Stuff Edit

How can one star endanger an entire galaxy?

technobabble -- 13:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
well I took that as metaphorically, as in Romulus being destroyed would cause a political threat to the entire galaxy or some such

How did a black hole send Spock and Nero back through time? Every other time that black holes appear in Star Trek they simply crush anything that is sucked into them.

    • first the radiation and the alteration of gravity from the star could cause galaxywide problems probably wouldnt have blown it up but still cause problems. second it is not that type of black hole the aspects of a red matter black hole may be far different from a normal one.
In Star Trek: Countdown (the official comic prequel to the movie), it was stated that it was a supernova unlike any that has been encountered before. As the star expanded, in consumed matter and turned it into energy, causing it to grow. Romulus was the closest system, and Spock was unable to stop the supernova before it reached Romulus. Also, the black holes created using red matter were not your typical black holes. --From Andoria with Love 23:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
So does that mean that if the Enterpise hadn't destroyed the Narada it would have gone further back in time? Does that also mean that Vulcan was sent back in time?
A Wormhole can acutually made of a black hole and a white on different points of the spacetime, which are connected [1]. You need exotic matter to keep such a Schwarzschild Wormhole open, but maybe red matter decays to exotic matter. But mybe all of this red matter things are just technobabble/wantum physics. -- 15:04, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

My guess is the "Black Hole" created by Red Matter is little more than a highly unstable and violent wormhole, that has similar pull strength to the more traditional type, It's possible that Vulcan was sent back in time, but in pieces as it was torn apart. When The Jellyfish and Narada were pulled in the first time, they went in intact.

If anyone can find a more solid picture of the red matter, please replace the one I uploaded it'll be really appreciated. For now if there's no objections, leave this one as a substitue until then. --Paopuhead2picklehead 03:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Dr. Phil Plait put a review of the science of the new Star Trek Film in the his blog bad astronomy, briefly covering the red matter.

His comments are here:

I commented on the blog with some of my thoughts on it too, which i will summarize here:

If red matter was really massive enough to create a black hole how would they transport it? The red matter is an incredibly dense material that is near the threshold of being able to withstand its own gravity. A single drop on of it on its own is stable, but red matter will collapse forming a black hole under certain circumstances. If it is crushed by an external force like a detonation, or too much red matter is collected in a small area.

1st: A single drop could be crushed with a detonation device. (like how vulcan was destroyed).

2nd: Putting a large amount of the red matter in a small area. (Like how the romulan ship was destroyed.)

Because the force of gravity points toward the center of gravity and the magnitude of the force is proportional to the distance between two objects, a large amount of red matter can be transported by creating a big bubble of it. Remember when a drop of red matter is collected from the red sphere? That red sphere, to me, looked like a big bubble because of the way it deformed when the syringe poked at it. I am guessing that a bubble would be the most efficient way of transporting it.

The concept is similar to the design of a nuclear bomb, too much radio active material in a small area will trigger the sustainable nuclear reaction. A nuclear bomb is a spherical shell of radioactive material with a explosive device that crushes it into a smaller area. In the case of red matter, when spocks ship was kamakazied into nero's ship, the bubble popped and the red matter coalesced(by force of gravity) into a critical amount of matter. 20:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)Alphasuede

Someone asked, "How did a black hole send Spock and Nero back through time? Every other time that black holes appear in Star Trek they simply crush anything that is sucked into them."

I do not believe that they were sent back in time per se. I am of the opinion that what happened was this...the black hole that was created by the red matter created a door to an alternate reality, like in that episode "Mirror, mirror" and other episodes like it. In reality, Nero did not change history in the prime universe, but changed history in the alternate history. For example, look at 's birth. The Chekov in this movie was born at a different date than the Chekov in the original universe. There is no way that Nero's incursion could have changed birth records. Nero and Spock are simply in an alternate universe. -- 07:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

That is a valid and logical interpretation of what happened. It's not what the writers intended, though; they specifically stated that everything before Nero's appearance was part of the prime timeline or universe. That's why we consider the Kelvin as existing in the prime timeline, but it's destruction in 2233 is part of the timeline altered by Nero. --From Andoria with Love 07:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Btw, V'Ger was sent back in time (and to another galaxy) when it fell into a black hole. Just leaving that out there.--Tim Thomason 08:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I prefer the "ripples through time" interpretation. This says that the new movie *is* set in a new timeline, not a whole new alternate universe. However Nero's incursion was able to change things not only after his arrival, as a direct result of his actions, but also *before* his arrival, with some kind of quantum ripple effect changing random events in the past as a result of the extremely unstable and destructive nature of the time travel method that was used. This can be used to justify pretty much any direction this new Trek might go in without resorting to just throwing up our arms and saying "I give up, it's an alternate universe" -- 00:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Red matter = red herring? Edit

I removed the following from the apocrypha section:

One might also draw parallels of Red Matter to the idiom of the Red Herring or Red Mercury as the name being made to distract or fool anyone trying to get some for their own uses.

For one thing, this isn't apocrypha. For another, one might draw parallels to any number of things, but we're not here to supply speculation or original research. --From Andoria with Love 16:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Origin of Red MatterEdit

Is it possible that Red Matter was created by the Romulans. Their engines have been powered by artificial black holes for years, is it possible that Red Matter was made by Romulans and used to create their engines, and that Spock simply found a way to enhance it and create a black hole big enough to stop a super nova? --Preator 21:30, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Seriously doubt it because if they did they would have saved their own world and wouldn't need the Vulcans. So yeah, doubt it - even if it was true it's non-canon. — Morder (talk) 21:36, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
It's also possible Spot created it by hacking up a really weird hairball. We don't know, so we shouldn't speculate. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:36, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

As I said, it's possible that Spock helped to enhance the technology of Red Matter, and thats what the Romulans needed him for, not to create it. It is not said in the movie that Vulcans invented Red Matter, simply that it was placed in his ship and used. As for the spot comment, thats just being stupid. Talk pages are meant for speculation. --Preator 00:33, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Wrong, talk pages are not for speculation they're for improving the article. — Morder (talk) 00:59, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
Preator does raise a valid point, in that it is stupid to think that Spot created red matter; everyone knows that red matter was created by Livingston. - Archduk3:talk 02:16, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Wow, the level of intelligent conversation on this site has really dropped. No wonder I haven't been on this site for months. Speculation and conversation do improve articles, that's why there are talk pages on wiki sites. Talk pages aren't for making stupid, meaningless comments about cats and fish. Why anyone wastes their time making 1st grade level comments like that is beyond me. --Preator 04:24, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Speculation like this does NOT lead to improving articles. There is absolutely no canon evidence suggesting the Romulans developed Red Matter, so it cannot ever be put in the article. Period. No article change, no article improvement. You also dropped off the map related to things like your block, refusing to accept the destruction of Romulus, or that evolution is accepted in Star Trek. You want to talk about the level of intelligent conversation here? Look smack in the mirror. The Spot comment was a joke to illustrate the fact that we simply don't have any evidence for your theory any more than one like a cat doing it. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:28, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
Agreed cobra, edit conflic). My last post here as it's pointless. You've wasted more time by starting a speculative statement that does nothing to improve the article. You are correct that conversation but speculation can not improve an article when speculation is not allowed on this site. You yourself have caused many problems on this site due to not following it's policies. Talk pages are not for speculation. Just stop. — Morder (talk) 04:30, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

I have never done anything but try improve this site. Speculation runs rampant on this site, look at any of the other talk pages, i.e. Talk:Star Trek (film) or Talk:USS Kelvin. As for my so called speculation, I was simply asking a question and seeing what oppinions on the matter there would be. I thought I might find an intelligent conversation on the subject. Asking a question like I did today belongs in talk pages, it's not like I tried to add it to the article itself. --Preator 04:46, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Just because something happens elsewhere does not mean it is correct. If you just want to ask a question that is not relevant to improving an article, we have the proper places to do that. Talk pages are not for random speculations.--31dot 12:16, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Forget about it, don't know why I ever bothered to come back to this site. You all get your wish, I'm leaving. --Preator 14:18, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

I don't see anyone who said that, but have it your way.--31dot 14:23, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

The VulcansEdit

Given the canonical history of the Vulcans, one has to wonder why they kept information about the "Red Matter" from the Federation. Just because they promised that they would not make anymore and their claim that Spock had all of it does not make it true. -- 22:16, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Removed bg note Edit

Real world source: R-Reverse E-Energy D-Distribution or RED Matter. This is String Theory in reverse. Take numerous Zero Points and serially align them; you then have changed a one dimensional universe into a two dimensional universe. Apply energy to the string of zero points and the string begins to vibrate, adding a third dimension, The vibration of the string requires the string to be in multiple locations, thus you have a temporal horizon or 4th diminsion. Reverse the applied energy distributed to the string of zero points, and the 3rd and 4th dimensions will colapse. The diminsional collapse of both 3rd and 4th diminsions will allow both worm holes and black holes to theroretically occure, much like a whirlwind or tornado will arise in the reverse of wind direction in a thunderstorm. Although red matter is a great tool for the movie Star Trek's plot, it is also a new discussion in the world of quantum physics along with the Higgs Boson.
Source(s): Fred Allen Wolf, Parallel Universes; Stephen Hawking's discussion, String Theory's affect on Energy and Time.

Interesting, but not sure this is the place for it. - Archduk3 00:17, January 25, 2014 (UTC)