Daystrom Institute

In season 3 of PICARD, there are two major plot points that strongly echo plots from the two current animated series. The struggle between Data and Lore for control of Data's body is very similar to Rutherford's struggle with his former self in Lower Decks s3e5, and the takeover of Starfleet by the Borg's virus is very similar to the takeover of Starfleet by the vengeful time-travelers' virus in Prodigy.

There is nothing wrong with reusing plots -- Star Trek has done it from time immemorial. Sometimes the results are good, sometimes they are redundant. They have to be judged on a case-by-case basis. In these cases, I believe that PICARD cheapens the original plots.

First, on Lower Decks, we had gradually been introduced to hints that there was something amiss about Rutherford's implants. Our curiosity naturally built over time, and the revelation that his memories had been overwritten to cover up his past self's malfeasance was at once surprising and organic. The resolution of the plot, where Rutherford doesn't want to let his past self disappear, shows us the best of the character we have come to love. Then the information we learn there serves the larger developing plot, culminating in the revelation of the automated fleet. The plot is well-paced and meaningful both to the individual character and the show's overall arc.

None of this is true of the struggle between Data and Lore in PICARD. The continued existence of Data is sprung at us at random, arbitrarily contradicting the fact that he has been killed not once, but twice. The fact that he has been combined with Lore is equally arbitrary, serving little more than a desire to call back to a familiar character. The resolution of the conflict is clever, as Data uses Lore's negative tendencies against him, but in the larger story arc it only serves to solve a problem that the combination of Data and Lore caused in the first place. Overall, the plot serves to put Brent Spiner back on screen in two familiar roles, seemingly for its own sake.

Turning now to Prodigy's fleet takeover plot. Again, this idea was introduced very early on and gradually evolved into the key plot conflict in the show. When it was finally triggered, it spawned two attempted solutions, both of which embodied Star Trek ideals. In the first, non-Starfleet ships helped to disable the infected vessels, giving the lie to the Diviner's vision of Starfleet as a malign influence. In the second, hologram Janeway sacrifices herself to save the fleet, providing a satisfying end to her character's development as a fully sentient being while solving the problem of how to handle the awkward co-existence of real Janeway with her holodeck double. As with Lower Decks, everything seems to fit together well.

By contrast, the takeover of young Starfleet members by the Borg virus -- based on DNA supposedly slipped into Picard decades ago and leveraging Jack's telepathic mind control abilities -- comes way out of left field only in the second to last episode. When it comes to the resolution, they seem to sidestep the possibility of using Seven's Borg identity as part of a meaningful solution. Instead, the entire thing seems gerrymandered to make the use of an older generation of ship, namely the Enterprise-D, necessary to save the day. Where the tweens of Prodigy take their situation deadly seriously, Picard makes jokes about the carpet even as Starfleet self-destructs and Earth is on the brink of oblivion. The message, such as it is, seems to be that the TNG crew effectively is the "last generation" of the series finale's title -- the last generation that is able to achieve anything meaningful. All of Starfleet is threatened with extinction and an entire generation is traumatized by their participation in mass murder, all so we can get a glamor shot on the old bridge.

The fact that the undisputed best season of PICARD is so easily upstaged by animated cartoons in the execution of basically identical plot points seems to me to be a major lesson. I don't begrudge anyone their moment of nostalgia, but to me this comparison shows that the franchise needs to get past the legacy characters in order to tell a coherent and satisfying story at this point. And given that Prodigy has been abruptly cancelled and removed, it doesn't seem like it's a lesson anyone in charge is likely to learn anytime soon.

But what do you think?

I’m not talking about stuff like O’Brien’s hollow rank pip, I’m talking about stuff like “Why make Chakotay a lt. commander rather than a full commander?”

It seems like there was at least some forethought put into who has what rank, but it’s not clear to me how much thought, nor how much meaning was supposed to be baked in to those decisions.

For example, Dr Crusher was a full commander from Day 1, matched only by Riker on the main cast. Was that supposed to signify the authority afforded to the CMO? Was it supposed to be blatant enough for the audience to “get” it?

One of the most prominent examples is Sisko starting his series as a commander. Again — was that supposed to signify that he was more junior, a younger officer?

Behind the scenes, I wonder if we can trace a waxing and waning military influence in the writers room over the years. I know Roddenberry served, and I think some of the early TNG writers did as well. But I feel like that became less common in later series? (But I don’t know for sure.)

I think it’s striking that rank is significantly downplayed on DSC, except for Burnham and potentially Saru.

(originally posted here)

Very often I see people confidently think or claim that the Star Trek warp drive works like the warp "drive" first proposed by physicist Miguel Alcubierre in 1994. Unfortunately, this is in error (I put "drive" in quotes because Alcubierre apparently dislikes calling it a drive, preferring to call it a "warp bubble"). As Alcubierre himself says, it was Star Trek that gave him the inspiration for his metric, not the other away around.

Why there is this conflation may be because people desperately want to think that Star Trek is based on hard scientific principles, or that the same principles in Star Trek are actively being worked on in real life. I don't propose to speculate further. There are also several fan ideas and beta canon ideas in licensed fiction about warp drive (notably in the excellent novel Federation by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens) but for the sake of brevity, I'm limiting my discussion to what we see on-screen and related behind-the-scenes documents.

Background

The basic obstacle to superluminal or faster-than-light travel is Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. Special Relativity says that as the velocity of an object with mass accelerates towards the speed of light (c), the mass of that object increases, requiring more and more energy to accelerate it, until at c, that object has infinite mass, requiring infinite energy to push it past c. In fact, Special Relativity says that nothing with mass can reach c - photons are massless and can only travel at c. From there, it follows that theoretical objects with negative mass can only travel above c, hence given the name tachyons, from the Greek tachys, or “fast”.

Alcubierre wondered: if you can't move the object/ship without running into relativistic issues, why not move space instead? Alcubierre's idea was to warp space in two ways - contract space in front of the ship and expand space behind it, an effect he compares to a person on a travelator. So while the ship itself remains stationary in a flat area of spacetime between the two areas of warped space (the whole thing being the "warp bubble"), that flat area gets moved along like a surfboard on the wave of warped space. Of course, warping spacetime in this manner involves incredible amounts of negative energy, but that's another discussion.

So this is how the Alcubierre metric circumvents relativistic issues. Because the ship itself remains essentially motionless, there is no acceleration or velocity and thus no increase in inertial mass.

But that's not how Star Trek’s warp drive works, and has never been.

Warp Drive pre-TNG

There is no description on how Star Trek warp drive works on screen in TOS except perhaps for a vague pronouncement that the "time barrier's been broken" in TOS: "The Cage" (in the episode Spock also calls it a "hyperdrive" and refers to "time warp factors").

During the production of Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979), science consultant Jesco von Puttkamer, at the time an aerospace engineer working at a senior position in NASA, wrote in a memo to Gene Roddenberry dated 10 April 1978 (The Making of Star Trek: The Motion Picture by Susan Sackett and Gene Roddenberry, 1980, pp153-154) his proposal for how warp drive was supposed to work, in a way eeriely similar to Alcubierre's metric:

When going “into Warp Drive,” the warp engines in the two propulsion pods create an intense field which surrounds the entire vessel, forming a “subspace”, i.e. a space curvature closed upon itself through a Warp, a new but small universe within the normal Universe (or “outside” it). The field is nonsymmetrical with respect to fore-and-aft, in accordance with the outside geometry of the Enterprise, but it can be strengthened and weakened at localized areas to control the ship’s direction and apparent speed.

Because of the its non-symmetry about the lateral axis, the subspace becomes directional. The curvature of its hypersurface varies at different points about the starship. This causes a “sliding” effect, almost as a surf-board or a porpoise riding before the crest of a wave. The subspace “belly-surfs” in front of a directionally propagating “fold” in the spacetime structure, the Warp - a progressive, partial collapse of spacetime caused by the creation of the subspace volume (similar to but not the same as a Black Hole).

But there's no evidence that Roddenberry actually used this concept. In fact, Puttkamer said further in the memo that at warp, Enterprise would have "little or no momentum", which we will see is not how it's portrayed. Puttkamer was even against the now famous rainbow effect of going into warp:

The effect should not be firework-type lights but a more dimensional, geometric warping and twisting, an almost stomach-turning wrenching of the entire camera field-of-view.

So while an interesting document, there's no evidence that Puttkamer's ideas made it into any on screen incarnation of Star Trek.

Warp Drive in TNG and beyond

In TNG, the first publicly available description of how warp drive is supposed to work came from the licensed Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual (1991). At page 65:

WARP PROPULSION

The propulsive effect is achieved by a number of factors working in concert. First, the field formation is controllable in a fore-to-aft direction. As the plasma injectors fire sequentially, the warp field layers build according to the pulse frequency in the plasma, and press upon each other as previously discussed. The cumulative field layer forces reduce the apparent mass of the vehicle and impart the required velocities. The critical transition point occurs when the spacecraft appears to an outside observer to be travelling faster than c. As the warp field energy reaches 1000 millicochranes, the ship appears driven across the c boundary in less than Planck time, 1.3 x 10^-43 sec, warp physics insuring that the ship will never be precisely at c. The three forward coils of each nacelle operate with a slight frequency offset to reinforce the field ahead of the Bussard ramscoop and envelop the Saucer Module. This helps create the field asymmetry required to drive the ship forward.

As described here, Star Trek warp drive gets around Special Relativity by using the warp field to distort space around and lower the inertial mass of the ship so that the shaping of the warp fields and layers around the ship can push and accelerate the ship itself towards c with reasonable energy requirements. The stronger the field (measured in units of millicochranes), the lower the inertial mass gets and it becomes easier to accelerate. When the field hits a strength of 1000 millicochranes, the ship pushes past the c barrier. Presumably at this stage it's in subspace, where Relativity no longer applies, and can accelerate even faster to each level of warp until the next limit at Warp 10 (TNG scale), or infinite speed. I'm not getting into how warp factors are defined (but see here for a discussion on the change between TOS and TNG warp scales, which also goes into the definition of warp factors, if interested).

The Technical Manual was written by Rick Sternbach and Michael Okuda, who were both technical consultants behind the scenes, and evolved from a document prepared by them in 1989 (3rd Season) to aid writers on the show in writing the technobabble in their script. (See also the history here.)

Here’s what the first, 3rd Season edition says about the way warp works, which is simply that the drive “warps space, enabling the ship to travel faster than light,” and that the ship is “‘suspended in a bubble’ of ‘subspace’, which allows the ship to travel faster than light”. This description also shows up in the 4th Season edition, and the Star Trek: Voyager Technical Guide (1st Season edition) in identical form.

While the actual text of the manual never made it on screen, there are several pieces of on-screen evidence that tell us Sternbach and Okuda's description of warp drive is followed: warp fields lower inertial mass, and the ship experiences acceleration and inertial forces during warp.

Evidence of warp fields lowering inertial mass

In TNG: "Deja Q" (1990), Enterprise-D uses a warp field to change the inertial mass of a moon:

LAFORGE: You know, this might work. We can't change the gravitational constant of the universe, but if we wrap a low level warp field around that moon, we could reduce its gravitational constant. Make it lighter so we can push it.

Later in that episode, we see the effect the warp field has on the moon:

DATA: Inertial mass of the moon is decreasing to approximately 2.5 million metric tonnes.

At the time "Deja Q" was broadcast, all that was said about warp drive in the technical guide was that warp drive "warps space" and the ship is in a subspace bubble with no mention of lowering inertial mass. Yet "Deja Q" shows warp fields doing exactly that, which tells us that either the writer gave Sternbach and Okuda that idea or they already had their ideas in place behind the scenes. The latter is more likely, given that the Technical Manual was published the following year.

In DS9: "Emissary" (1993), O'Brien and Dax use a warp field to lower the mass of the station so they can use thrusters to "fly" the station to where the wormhole is.

DAX: Couldn't you modify the subspace field output of the deflector generators just enough to create a low-level field around the station?

O'BRIEN: So we could lower the inertial mass?

DAX: If you can make the station lighter, those six thrusters will be all the power we'd need.

Evidence of inertia during warp

We've known from TOS on that during warp speed, inertia still exists. If it didn't, then there wouldn't be the bridge crew being subjected to inertial forces when maneuvering at warp speeds and being tossed around the bridge (TOS: "Tomorrow is Yesterday", when Enterprise slingshots around the sun at warp - with the last reported speed being Warp 8 on the TOS scale).

In TMP (1979), we see Enterprise accelerating to warp speed before the engine imbalance creates a wormhole.

KIRK: Warp drive, Mr Scott. Ahead, Warp 1, Mr Sulu.

SULU: Accelerating to Warp 1, sir. Warp point 7… point 8… Warp 1, sir.

As noted, a ship using the Alcubierre metric doesn't need to accelerate, because it's space that's moving, not the ship. Additionally there'd be no need for an inertial dampening field (as we see in TNG and beyond) that is supposed to protect the crew when accelerating to superluminal speeds. From VOY: "Tattoo" (1995):

KIM: Could we go to warp under these conditions?

PARIS: The ship might make it without inertial dampers, but we'd all just be stains on the back wall.

In the 2009 Star Trek movie, Enterprise was unable to go to warp unless the external inertial dampeners were disengaged.

SULU: Uh, very much so, sir. I'm, uh, not sure what's wrong.

PIKE: Is the parking brake on?

SULU: Uh, no. I'll figure it out, I'm just, uh...

SPOCK: Have you disengaged the external inertial dampener?

(Sulu presses a couple buttons)

SULU: Ready for warp, sir.

PIKE: Let's punch it.

If there's no acceleration or inertia, there's no reason why them being on would impede warp drive operation.

Closing Remarks

Taking all these pieces into account, I hope I've shown convincingly that the way the show treats Star Trek warp drive is consistent with a drive system that involves acceleration and inertial forces, and with warp fields that lower inertial mass - just like Sternbach and Okuda describe in the Technical Manual, and definitely not consistent with way the Alcubierre metric is supposed to work.

For those who want a deep dive into Star Trek warp physics, some canon and some speculative, I heartily recommend Ex Astris Scientia's series of articles on warp propulsion. I also recommend Jason W. Hinson's series on "Relativity and FTL Travel". Hinson was a regular participant in rec.arts.startrek.tech in the 90s and educated us on how Relativity worked and how it applied to Star Trek.

For example, the Federation's founding members (Tellarites, Andorians, Vulcans, Humans) were the subject of fan theories and "fanon" for many years before the ENT writers made it official. One of the interesting (and fun) aspects of this recent wave of series has been seeing the writers increasingly add nods to fan theories and pieces of fanon lore over the years. What are some good examples of this?

And relatedly: what's a fan theory, or piece of fanon, that you suspect the current writers believe, even if they haven't explicitly stated it on-screen?

There is something undeniably weird about the new Kirk that we're seeing in Strange New Worlds. He doesn't yet "feel" intuitively like Kirk to me, especially in the rom-com episode. But I do think his writing and, to a lesser extent, his performance show that the writers are thinking deeply about the character and what people have been missing about him. In a sense, SNW may be trying to counteract the phenomenon of Kirk drift, where pop culture stereotypes about the character's impulsive, womanizing ways makes it impossible to understand the person we actually see on screen.

What the first season finale shows us is a Kirk who is by the book, yet decisive and sure of himself. He does not disobey Pike, but he is not afraid to tell him he's wrong -- not based on gut feelings, but based on a sound tactical analysis that proves to be right. Compared to Picard, Kirk -- especially the movie Kirk -- may seem brash and prone to violate the rules, but TOS consistently shows us a captain who respects authority but is willing to push it up to the very limit to protect his crew and achieve his goals. It's interesting that the episode picks up on this aspect of the character as the one that creates an instant bond with Spock. It's not his emotional nature or his instincts or whatever else, it's his respectful yet firm leadership style -- a sharp contrast to Pike's tendency to leave his subordinates to their own devices.

In the romcom episode, the message is a little garbled by the fact that this is an alternate timeline Kirk, but I think it highlights the fact that (a) Kirk is not a compulsive womanizer by any means and (b) Kirk bonds sincerely with women who feel isolated by leadership or other burdens -- not in a predatory way, but in an empathetic way. In contrast to Chris Pine's layabout troublemaker who is constantly getting laid (at least in the first film), the Kirk from TOS is basically a lonely nerd. A charismatic one, to be sure, but still a lonely nerd. Even well into his second command, he's haunted by the guy who bullied him at the Academy! He is, if anything, sexually thwarted by his sense of duty and his "marriage" to the ship. Hence when he meets a woman with a similar predicament, they are drawn to each other. Everyone has a type! It's just a sad coincidence that he wound up meeting someone of his type virtually every episode in season 3.

I don't think it's perfectly executed, at least in the pairing with La'an, but I do like that they're trying to refresh our perspective on the character and that they're doing it in a way that reminds us of all the traits from TOS that the pop culture parody of "Captain Kirk" leaves out. But what do you think?

SNW S2E02 introduce a new quirk of the canon: The time "push back", such that there will be some events (let's just call it Canon Event) that will always come about in Prime Timeline, albeit in different actual time. Aside from the aforementioned Eugenic War, I can think of a few other so-called "inconsistency", such as how there are already Cloaking technology for both Romulans and Klingons before Kirk's mission, despite TOS dialogue implies that Romulan first got cloak during Kirk's mission, and then transfer technology to Klingon. (I think the current explaination is different cloaking technology, which have various quirks.)

So here's the question: Under what situation would you consider "Time Pushback" being an acceptable explaination for discrepancy??

Back in the day on TrekBBS (alas, I cannot find the original post), someone pointed out that Odo shapeshifts less and less often as the series goes on. It was never a super frequent thing, but it occurred more often in the earlier seasons, but, even accounting for his time as a solid in Season 5, he seems to shapeshift less and less in later seasons.

What reasons (in-universe and real-world) might there be for this? Was it just a budget thing? Were the writers using it as a "trick" (writing crutch) earlier on? Are we supposed to believe that Odo is trying to assimilate, or reject his Changeling heritage?

This is the Daystrom Institute Episode Analysis thread for Strange New Worlds 2x03 Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow.

Now that we’ve had a few days to digest the content of the latest episode, this thread is a place to dig a little deeper.

It is one of the most dire aspects of Star Trek Picard: a long-running ban (under "galactic treaty") that eliminates not only research into synthetic life, but appears to ban synthetic lifeforms themselves.

And, candidly, I don't think it's an element of the story that is plainly justified on first read. It appears incredibly -- to the point of being implausibly -- reactionary, to an extent that we haven't seen from the Federation before. It also stretches credulity that a single event -- no matter how catastrophic -- could lead to such a long-lasting draconian policy. For it to be believable, we really need to assume that the Federation already was morally corrupt and weak-willed in a way that makes it in turn seem hard to believe that people of good character like Picard could hold the Federation in such high esteem. (Of course, there is ample evidence that the Federation, or at least Starfleet, has been immoral in this area for quite some time.) This is worsened, of course, by the sudden turnaround at the season's end wherein the ban is lifted, with apparently very little effort.

It's a weakness of storytelling in PIC S1. But, when we start to layer in stories from other series, a new picture emerges.

Let's work backwards. From PIC, we know what happens in 2385:

2385: in the Attack on Mars, rogue synths surreptitiously hijacked by the Romulan anti-AI extremist group known as the “Zhat Vash” lead a devastating attack on Mars, destroying the colonies, the Utopia Planitia shipyards, and the Romulan Rescue armada. Romulan involvement remains unknown for years after.

2385: a political crisis erupts following the Attack on Mars, with at least fourteen Federation members threatening secession. Starfleet chooses to abandon the evacuation mission, and Admiral Picard resigns in protest. Soon thereafter, a wide-ranging interstellar treaty – signed by so many powers that it was sometimes described as a “galactic treaty” – bans research, construction, and even the mere presence of synthetic lifeforms. Dr. Bruce Maddox flees the Federation shortly after and settles on Coppelius with Altan Soong.

Prior to that, PRO tells us about 2382-2384ish:

2382 (speculative): the Protostar launches under the command of Captain Chakotay, an experimental vessel equipped with a new propulsion technology called “proto-warp”, on a mission to return to the Delta Quadrant.

(PRO seems intentionally vague on the exact timing of this launch; potentially it could be placed as far back as 2378, or even maybe as late as 2384.)

2383 (speculative): Construction of the Romulan Rescue armada at Utopia Planitia is underway.

(The timing of the fleet construction is vague, but I argue it needs to be early enough such that the attack in 2385 creates a setback too large to recover from. As I recall, PIC is a little unclear on whether it would have been feasible to rebuild the fleet in time after the attack. But for there to be such severe political blowback, I think the project needed to have been underway for at least a couple of years.)

2383: following temporal displacement, the Protostar is discovered and commandeered by Dal R’El and his crew.

2384: the Dauntless, under the command of Vice Admiral Janeway and equipped with a (limited) quantum slipstream drive, embarks on a search for Captain Chakotay and the Protostar.

2384: the Battle of the Living Construct wreaks a heavy toll on the gathered Starfleet armada, which includes the starships Defiant, Centaur, Sovereign, and possibly Enterprise, as a viral AI hijacks starships via communication transmission and pits them against one another. The crew of the Protostar destroy the ship to terminate the signal and end the battle.

2384: full production of the Protostar class commences

There are two things to highlight here. First, this now marks the second instance of a destructive AI within as many years. It's unclear from PRO's finale how many ships are destroyed, but it is eerily reminiscent of the Attack on Mars a year later.

Second, the early 2380s saw the release of not one but two experimental FTL technologies, to say nothing of the use of sentient holograms as crew members. And yet none of that seems present by PIC S3 -- perhaps an illustration of the profound impact of the destruction of Utopia Planitia (and the all-but-certain brain drain as thousands of Starfleet designers perished).

Finally, we come to LDS' contribution to the tale of the early 2380s:

2381: the Battle of the Texas Trio, in which three autonomous Texas-class starships go rogue due to the malfunction of the AI known as “Badgey”. Before being stopped by a fleet of California-class starships, the “Texas Trio” carried out a devastating attack with significant loss of life, including that of Vice Admiral Buenamigo, who led the development of the Texas class.

That marks three rogue AI catastrophes in four years, with consecutively higher costs each time, culminating in what appears to be the destruction of an entire generation of technology development and Starfleet researchers, whose loss still appears apparent fifteen years later.

The Synth Ban wasn't just a reaction to the Attack on Mars -- it was a reaction to half a decade of AI disasters. No doubt the Ban was encouraged both explicitly and implicitly by Romulan (and Zhat Vash) elements, and even within this broader context, the Ban is still an overreaction. But the Attack on Mars "struck while the iron was hot", at a time when the Federation populace would be more anti-AI than at any point in history.

As a topic for a separate post, but the more I look at the pre-2385 vs post-2385 stories, the more stark a shift I see, and the more potential for potent storytelling becomes apparent. The Attack on Mars and the Romulan Supernova became a generation-defining event: the 9/11 of its time, separating the 90s-esque optimism of TNG, LDS, and PRO, from the 2000s-2010s-esque troubled times of the Synth Ban and PIC.

Of course, it doesn't literally have to be the orchid -- although it's thought-provoking to consider that angle. (An orchid suddenly gets super-evolved with the ability to speak and walk -- damn straight it's gonna want to live and would happily lie to do it.) But the point to consider is the source of various claims that are made about the situation.

Critically, Tuvix claims that he speaks for both Neelix and Tuvok -- that both of them are present and both of them are happy being merged.

But that's actually a somewhat bold claim, especially the second point. Given what we know of Tuvok and Neelix, it seems hard to imagine either of them voluntarily signing up for this -- certainly given their mild personal animosity, but also because we really have no evidence to suggest that either of them feel "incomplete". Like, Tuvok really doesn't seem that interested in becoming more in touch with his emotions; Neelix is a little more debatable, but even he doesn't really seem like he is longing to be more logical or serve in Starfleet.

So Tuvix is making at least one implausible claim; that claim is important because, if it were accurate, then yes, Janeway's decision goes against the wishes of Tuvok, Neelix, and Tuvix, which would be bad.

For the sake of argument, imagine then that Tuvix is actually neither Tuvok nor Neelix, but is the orchid, with access to Tuvok and Neelix's memories, knowledge, and personality -- and maybe even holding mental versions of their persons as silent captives. The orchid would have incentive to lie, and would have all the means at its disposal to engage in a convincing deception.

In that scenario (and certainly if Janeway discovered this to be true), it seems pretty straightforward that deintegrating Tuvix is the right thing to do: Tuvok and Neelix are being held captive with no ability to advocate for themselves. The orchid, while surely benefiting from the situation, does not have the right to usurp the autonomy of Tuvok and Neelix.

It is, of course, unknowable whether the orchid was in fact holding Neelix and Tuvok hostage. But even if we set aside the orchid, and take the more conventional interpretation that Tuvix is a composite individual arising from the transporter combination of Tuvok and Neelix, I think the above argument still holds.

Tuvix is not Tuvok nor Neelix -- that much is clear externally as well as by his own account. Tuvix (who is not Tuvok nor Neelix) claims to speak for both Tuvok and Neelix and makes an assertion that would seem out of character for both individuals. Tuvix makes claims that blatantly serve his self-interest. Tuvix advocates action that benefits him, and which has an unknowable impact on Tuvok and Neelix but either way denies them their autonomous existence.

Whether "Tuvix" is a malicious masquerading hyper-evolved orchid, or a genuine composite individual speaking from his unique perspective, it doesn't really matter. There is no usable evidence of consent from either Tuvok or Neelix, and there are ample reasons to believe that they would not consent to this situation. Janeway has no way of knowing that Tuvok and Neelix aren't both screaming inside of Tuvix, demanding to be freed -- a scenario that does seem likelier true than not.

Tuvix's death is a tragedy, as was his birth.

I want to live!

- EvilKirk's last words

Whatever else you want to say about EvilKirk, it's pretty clear that he didn't want to be merged back into the single Kirk. Despite this, there is no shortage of reasons why it was a good idea to merge the Kirks: the Enterprise needed its CO back, GoodKirk wanted to do it, and it seems possible that the strain of remaining split would have eventually killed EvilKirk anyways. However, the fact remains that EvilKirk did not consent to the procedure which ended his existence.

Clearly the circumstances here are quite different and there's basically no argument to be made that allowing EvilKirk to continue to exist would benefit any involved party, EvilKirk included. But for the purposes of this comparison, the only fact that really matters is that EvilKirk was just as passionate about his desire to continue existing as Tuvix was.

Yet—and it's obvious where I'm going with this—"Spock murdered EvilKirk" is not a meme.

So what gives? Did Spock murder EvilKirk or not? If yes, why does he get a pass while Janeway is condemned?

It's a brief mention in PIC S3. As the crew approaches the restored Enterprise-D at the Fleet Museum, La Forge makes a stray comment, to the effect of:

...and obviously we can't use the Enterprise-E

at which point, everyone turns to Worf, who insists with indignation,

That was not my fault.

There's a beat as everyone makes a face and gives each other a knowing look, and then... that's it.

It's clearly meant to be a wink and a nod from the writers: "Yes, we know you want to know what happened to the E, and no, we aren't going to tell you."

Even the behind-the-scenes materials are mum on the topic. The Star Trek: Picard Logs, posted on Instagram, mention both an incident at Kriilar Prime that apparently led to Worf's departure, as well as a subsequent classified mission after which the ship was taken out of service. (To me, this seems at odds with what is shown on-screen: it's obvious that Worf had something to do with the E's demise, and it's also obvious that the story is common knowledge -- even known to Crusher, who has been "out of the loop" for 20 years. So I think neither of the Logs' stories are satisfactory explanations.)

But, as I just alluded to, there are a few things we can infer about what happened to the E.

First, there's no way it was destroyed and no way it resulted in any loss of life. For one, La Forge's tone is too glib for that -- there's no way he would describe the destruction of a starship in those terms. But more importantly, there's no way that Worf would shirk responsibility for such a thing.

Second, we know it's something unusual, memorable, and (in my opinion) decidedly unclassified. And, I would argue, it seems like it's something... funny. Or perhaps whimsical or ironic or otherwise something that it's polite to strike a glib tone regarding.

Finally, I would suggest that, whatever it was, it happened around 2384. We get a brief sighting of the E in the battle of the end of Prodigy's first season (though it's a little unclear whether it was actually supposed to be the Enterprise or the Sovereign) so we know it's active at least until then. But it seems unlikely that any loss of a starship after the Attack on Mars in 2385 would be considered a laughable matter. What's more, we need the -E to be out of service early enough for the -F to have a reasonable career before being decommissioned in 2401. Assuming that a loss of a starship in the wake of the Romulan Supernova would also not be a laughing matter, that would push an -F launch date perhaps as late as 2389, which seems like an implausibly short service tenure. Retiring the -E in '84 gives some flexibility for when to launch the -F and still give it a long enough service life.

So, what do you think? What are some scenarios that could satisfy the clues we've been given? (I'll put a couple of my ideas in the comments!)

As you may have heard, Paramount cancelled Prodigy, halting production on its almost-complete second season, and removed the show from its service. The primary reason to do this, other than to streamline their content in light of the service's upcoming merger with Showtime, was to generate a tax loss -- a disturbing trend among streaming services.

Placing the commercial question aside, this has implications for the franchise. If Prodigy has effectively been deleted from the historical record and is no longer available to watch, is it still canon? The last time something equivalent happened was when the original Animated Series was unavailable for decades, and it was largely not treated as canon by subsequent shows. Nowadays it is counted as official canon (which introduces some complications), but it's also widely available. The likelihood that they will tell a story in the future where this makes a difference is low, but it's still worth clarifying.

What do you think?

BLUF: The Star Trek Universe and its parallels (e.g. the Mirror Universe) are part of a simulation, and the Q are AI programs that can interact and influence them all.

I started thinking about the nature of the Q the other day when rewatching the Voyager episode "The Q and the Grey"; it seems odd that an omnipotent/omnipresent species would also be so rigid and unimaginative. Why, for instance, do the Q have such strict rules about suicide? You can argue that they fear their species eventually being gone because they all eventually opt to off themselves out of boredom with existence, but as long as they had the ability to die that is unavoidably going to be the eventual outcome of an organism that can exist for infinity (mind-boggling, isn't it?) anyway.

And why is it such a disruptive event in the Q Continuum for two Q to have an offspring? Obviously a species that can live forever doesn't need to procreate, but it's clearly possible so why is it so shocking?

Then you have the fact that the Q are not just invisible observers of the universe; they interact with species and even individuals to, seemingly, drive outcomes that are possibly part of a preferred order to things. Quinn influenced Earth's history to drive certain changes; helping Newton define gravity was certainly a big event in human scientific growth. Why, though? What is driving the Q to pursue certain outcomes in evolutionary history?

It's almost as if the Q have an inherent nature, and are just after an incalculable period of time starting to question and even push back against that nature. So where did that nature come from? Was it possible programmed into them?

Now step away from the Q and look at the characteristics of the Star Trek universe. The Milky Way galaxy alone is chock full of humanoid alien species that (for the most part and with variations/outliers) breath the same air, can live within a certain range of temperatures, have brains/emotions/standards that function similarly enough that ideas and principles can be shared and abided by, and interbreeding is even possible to a certain degree without outside support. That's huge. And though the show tried to explain this a little bit in "The Chase", I think it's fair to say that we've seen humanoid species across the galaxy to a degree that a shared ancestor isn't enough to explain it all.

Beyond biology, let's also look at the makeup of the physical universe: subspace allows interstellar communities to function without succumbing to the laws of relativity: FTL travel is possible; real-time or at least near real-time interstellar communications function; the materials needed to facilitate warp drive are ubiquitous enough that nearly any warp-capable species that wants to travel into space can get it. It is arguably miraculous that the universe in Star Trek can operate the way that it can, and these things do not conform to our current understanding of how the universe and space/time operate.

Taking all of this together, I propose that the Star Trek universe is a complex simulation, designed purposefully to simulate what the universe would be like if it operated by certain principles that would allow for interstellar communities to form and that many humanoid species existed and were capable of interacting with each other. Several instances of this simulation are running simultaneous with similar parameters but modified to generate different outcomes: the Mirror Universe, for instance, has different presets to create more aggressive humanoids less likely to work together. Furthermore, I submit that the Q are AI programs designed to interact with and shepherd these communities into developing in such a way that they would eventually develop the right levels of technology and understanding to grow into a spacefaring species.

I suggest further that the Q are only partially aware of their nature and don't necessarily understand that the universe is a simulation, or if they do they don't share that fact. Over the millennia that the simulation has been running (at least internal to the simulation) the Q individually have started to develop interests and ideas beyond their original programming, and other Q programs cannot abide that because it goes against their designed nature. Imagine a piece of an Operating System deciding it wanted to commit suicide, or two programs getting together to code their own, new piece of software. It's unheard of, and that's why it's so disruptive to the Continuum.

Maybe one of the original designers of the simulation was a fan of old science fiction stories and incorporated ideas from a writer named Benny Russell into the coding of the simulation to recreate some aspects of his work?

I know this isn't a provable hypothesis and it's really just an idea for fun, but it kind of (in my opinion) adds another dimension (no pun intended) to a species like the Q.

I recently rewatched the premier of Picard season 2 and was puzzled by one thing that doesn't seem to fit, even on rewatch -- why does the Jurati-Queen act so aggressively and fail so dramatically to communicate clearly? It makes sense if she were representing the regular Borg, but she's supposed to be the "nice" Borg! What gives?

I think we can solve this puzzle if we realize that Picard season 2 is structured like TAS "Yesteryear" -- a theory that I planned to write out here, without realizing that I already wrote the exact post years ago! Long story short, TAS "Yesteryear" is a unique situation in Star Trek time travel where the "wrong" result has to occur to motivate the "right" action -- basically, Spock has to fail to go back in time to rescue himself, in order to be alerted to the fact that he needs to do it in the first place.

Similarly, when the Jurati-Borg sees her former self on the bridge of the Stargazer, she realizes that she needs to scare Picard into self-destructing the ship -- so that Q will send them back and lead to her own creation. The "wrong" timeline is integral to the process of getting us to the "right" timeline. If she had acted more reasonably, she never would have existed in the first place!

What do you think?

The purpose of this post is to examine the history of genetic modification in the Federation, prior to "Strange New Worlds". I've tried to compile various references to genetic engineering, eugenics, cloning, and genetic resequencing within the Federation across all series, with quotes and additional context as needed. All examples are presented in real-world chronological order, to better examine how these ideas have evolved over the history of the franchise.

The first reference to eugenics I could find is in the Original Series episode, "The Conscience of the King". In that episode, they briefly described how Kodos was employing his own theories of eugenics when he enacted the massacre at Tarsus IV:

Spock: Kodos began to separate the colonists. Some would live, be rationed whatever food was left. The remainder would be immediately put to death. Apparently, he had his own theories of eugenics.

McCoy: Unfortunately, he wasn't the first.

Spock: Perhaps not. But he was certainly among the most ruthless; to decide arbitrarily who would survive and who would not, using his own personal standards, and then to implement his decision without mercy. Children watching their parents die. Whole families destroyed. Over four thousand people. They died quickly, without pain, but they died. Relief arrived, but too late to prevent the executions.

The subject comes up again, of course, in "Space Seed", when Khan and his fellow prisoners are discovered:

McCoy: The Eugenics Wars.

Spock: Of course. Your attempt to improve the race through selective breeding.

A later statement from Kirk affirms the root cause of the Eugenics Wars:

Kirk: An improved breed of human. That's what the Eugenics War was all about.

Spock is the first to suggest that there was a fatal flaw in the engineering process:

Pock: In 1993, a group of these young supermen did seize power simultaneously in over forty nations.

Kirk: Well, they were hardly supermen. They were aggressive, arrogant. They began to battle among themselves.

Spock: Because the scientists overlooked one fact. Superior ability breeds superior ambition.

Kirk: Interesting, if true. They created a group of Alexanders, Napoleons.

Khan himself has some thoughts on his own abilities relative to the rest of humanity:

Khan: Captain, although your abilities intrigue me, you are quite honestly inferior. Mentally, physically. In fact, I am surprised how little improvement there has been in human evolution. Oh, there has been technical advancement, but, how little man himself has changed.

Little is said about genetic engineering for quite some time, until we get to The Next Generation's "Unnatural Selection". This one appears to be a bit of an outlier, given what we later learn about genetic enhancement, but it may be possible to reconcile it. When the Enterprise crew first meet Dr. Kingsley of the Darwin Genetic Research Station, she makes the nature of her research seem as innocuous as possible:

Kingsley: Our research here is limited to human genetics. I can assure you we're not dealing with something that got away from us. We believe that we were infected by a supply ship that was here three days ago.

Later, she acknowledges that the children aboard the station are genetically enhanced, with an interesting caveat:

Kingsley: Our ultimate achievement. The oldest is twelve, and all are telekinetic. Watch.

Pulaski: Genetically engineered?

Kingsley: Not engineered, created. Perfect in every way. Their body structure, their musculature, their minds.

I find it very interesting that Kingsley draws this line between "engineering" and "creation" - this distinction seems to hold some relevance to her, but it's not explored in the episode itself. Could Federation law draw a distinction between genetic modification of living individuals and cloning?

This episode also gives us an example of a genetic medical treatment of sorts, when the transporters are modified to filter out the genetic changes Pulaski endured when she transported over to the Darwin station.

Another Next Generation episode, "Up the Long Ladder", reveals some attitudes about cloning, specifically:

Riker: You want to clone us?

Granger: Yes.

Riker: No way, not me.

Granger: How can you possibly be harmed?>

Riker: It's not a question of harm. One William Riker is unique, perhaps even special. But a hundred of him, a thousand of him diminishes me in ways I can't even imagine.

Notably, when Riker and Pulaski are cloned without their knowledge or consent, Riker destroys the clones outright while they are still developing.

The episode also mentions "replicative fading," a process by which errors creep into the chromosomes of clones across successive generations, until the clones are no longer viable.

In Deep Space Nine's "A Man Alone", Odo arrests Ibudan for murdering his own clone in an attempt to frame Odo for murder:

Odo: Killing your own clone is still murder.

Notably, Odo is likely referring to Bajoran law, not Federation law, in this case.

The Next Generation's "Bloodlines" contains an early reference to DNA resequencing, a term which will be used more frequently going forward. It is also another example of flawed genetic manipulation:

Picard: You know as well as I do, Bok, he's not my son. I know what you've done. Miranda Vigo is his mother but I am not his father. You made it appear so because you resequenced his DNA. But your technique was flawed. He developed a neurological disorder. When my ship's Doctor investigated it, she discovered what you had done.

Later, Jason Vigo notes that he is responding well to an unspecified treatment provided by Doctor Crusher, and that the damage caused by the DNA resequencing may be completely reversed.

Federation law regarding genetic enhancements starts to come into focus in Deep Space Nine's "Doctor Bashir, I Presume":

O'Brien: You're not a fraud. I don't care what enhancements your parents may have had done. Genetic recoding can't give you ambition, or a personality, or compassion or any of the things that make a person truly human.

Bashir: Starfleet Medical won't see it that way. DNA resequencing for any reason other than repairing serious birth defects is illegal. Any genetically enhanced human being is barred from serving in Starfleet or practising medicine.

Later, Rear Admiral Bennett makes the case for these laws, echoing the sentiments of Spock in "Space Seed":

Bennett: Two hundred years ago we tried to improve the species through DNA resequencing, and what did we get for our trouble? The Eugenics Wars. For every Julian Bashir that can be created, there's a Khan Singh waiting in the wings. A superhuman whose ambition and thirst for power have been enhanced along with his intellect. The law against genetic engineering provides a firewall against such men and it's my job to keep that firewall intact.

It's interesting that ambition is something specifically cited by O'Brien that cannot be influenced by genetic resequencing, while Bennett says that it can.

In Voyager's "The Raven", the EMH uses genetic resequencing to neutralize Seven of Nine's nanoprobes. Borg nanoprobes are obviously not a birth defect, so it appears that other medical uses of resequencing are considered ethical and legal.

Continued in the comments...

In Star Trek Picard we see Raffi living at rock bottom for a while. She has no job after her discharge from Starfleet, and is clearly not doing as well. She describes her life as humiliation and rage.

And yet by modern standards she has a home, food, and power. Her drug usage isn't condoned but she's left largely alone to do it. By modern 21st century standards its a very soft landing.

Does it get worse than this? What is the worst possible economic outcome someone living on 24th Century Earth is likely to face.

The events of DS9: Past Tense imply that things aren't as bad as sanctuary districts and mass homelessness, but there's a lot of range between that and where Raffi landed. So what evidence do we have about how bad it can get?

It is important to recognize that Daystrom Institute is a curated space. We have much stricter rules than typical internet discussion boards, designed to encourage deep-dive analysis and thoughtful discussion throughout our community.

Our rules, listed on the sidebar, give an overview of what Daystrom Institute contributors should and should not do. This post is designed as a slightly more detailed guide, for anyone entering our community from elsewhere and looking to join the discussion.

These rules are not arbitrary, but built up over ten years of trial and error at reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute. That said, they can and will change over time, as the needs of different circumstances, communities, and platforms shift.

What kinds of comments can I make here?

In general, any comment which seeks to further civil discussion of Star Trek is appropriate. This includes, but is not limited to:

• Attempting to answer a question
• Proposing a counterargument to another user's point
• Asking a relevant followup question
• Mentioning a relevant piece of evidence and connecting it to a previous point

What kinds of comments are not permitted here?

First off, rudeness in any form is unacceptable in Daystrom. We expect all commenters to be polite and diplomatic to each other under all circumstances. Among other things, this rules out insults, snarky behavior, and passive aggressive attempts to get the last word. If someone is being rude to other posters, do not "fight back". Report them and move on; we will deal with the problem.

Additionally, there are many types of comments which are appropriate elsewhere on startrek.website and most other corners of the internet at large, but are not acceptable in Daystrom. They include:

• Dismissing the validity of someone else's post or comment. This includes declaring a point invalid because it references shows which are non-canonical or which you simply don't like. Alternately, declaring that "the writers didn't think about it" or "Q did it" are so banal as to be worthless: if that's all you have to say, don't say anything.
  • Note: this does not preclude discussing the show or answering questions from an out-of-universe perspective. Such comments are encouraged provided they are thoughtful and constructive, and not an excuse to devalue another poster's contribution.
• Asserting something without explaining your reasoning. If it's worth mentioning at all, it's worth telling us why you believe it to be true.
• Sharing an opinion without further explanation. Your opinion is not interesting to other people, unless you can explain why you hold that opinion in a substantive way.
• Whinging: If you want to express a negative opinion about a show, a writer, a cast member, etc, that is permitted provided that (like any other content) it is substantive, constructive, and relevant. "Burnham sucks" is never appropriate, while a longwinded explanation of how Michael Burnham is an overpowered character is appropriate in a discussion about how the Michael Burnham character is written, but not appropriate in a discussion of (for example) how the Spore Drive works which happens to mention Michael Burnham.
• External links (such as to blogs or videos) without context. If it's worth sharing, it's worth explaining what it is and why it's relevant.
• Memes, image macros, gifs, and other examples of visuals intended to deliver a joke.
• One-off jokes in any other form.

Wait, we can't tell jokes here?

Injecting humor into a post or comment which would stand alone as an acceptable submission without the joke is acceptable: humor can be very effective for making a point. However, any submission which exists primarily to deliver a punchline is not appropriate.

But what if it's really, really funny?

Fun police here. Sorry, still no. If your joke can stand alone, it's perfect for /c/Risa. If not, hang on to it for next time the topic comes up on /c/StarTrek and dazzle us all then.

If these rules seem overly harsh to you, that's okay. The other communities on startrek.website are much less stringent, intentionally, and we encourage you to go there for shitposting and more casual Trek discussion. That's the benefit of specialized spaces: if this one doesn't seem like a fit for you personally, one of the others should.

One of the fascinating things about this "third generation" of Star Trek (starting either with Star Trek 2009 or with Discovery) is the way the Star Trek universe has started to knit itself closer together by referencing existing backstory. For example, Discovery wholeheartedly embraced the idea that Andorians and Tellarites are key Federation members and should therefore be highly visible in Starfleet, building on lore originally implied in TOS, largely ignored by TNG, DS9, and VGR, and re-embraced by ENT. Prodigy, for its part, leaned very heavily on VGR for its worldbuilding source material.

This has also produced some interesting quiet exclusions from recent stories -- not to suggest they've been "decanonized" or anything like that, but clearly have been deprioritized. The Tholians come to mind as a ready example of this. Like the Gorn, they debuted in TOS, received stray mentions in DS9, before making an on-screen return in ENT. I wonder if the SNW writers considered using the Tholians but balked at a villain that had such different atmospheric requirements, and all the consequences that entails in terms of dramatic presentation. The Denobulans also seem to fall into a similar bucket; outside of a pair of appearances in PRO, they have received nary a mention since ENT.

Then of course we have the lengthy list of "one-off" civilizations, including the likes of

-the Sheliak
-the Husnock
-the Tzenkethi
-the Jarada
-the Miradorn

And in terms of "underexplored corners", I've only been focusing on the civilizations, but there are any number of other corners we could poke into. The Department of Temporal Investigations, the Corps of Engineers, the Federation Council, the Lunar Colonies... the Trekverse is littered with these little crumbs all over the place -- tiny seeds of ideas that suggest opportunities for imagination.

For my part, I would love to learn more about the Sheliak. For one thing, they seem like they would benefit from the advances in CGI over the last 30 years. But I like that they seem equally matched to the Federation in terms of strength, and that their hyperfocus on legal compliance gives them a generally underused "hat" to wear in the Trekverse. They have some similarity to Vulcans, but taken to an extreme, and layered in with real disdain for "lower life forms" that I think would make for a fascinating "adversary" -- I'd love to see Captain Pike or Captain Seven in a verbal jousting match with a Sheliak commander.

What is an underexplored corner of Trek lore that you think merits exploration?

This is the Daystrom Institute Episode Analysis thread for Strange New Worlds 2x02 Ad Astra Per Aspera.

Now that we’ve had a few days to digest the content of the latest episode, this thread is a place to dig a little deeper.

We often see technology from the future brought back to the present, whether as a case of a chance encounter, or something more.

However, it’s also fairly uncommon to see those technologies pop up against after they’ve been introduced. One such example is the ablative armour generators that Admiral Janeway fitted to the Voyager, being prototypes from a future Starfleet, which are seen in that episode, and then never again, even in shows that are set after the time she left.

The reason for this might be that the Federation does not want to run the risk of being accused of violating the temporal prime directive (or accidentally running afoul of it in some other way), and shelves that particular technology entirely.

From their standpoint, it would be rather difficult to separate a technology that the Federation developed of their own accord, compared to one that they might have developed from being inspired by, or reverse-engineering a piece of future technology, so they shelve it, rather than risk the trouble, never developing the preliminary steps to reach that future technology.

The only anachronistic part of this is the Doctor’s mobile emitter, which is a variant of 26th century technology, and was developed into Picard, but that can be explained by it being reverse engineered from 26th century technology, by someone in the 20th century, technically making it technology from the past. Since it is Earth technology from their own past, they might be able to get away with iterating on their own version without risking trouble with the various temporal enforcement agencies.

Numerically speaking, the vast majority of Ferengi we see on screen are sporting what have sometimes been called “headskirts”. Virtually every Ferengi we see on-screen — from the marauder crewmen in Next Generation to Quark’s waiters to various Ferengi businessmen seen in the background — is wearing one. Rom and Nog even wear color-coordinated versions of them once they join the Bajoran militia and Starfleet, respectively.

However, there are a few conspicuous exceptions to this otherwise apparently universal practice, most notably among them being Quark, the only Ferengi character billed as a series lead. This is particularly jarring, as Quark otherwise frames himself as the most Ferengi Ferengi around.

From a real-world perspective, I suspect that the headskirts were originally created to avoid creating a full head prosthetic for guest actors. Once the character of Quark was created, the cost of a reusable full head prosthetic would have been less prohibitive.

In universe, after reviewing which Ferengi are shown with and without headskirts, I believe I have a theory that fits what we’re shown on-screen, and gives us some grounds to infer a few extra bits about certain characters.

First, I propose that the “default” practice for Ferengi is to wear a headskirt. That would explain why we see them worn so frequently. However, I suggest that it is an option to abstain from a headskirt — under certain conditions.

Fundamentally, I propose that the absence of a headskirt indicates that a Ferengi believes he is a “top dog” — in that he has no one above him who could be considered his “boss.” However, I also suggest that there is some subjectivity and risk in this. (Note that “top dog” is not a coincidental choice of words on my part: the Ferengi logo is said to have been drawn to describe the “dog eat dog eat dog” mentality of a capitalist society.)

Zek and Gint are the clearest examples of this: as Grand Nagus, they are the pinnacle “top dog.”

Quark would also fit this criterion: Odo, Kira and Sisko aside, there basically is no one whom Quark answers to (unlike his waiters, who answer to him). Rom and Nog do not fit this criterion, for a few different reasons. Nog is a child at the series start before starting essentially an apprenticeship on his way to joining Starfleet; and obviously once he joins Starfleet, he continues to have those who outrank him. Rom answers to his brother before joining the station’s maintenance crew, at which point he ultimately answers to O’Brien.

There are several other Ferengi who do not wear headskirts, and it definitely is not a clean and tidy division between the bosses and the workers. However, that is where some subjectivity comes in. Rather than being a hard-and-fast rule, the absence (or presence) of a headskirt may be an assertion: “I’m a top dog and I dare you to say otherwise.” It then turns to one’s peers to decide if the claim is justified; if you make the claim but then don’t have the status to back it up, then you lose credibility and standing. So removing one’s headskirt is not without its risk.

Who else have we seen without headskirts?

Galia: as an arms merchant who can purchase his own moon, he would likely be seen as a “deserving top dog” — perfectly reasonable for him to abandon the headskirt.

Brunt: an FCA liquidator, his bare head takes on some new significance in this framework. The FCA is described as “answering to no one” — if that is true, then Brunt’s bare head would serve to reinforce that idea to all those misfortunate enough to cross his path. It’s also possible that liquidators are supposed to answer to someone — a manager or the like — but that Brunt goes bald anyway, just to flaunt his de facto latitude.

Nilva: as the chairman of a large Ferengi company, he likewise probably enjoys “deserving top dog” status.

Reyga: a Ferengi scientist and a bit of a maverick; we might interpret his bare head as indicating some level of rejection of Ferengi norms; if my proposed framework is true, then it is a louder act of protest than we would otherwise realize

Prak: though I doubt this was an intentional choice on the part of the showrunners (I suspect his bare head is the result of extra prosthetics being available from the concurrent production of DS9), Prak does give us an interesting example of someone who perhaps is “too big for his britches” — it is rare to see a DaiMon without a headskirt (presumably because they must answer to some sort of Ferengi admiral), but it’s easy to imagine a DaiMon who is cocky enough to flaunt their bare head — and is probably ridiculed by all his underlings for it. (Recall how Starfleet Captain Styles in The Search For Spock has been mocked for his swagger stick.)

There are several Ferengi whom we might expect to go bare under this framework who still wear the headskirt. Chief among these is Lek, who by his own admission works alone. Lek probably could justify “top dog” status if he wanted to. But the default is to wear a headskirt: to go bare is to make an active statement, and thereby draw attention to oneself. I imagine there are more than a few Ferengi who could justify their own “top dog” status but who would rather keep a lower profile (Rule of Acquisition 168: “Whisper your way to success”).

~ ~ ~

What do you think? Are there any good counter-examples to this? (I admit, I did not check the appearance of every Ferengi in every episode. So it’s possible that I missed someone!) Is this consistent with other things we’ve seen in Ferengi society? Are there any other possible explanations for the pattern of skirted vs bare heads?

We've seen it many, many times: the ship gets into a firefight, takes a few hits, shakes around, and consoles explode (possibly taking an unfortunate ensign with them). Eventually the battle is resolved with our heroes largely intact if somewhat shaken up. If it was a particularly nasty battle, there will be signs of damage: scorches on the walls, deformed equipment, busted lights, and rocks scattered about.

All of that seems reasonable... except the rocks, which look pretty out of place in a spiffy 24th century starship. So why are they there?

It's never made much sense that the entire multi-species Federation would be subject to a strict ban on genetic engineering due to events on Earth that happened centuries before the Federation was even founded. The way they doubled down on that rationale in Una's trial only highlighted the absurdity -- especially when Admiral April claimed he would exclude Una to prevent genocide.

On the one hand, the writers may be trying to create a straw man out of a weird part of Star Trek lore so they can have a civil rights issue in Starfleet. And that's fine. From an in-universe perspective, though, I think we can discern another reason for the ban on genetic engineering -- the Klingon Augment Virus.

There was a ban on genetic engineering on United Earth, which is understandable given that it was much closer to the time of the Eugenics Wars. Why would that remain unchanged when more time passed, more species joined, and more humans lived in places without living reminders of the war? [NOTE: I have updated the paragraph up to this point to reflect @Value Subtracted's correction in comments.] The answer is presumably that they needed to reassure the Klingons that something like the Augment Virus would never happen again. Hence they instituted a blanket ban around that time -- perhaps in 2155, the year after the Klingon Augment Virus crisis and also, according to Michael Burnham, the year the Geneva Protocols on Biological Weapons were updated.

That bought the Federation over a century of peace, but after war broke out due to a paranoid faction of Klingons who thought humans would dilute Klingon purity and after peace was only secured through the most improbable means, they doubled down on the ban. Una's revelation provided a perfect opportunity to signal to the Klingons that they were serious about the ban -- hence why they would add the charges of sedition, perhaps. Ultimately, an infinitely long speech and the prospect of losing one of their best captains combined to make them find a loophole -- but not to invalidate the ban or call it into question. This Klingon context is why April, who we know is caught up in war planning of various kinds, is so passionate that the ban exists "to prevent genocide" -- he's not thinking of people like Una, he's thinking of the near-genocide they suffered at the hands of the Klingons.

This theory still doesn't paint the Federation in a positive light, since they have effectively invented a false propaganda story to defend a policy that has led to demonstrable harm. But it makes a little more sense, at least to me. What do you think?

The Galaxy class starship was designed with the ability to separate the saucer from the stardrive section, so that the "floating city" part of the ship could be left somewhere safe while the rest of the ship galavants off to do something risky. We see this happen precisely once, in the season one episode Arsenal of Freedom. We also see saucer separation deployed for a handful of tactical and or emergency uses (such as against the Borg in The Best of Both Worlds, or to escape the breaching warp core in Generations).

So, this seems like a useful ability to have, and the Enterprise is constantly being sent into dangerous situations. Why not use this ability more frequently?