Star dates – is one day equal to 0,07 SD in TNG? (midwest.social)

submitted 3 months ago by clark@midwest.social to c/startrek@startrek.website

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Just had a thought while watching TNG.

In “Code of Honour,” the episode begins as stardate 41235.25. Then, after Natasha is captured, Picard voices that “one whole day” has gone by and the stardate is 41235.32. Does this mean one day in TNG is equal to 0.07 (stardate)? Or do the last 5 numbers have no meaning at all?

I know it’s a widely discussed issue in this community. Maybe I’m on the completely wrong track and maybe there is another consensus. But I thought it would spark conversation. Cheers!

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 42 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I'm a big believer in "stardates are nonsense, and should remain nonsense," but there were efforts made to standardize them in the '90s. They weren't particularly consistent efforts, though. The full history can be found here.

In early TNG, this was the explanation:

A stardate is a five-digit number followed by a decimal point and one more digit. Example: "41254.7." The first two digits of the stardate are always "41." The 4 stands for 24th century, the 1 indicates first season. The additional three leading digits will progress unevenly during the course of the season from 000 to 999. The digit following the decimal point is generally regarded as a day counter.

By TNG season 6, they were going with:

A Stardate is a five-digit number followed by a decimal point and one more digit. Example: "46254.7". The first two digits of the Stardate are "46." The 4 stands for the 24th Century, the 6 indicates sixth season. The following three digits will progress consecutively during the course of the season from 000 to 999. The digit following the decimal point counts tenths of a day. Stardate 45254.4, therefore, represents the noon hour on the 254th "day" of the fifth season. Because Stardates in the 24th Century are based on a complex mathematical formula, a precise correlation to Earth-based dating systems is not possible.

[-] corvi@lemm.ee 11 points 3 months ago

I guess when you’re traveling around faster than the speed of light, time and date stop meaning the same thing as they do back home, so it stands to reason that you couldn’t map stardates to any standard calendar.

At least, that’s my new headcanon.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Stardates should be a standard calendar at least amongst themselves.

[-] corvi@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

I suppose it could go either way. That would be true if we see stardates as a universal system that applies anywhere and everywhere. If we instead imagine them to include encoded information about local space time, it makes sense that they might be inconsistent but always moving forward.

I am, of course, using “makes sense” extremely loosely here.

[-] mercano@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

It also removes an emphasis on any one particular planet’s day or year.

[-] wjrii@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

Because Stardates in the 24th Century are based on a complex mathematical formula, a precise correlation to Earth-based dating systems is not possible.

Hand successfully waved.

[-] PumpkinEscobar@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

The headings / bearings they use are all over the place too, remember looking it up and it feels like the writers just picked whatever numbers best fit the flow / cadence of dialog they were looking for

[-] KillingAndKindess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 months ago

And they nailed it especially with Sir Patrick Stuart's short monologues.

[-] klemptor@startrek.website 2 points 3 months ago

Not always. On DS9, when the Defiant was departing the station, the heading was given as 180 mark zero - meaning, traveling exactly backward from their current position. This made sense because when docked, the Defiant's nose is buried in the docking ring.

[-] PumpkinEscobar@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah, some shows did have their own consistent-ish systems, but I think some shows used a system that seemed to be relative to the center of the solar system, others from the perspective of the ship (which makes more sense to me, like naval bearings) - https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Heading.

It was a quick lookup from a long time ago, I was working on a 3d space game and was curious if ST had a consistent model I could just use.

[-] Logh@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago

“4 stands for the 24th century” so… just a couple of centuries until another y2k style panic?

this post was submitted on 02 May 2024

31 points (100.0% liked)

Star Trek

10416 readers

63 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.

New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?

Rules

1 Be constructive

All posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.

2 Be welcoming

It is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.

3 Be truthful

All posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.

4 Be nice

If a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.

5 Spoilers

Utilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episodes, as well as previews for upcoming episodes. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.

6 Keep on-topic

All submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/quarks.

7 Meta

Questions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.

Upcoming Episodes