Showing posts sorted by relevance for query stargate. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query stargate. Sort by date Show all posts

23.2.09

Gate Geek


I hate when this happens. You've been warned.

This weekend I caught a showing of Stargate on cable. It's one of my all time favorite movies and despite the regurgitated syndication of television shows it remains a solid science fantasy movie. Even after 15 (yup) years it still holds up a well produced film.

But there's a plot hole I never saw until just now.

For those who haven't seen it (and seriously, how can you be using a computer, the internet or breathing if you haven't) the story revolves around an unearthed piece of ancient technology that opens travel between star systems. A scientist and a group of soldiers take the first ride to a planet on the other side of the galaxy where they find a civilization much like ancient Egypt. It turns out, Ra - the sun god - was an alien. (Later in the television shows he is shown to be of a race called the Ancients. How droll.) This alien used the uncivilized humans to create an empire for himself, essentially creating civilization on Earth. This proves the scientist's theory that the pyramids were created by aliens.

Ra's slaves revolted and he fled, but he created (or planted) a stargate on Earth and then kidnapped a few thousand humans. On this new planet, Ra outlawed reading and writing to avoid another revolt, but when the scientist and soldiers show up, the slaves revolt again and this time Ra isn't able to run.

It's a neat story, but there's a problem with the technology.

The gate contains 39 symbols or chevrons. It spins around on a free wheel and uses 7 locking mechanisms to hold selected symbols in place. Once you put in the seven correct symbols, the gate opens and you can walk through it to the new location. The way it's described in the movie is problematic in that the scientist says you need seven points to plot a course through space; six for a destination and one for the starting point. There was a cover stone with six symbols on it, but the original team couldn't figure it out until the scientist came in and figured out that the symbols are all star clusters - constellations. The seventh symbol, the point of origin, was a representation of Earth.

Ok, it kind of makes sense if you're watching and aren't thinking about it too much. But I did start thinking and here's my problem.

First: Now I could be wrong on this, but I thought you only needed three "points" to plot a point in space. The intersection of the lines drawn from an X a Y and a Z intersect to give you a point. On a plane this is triangulation, so I'm assuming someone smarter than me looked up how to go about doing this in 3 dimensions. But this leads to my second problem.

You have to use spatial coordinates to plot anything. If I was using the methodology from the movie, I'd have to know six distinct coordinates, which are usually of an X, Y, and Z variety. So that's 18 numbers already, but where am I measuring FROM? On Earth we coordinate using established longitude and latitude lines, and we only need two numbers. But in space are we measuring from Earth? The Sun? The center of the universe? There's a great article on how the TARDIS from Doctor Who moves through space (and time) but I won't get into it here. Needless to say, it's starting to get dodgy because without a frame of reference, even the six points I need to use to find another point are in question. So what do I use? What happened here is whoever wrote and finalized the script wanted to use symbols. It allowed an ancient language expert to join a military venture. So the symbols were tied to star clusters and with out suspension of disbelief, we were baited and switched over the facts that coordinates equal star clusters equal symbols. Symbol one is Orion which is x28, y105 and z254.

Point the third: Even if the coordinate you used was a single star IN that constellation, that star moves. Gates (for the most part) are on planets that move around a star that move within a galaxy that hurtles through the universe. So let's assume you've rationalized the coordinates being a star cluster and that each on is represented by the cluster's dominate star, it would be like plotting a point in your backyard using moths; it'll never be the same. This led me to believe that the symbols are not coordinates at all, but an address. It seems more likely that you could use a group of symbols to find almost a postal location. The gate is there and has a dialing or mailing code so you use other gates to find it. My house doesn't move in relation to other houses in the eyes of the postal service, so sending it to 123 Main St. Austin, TX, 78701 USA will always get it to the right place, no matter how fast you and I plunge through the cosmos. So, we can equate the 7 symbols to and address. That's easier right?

Not so fast, Dr. Jackson. Here is my final point and the one that can't really be resolved. In order to travel to another place, I'm giving you six symbols, based on my location, to represent where I'm going AS WELL AS a seventh symbol representing where I am. Let me say that again using the mailing address analogy. I'm going to mail a package from Austin to Dallas. In order to know where to drive, I need an address. The address is a street number, street name, zip code, city, state, country. Six symbols, right? The seventh is my point of origin. The package is GOING to Dallas, it doesn't need to know my current location to get there, so it's 7th symbol will be "mailbox." Ok, so using the Stargate method of travel, I'd tell my package where to go by addressing it based off things only I can see from Austin (star constellations only I can see from Earth.) If I looked north toward Dallas, I'd see a couple clouds, a building, maybe a few cars. So I'd address my package, "To: Big cloud, little cloud, bank, Chevy, overpass, jogger. From: Me."

That's what Stargate is doing.

It's telling us this gate can open a wormhole to another place by giving it directions to ourselves. The star constellations only make sense if you're on Earth, if you're using them as an address and not coordinates. If you're using coordinates, it only works if you account for drift and a known center of the universe. In short, it doesn't work either way.

Not to mention the fact that if you're using the number of symbols on the wheel as a method of "dialing" a location, you'd be trying forever to figure something out. I used an online permutation calculator so I can't claim my alegebra is right, but of 39 symbols, using 6 as a subset (assuming 1 never changes as a point of origin) you have 137,231,006,679 possible destinations. They explored that in the show and alluded to the idea that there are gates almost everywhere in the universe, but at this point I think they're method for dialing is flawed.

See what happens when I get an itch on my brain like that? You were warned.

2.7.08

More Charlie Jade


Two more reviews up at Television Zombies and number 4 on the way. For all you Sci-Fi fans out there, you should give this show a good watching. Set up your DVRs for Monday at 2am or whatever the schedule is, and watch it. It's something Sci-Fi doesn't have right now, a unique show that isn't Stargate or Star Trek related. They need something to help Doctor Who and Battlestar: Galactica along and barring a Farscape or Firefly renewal, this is about as good as it gets for that channel.

11.3.09

Star Wars Live Action


Unless you're a geek who has been living under a particularly large rock, you'll likely have heard the reports over the last few years of the impending doom-er...live action Star Wars television show. Well it's now official and casting is underway.

I honestly don't know where I stand on this. I mean, there are parts of the Star Wars universe I like and parts I don't. It's natural with something as awesome in scope as Star Wars that there are going to be times when you just don't like what's produced. To some extent Star Trek is the same way. And it's not specific episodes or films I like more or less, it's aspects of the whole. The analogy would be that you enjoy the taste of tomatoes and cheese but you don't like club sandwiches.

I like space battles, not gonna lie. Way back when the PC game X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter was out, I was cultivating a sincere love of vehicles flying around in space shooting at each other. The bigger variety of ships, the wider the range of sizes and capabilities the better. I LOVE Star Wars spacecraft. I love it. A Twitter account was recently set up to ask a daily question and yesterday posed, "What did you want to be when you grew up?" I answered a test/fighter pilot, but only because I wanted to be Luke Skywalker or Wedge Antilles. Han was cool and all and the ladies loved him, but I knew I wasn't that cool. I wanted to be the starfighter pilot with an enviable and nuanced command of a laser blasting bird of prey.

And thus comes my problem with a live action Star Wars show. I'm trying to think of a franchise that started as a movie and then became a TV show. And I don't mean a TV movie or mini series, I mean a full blown Hollywood film. At first I had a hard time thinking of a good example, so using my wiki-fu I was able to find a decent list of movies that had been made into serial TV shows. I was surprised how much I'd forgotten. I also noticed Smallville isn't on that list and that was the one example I was going to use. I guess the Superman story was first a comic, then a TV show, THEN a couple movies, then a few more TV shows.

So if you look at that list, it's not a great track record. There are some exceptions where the show was as good as the movie; M*A*S*H, The Odd Couple, maybe Highlander, but for the most part the TV shows were either animated adaptations or hollow money grabs to further the property. And in even rarer instances (Buffy) the show was better than the movie.

How does this impact a live action Star Wars show? We've seen that sci-fi/fantasy can be done on the small screen with varying success (Doctor Who, Battlestar: Galactica, Hercules/Xena, Smallville, Stargate SG-1, Lost, Supernatural) but where the show ends up being broadcast may determine its success. Genre shows on broadcast networks, with a couple mega-exceptions, don't do well. Critically they are panned and they tend to be short lived and usually run out of money. They do better on smaller channels and cable, however, because their ratings don't have to compete with hyper-reality TV. Even better, if they lived on a subscription channel, they could have total control and tell the story they want. So where would Star Wars live? Knowing Lucas, he'd make his own channel, but I'm going to guess if it doesn't go on Sci-Fi, then it's going to ABC.

Why ABC? Well, ABC is tied to Disney and Lucas has kids. He's going to make a show that's for young adults, by young adults, starring young adults. It's going to be The Rebel Alliance 90210. If the slapstick antics of Episode 1, the horrible love story in Episode II and the hormone filled rage of Episode III are any indication, don't expect there to be any Jedi, droids, starship fights, lightsaber battles or much political intrigue. A live action Star Wars is going to be about Princess Leia fighting with her adopted dad, Bail Organa, and how he doesn't understand her. She doesn't want to be a Senator. She loves Gareth, the starship mechanic from the wrong side of Aldera and their love will end this war Daddy!

*ahem*

So no, I don't have any faith that a new show will be any better than the Clone Wars animated show (which isn't bad, but not great), any of the prequel movies or, and I shudder to even type it, the Holiday Special. But it's Lucas, so whatever channel he picks, whatever time slot, you can be guaranteed that it will run as long as he wants it to.