to steal a line from Crusher, suppose he was her great great great great great great grandfather? What Picard should have done was send Data back with Rasmussen to the past, where Data chucks him out of the pod, returns to the 24th Century, then sends the pod back to the 26th. 14:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Too easy: rasmussen would still know a lot about the future. A more correct way to solve the problem would be travel back to the 22th century before rasmussen could get the pod and prevent him to do so. Of course this wasn't easy to do and there is always risk of further contamination. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

warp coils/warp drive Edit

Were warp coils mentioned in First Contact or only warp drive? If no warp coils were mentioned in FC, this bit:

  • Riker says that for him the most important technological development in the last 200 years was the invention of warp coils. According to 'Star Trek: First Contact the coils were invented at least more then 300 years before Rasmussen and Riker met.

Can be removed, as we don't know whether Cochrane's warp drive made use of coils or not, it's never stated anywhere that you can't have warp drive without warp coils. --Jörg 12:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

What do you know? I just removed this and came to find it already discussed here. Nobody knows whether Cochrane's drive had coils. You can get around the sector without them, sounds like slow warp to me. Nevertheless the nitpickery is reason enough to remove this. --TribbleFurSuit 16:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Was the metal coil-looking thing that Barclay gave to Geordi to examine a warp coil? I don't think it was mentioned on screen, but maybe in the script or something. If so, could be added as a continuity error (something which points out an apparent contradiction in continuity) rather than a nitpick (something which points out an error then analyzes it for explanations and reasons why it exists). --From Andoria with Love 04:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Not a warp coil.
BARCLAY: "Commander. This is what we're thinking of using to replace the damaged warp plasma conduit."
Not a warp coil. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Removed Edit

I removed the following note that has lacked citation for awhile:

  • There were rumours that in the first season of Star Trek: Enterprise it would be revealed that Rasmussen was Archer's roommate at MIT.

Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 10:41, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

I removed the statement that there were no phasers in the 22nd century. There were. Simply calling them something else, does not change that fact that they were phasers. Especially since they behave the same way as most other phasers. We really could simply state that Rasmussen's mistakes are simply, that he's not as smart as he says he is, and is largely unaware of current tech. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
And I brought the comment back. This is a talk page and no subject to remove comments by other users. Also it would be great if you could sign your posts. Thanks. Tom 19:24, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
I removed the following nitpick: "As the d'k tahg is simply a form of knife, it is unclear how exactly Rasmussen planned to profit from bringing it back to the 22nd century." --Defiant (talk) 09:57, September 7, 2017 (UTC)

Lev who? Edit

Who’s Rasmussen addressing when he says “I have a picture of you wearing that, Lev”? Can’t be addressing the Enterprise-D’s Chief Engineer because his name’s Geordi La Forge, not LeVar Burton ;-) --Archer4real (talk) 09:29, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

He says "You know, I have a picture of you wearing that in my office." Nixel uk (talk) 19:15, May 19, 2014 (UTC)#

Well, to be strictly accurate he says: "You know, I have a picture of you wearing that, Lev, in my office". Or does he says "Laf", diminutive of La Forge? Got to Laf haven't you--Archer4real (talk) 12:57, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

I've added the above: is it a nitpick? Hope not. I've avoided exclamation marks a-go-go --Archer4real (talk) 11:19, November 7, 2017 (UTC)