[Speculation] Will Star Trek: Discovery Season 5 explain the Romulan Supernova? – Trek Central

Comments

• grue@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Star Trek Online already explained it:

  Image

  source

  • ValueSubtracted@startrek.website ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Indeed, the article devotes the paragraphs to that explanation.

    source
• halm@leminal.space ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Even the Romulan-heavy Star Trek: Picard Season 1 avoided addressing or explaining the supernova in any detail.

  Explaining? Stars go supernova occasionally, there’s your explanation. There doesn’t need to be further cause or intervention behind it.

  IMO this is a solution (or really several) looking for a problem that just doesn’t exist. As it stands and despite fan speculation, Romulus was destroyed by a natural disaster, which is actually something that happens on Earth and in the wider universe.

  source

  • ValueSubtracted@startrek.website ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Stars go supernova occasionally

    Not spontaneously, with only a handful of years’ notice, they don’t.

    I’m all for Trek science being a little weird, but it seems very likely that there was some funny business going on for the star to suddenly blow up and threaten the entire galaxy.

    source

    • e_t_@kbin.pithyphrase.net ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yeah, with Star Trek-level technology, you should be able to tell to the week when a star will nova about 10,000 years in advance.

      source
  • Taleya@aussie.zone ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Especially since 2009 had it not be the romulan star, but one near enough for the shockwave to tank Romulus

    source

    • ValueSubtracted@startrek.website ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      That’s from tie-in material, not the film itself.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• ValueSubtracted@startrek.website ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  The idea had crossed my mind, and the timeline of the “ancient artifact” lines up well enough. I’d also like to see the Romulan supernova addressed…

  However, I’d actually prefer it to be handled by “Lower Decks”, which is set in that rough timeframe.

  source

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    They made the Koala angry

    source
  • andthenthreemore@startrek.website ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Prodigy is in about the right time period too.

    source
• JoMomma@lemm.ee ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  We don’t care, make more new worlds and lower decks

  source

  • JoMomma@lemm.ee ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Did you really remove my comment for expressing a preference in Treks?

    source

    • MaddieTian@lemmy.zip ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      If you criticised Discovery or praised Picard then yeah probably.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• MaddieTian@lemmy.zip ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It doesn’t really need to.

  There’s enough evidence with the shear amount of canon inaccuracies in Discovery, Picard S1 & S2, LD & SNW that they are actually set in the Kelvin timeline.

  They can’t all be down to bad writing, a lot of them sure, but not all.

  source
• BreadOven@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  No spoiler warning?

  source

  • ValueSubtracted@startrek.website ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    …for what? The Romulan supernova was in the '09 film.

    source

    • BreadOven@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Sorry haha, I forgot to put the /s at the end. My mistake.

      source