4

It's clear from the 1992 start date of the Eugenics Wars that Star Trek's timeline has already diverged from ours. Are there any earlier points of divergence? In DS9's "Little Green Men" episode, Quark and company traveled back to Roswell in 1947, but that caused no apparent changes.

I can't think of any earlier events, but I'm not an expert.

enter image description here

rosesunhill
  • 4,721
  • 1
  • 18
  • 58
  • Related, not quite duplicate: http://scifi.stackexchange.com/q/28404/44184 – DCShannon Mar 10 '16 at 19:52
  • @DCShannon I agree it's close, but not quite the same. However, that thread does mention Transparent Aluminum from the 1980s, and that's clearly earlier. I see no TA anywhere around. – rosesunhill Mar 10 '16 at 19:59

2 Answers2

7

According to The Star Trek Chronology, by Michael and Denise Okuda (both of whom worked on production for TNG and several other Star Trek series and films), the earliest differences occurred during or shortly after World War II. Note that Chronology is fully canon and was initiated by Roddenberry just prior to his death.

They are not specific about the earliest differences, but differences in the Star Trek timeline in the late 1940s had led to the augmentation program that gave birth to Khan Noonien Singh (who rose to power in the 1990s).

There were earlier incursions than "Little Green Men", such as

  • Kirk, Spock, and McCoy's visit to the 1930s (in TOS "City on the Edge of Forever")
  • when Quinn flung Voyager to the birth of time (in Voy "Death Wish")
  • when Q took Picard to primordial Earth (in TNG "All Good Things")
  • such as when Picard and others travel to 1893 San Francisco (in TNG "Time's Arrow")

However, apart from "City on the Edge of Forever", these episodes were written after the release of Chronology, and it is unclear if any of them had an effect on the timeline.

Praxis
  • 111,024
  • 50
  • 512
  • 690
  • 1
    City didn't take place in 1839 - Edith Keeler being run over by a car being the main give away ;) – NKCampbell Mar 10 '16 at 19:57
  • 1
    @NKCampbell : It's my favourite episode! I meant 1939. :-P – Praxis Mar 10 '16 at 19:58
  • @NKCampbell : By the way, you probably could have edited your answer in such a way that the two answers might have complemented one another and I would have upvoted! :-) – Praxis Mar 10 '16 at 20:01
  • The changes during or just after WWII may well be the earliest. Now I wish we knew what they were. – rosesunhill Mar 10 '16 at 20:03
  • @Praxis - nah - you had sources - I just had pictures ;) – NKCampbell Mar 10 '16 at 20:04
  • @NKCampbell Also, totally unfounded claims that Picard didn't visit primoridal Earth. How would you know? – DCShannon Mar 10 '16 at 20:06
  • @DCShannon - ? I don't understand your statement – NKCampbell Mar 10 '16 at 20:16
  • 2
    @NKCampbell It's a joke, sorry. Your deleted answer implied that Picard being in the past was a difference from our timeline, but there's no evidence he wasn't there (apart from being fictional). – DCShannon Mar 10 '16 at 20:26
  • That a being went to the past doesn't necessarily mean that it "deviated" from our timeline, but the earliest possible difference is the Space program of the 60s which the date is slightly off in TOS. The earlier ones that I know of off the top of my head (Ent's messing around in WW2) might not have actually happened in the ST timeline. Also there is t'pal's story about her grandmother which might count as a deviation and there is a story I'm not sure is canon or what the title is which related a similar story as far as human earth history goes. – Durakken Aug 02 '16 at 04:11
1

IMHO some Star Trek writers didn't know enough about history to avoid making big errors in their historical references. Thus there were already historical differences from our timeline hundreds and thousands of years ago. Thus Star Trek was already in an alternate universe hundreds and thousands of years ago.

Once two alternate universes diverge from each other they will tend to become more and more different from each other. It seems just about impossible for two different alternate universes to ever become identical again. Instead they should just keep on getting more and more different from each other forever.

But there are also many historical references in Star Trek that seem correct as far as I can tell. And it is not like all the correct historical references are far in the past and all the incorrect historical references are in the more recent past. That would be the case if all the correct historical references were from before the Star Trek universe diverged from our universe and all the incorrect historical references are from after the two universe diverged.

Instead the correct and incorrect historical references are mingled together over hundreds and thousands of years. Correct and incorrect historical references follow one after another in random order. Once two alternate universes diverge from each other they naturally become more and more different from each other. They will not naturally re converge to become more similar to each other.

But our universe and the alternate universe of Star Trek do seem to diverge and then converge, become different and then become similar or identical, over and over again for hundreds and thousands of years. Since that is not a natural process, something or someone is acting to make the two universes become more similar every time they naturally drift apart.

Thus it may be speculated that something or someone very powerful is acting to make the two alternate universes, and probably many others, have similar histories, making them all closer and closer to a chosen history.

M.A. Golding
  • 31
  • 1