Mirror Universe--Alternate Timeline?

[ultron2099]

Okay, from what I understand. Alternate time lines, divergent time lines, quantum universes and parrallel universe pretty much all fall under the same hat. At ever point in micro second time, quantum rules take effect and multiple time line events happen splitting off into parrallel universes with diferent quantum frequencies. When worf found himself adrift bouncing from one universe into the other, they found him with his quantum signature. The mirror universe is merely a parrallel divergent time line were one event in the distance past created a series of new events which although enacted a radical change in how humans viewed themselves and the universe it also left enough similarieties that the overall tapestry of human history played itself out in much the same manner.

Thus, a much difficult question arises. At what point in the distant past would an event change which changes the whole of human history into a more 'empire' oriented frame of mind. My two bits, Alexander the Great lived, and his decendants clashed with the Roman empire after they had conquered Carthage. It would have set up a war between half of Europe and upper Africa vs Greek empire (Greece, Egypt and what was once the Persian Empire). Greeks would still be using Phalanxes, but the Romans would be using Legions. It would be Julius Caesar vs the best Greece had having learned from the lessons of Alexander's campaigns.

There's a fun what if.

[Reliant121]

you've done it again. Ultron 2, the other...er..thing 0

[Mikey]

I'm not sure I understand why those two cultures clashing would lead to a global empire-building philosophy - both Alexander of Macedonia and ancient Rome were already empire-builders, even without clashing, so why would the two of them interacting strengthen that paradigm?

[ultron2099]

I'm not sure I understand why those two cultures clashing would lead to a global empire-building philosophy - both Alexander of Macedonia and ancient Rome were already empire-builders, even without clashing, so why would the two of them interacting strengthen that paradigm?

Alexander the Great was the empire builder, before and after him all that was left of the greeks were city states. Romans were empire builders. Now place two very powerful and diverse empires against each other in those times. The war could last for years. Two empires struggling for domination. And extended war could easily lead the citizens to a 'war' mentality. As I said, its more of a theory opening up the possibility for debate.

[Mikey]

I see what you're saying, although it could be argued that Philip of Macedonia had begun the idea of Hellenistic empire-building, and he just wasn't as good at it as his son. My point is that that mind-set already existed in both cultures, and dind't produce the MU in our "non-alternate" universe.

[ultron2099]

I see what you're saying, although it could be argued that Philip of Macedonia had begun the idea of Hellenistic empire-building, and he just wasn't as good at it as his son. My point is that that mind-set already existed in both cultures, and dind't produce the MU in our "non-alternate" universe.

Begun it, but hadn't created the sucess that Alexander did. Now imagine if Alexander had continued living and the scenario I had put forth and happened and the war lasted for a few centuries.

[Mikey]

Maybe I'm being obtuse, but I still don't get it. What you're describing as I see it is a reason for a particular mindset among humanity; but that mindset was already present among the involved parties without that reason.

[ultron2099]

Maybe I'm being obtuse, but I still don't get it. What you're describing as I see it is a reason for a particular mindset among humanity; but that mindset was already present among the involved parties without that reason.

That mindset was involved, but not exactly spread out or set. Remember the greek city states all had different philosophies about governing. in fact, many of the cultures around there had different mind sets and beliefs. rome unified many of them, but it eventually fell leaving a power vacuum were new ideas eventually took over. what i'm suggesting is a scenario were the mindset was more developed and driven in with blood and years of fighting for one of two empires, both in a dead lock.

think of it as the cold war of our time, a war between democracy or communism. but in there case, it was a hot war between not government or religion but who's empire was to survive. after winning the war, they would continue to go forth conquering more and more adding to the empire. this would eventually lead to world war between empires and eventually to a single unified empire.

again, just a thought.

[Mikey]

I guess I'm looking at the wrong time frame. By the time of Hellenistic Greece, during which Alexander had consolidated Greece under his rule BEFORE building the empire which included the Middle East and India, those Greek polisi were already part of his empire, so I would imagine that the idea of empire was already prevalent there.

[ultron2099]

I guess I'm looking at the wrong time frame. By the time of Hellenistic Greece, during which Alexander had consolidated Greece under his rule BEFORE building the empire which included the Middle East and India, those Greek polisi were already part of his empire, so I would imagine that the idea of empire was already prevalent there.

However, Alexander died and rule of his empire fell to the various generals who staked out empires of their own. Again, a power vacuum was created. In this scenario, Alexander stops conquering, and begins administrating. Here he continues the dynastic empire his father began rather then have it fall appart. This eventually leads to Rome conquering the rest of Europe and northern Africa before finding itself pend in by its Eastern Equal, the Greek Empire.

[Captain Seafort]

However, Alexander died and rule of his empire fell to the various generals who staked out empires of their own. Again, a power vacuum was created. In this scenario, Alexander stops conquering, and begins administrating. Here he continues the dynastic empire his father began rather then have it fall appart. This eventually leads to Rome conquering the rest of Europe and northern Africa before finding itself pend in by its Eastern Equal, the Greek Empire.

A unified Alexandrian empire would certainly be better able to confront Rome from the perspective of having a superior population base, but that wouldn't help them on the battlefield. The Macedonian phalanx, while extreme successful in phalanx battles, was also extremely vulnerable to the much more flexible Roman system, where individual training and initiative played at least as great a role as group solidarity. That's how the Greeks were beaten historically, and barring an unprecedented revolution in Greek warfare that's how they would be beaten in this alternate reality.

[Mikey]

I always imagined that having lines of supply and bureaucracy stretching from India to northern Greece played a role, too...

[ultron2099]

However, Alexander died and rule of his empire fell to the various generals who staked out empires of their own. Again, a power vacuum was created. In this scenario, Alexander stops conquering, and begins administrating. Here he continues the dynastic empire his father began rather then have it fall appart. This eventually leads to Rome conquering the rest of Europe and northern Africa before finding itself pend in by its Eastern Equal, the Greek Empire.

A unified Alexandrian empire would certainly be better able to confront Rome from the perspective of having a superior population base, but that wouldn't help them on the battlefield. The Macedonian phalanx, while extreme successful in phalanx battles, was also extremely vulnerable to the much more flexible Roman system, where individual training and initiative played at least as great a role as group solidarity. That's how the Greeks were beaten historically, and barring an unprecedented revolution in Greek warfare that's how they would be beaten in this alternate reality.

Ah, but here is were the brilliance of Alexander the Great would play a part. Remember, with only the Phalanx he conquered and extremely diversified army and continued to spread his empire everywere he went. Now imagine when he sat down to create his empire one of the things he would do is set up military doctrine and training for his people. So you wouldn't be up against the traditional greek phalanx exactly, but something that had evolved from the lessons that Alexander the Great would have learned and instituted.

Anyhow, as I said, its all just food for thought.

[Mark]

Has anyone ever theorized that maybe THAT is the REAL universe? And our Trek is the Mirror? That universe seems to follow humanities journey alot more realisticlly that of "officia" trek history.

[Tsukiyumi]

Has anyone ever theorized that maybe THAT is the REAL universe? And our Trek is the Mirror? That universe seems to follow humanities journey alot more realisticlly that of "officia" trek history.

I think I made a joke about that a few months ago. It does make a lot more sense.