The Genesis Device

[KuvahMagh]

Agreed. I don't think the cause of death matters to themn so much as the circumstances; I'm sure every Klingon would prefer being "genesised" in battle to dying of old age at home.

Ahh but would it be a true battle to them, say at random this happened to a planet, it would be the start of a battle no doubt but would it, on its own, be a battle or a massacre... either way i think we all know the klingons would be lining up to kick some ass...

[Captain Seafort]

Ahh but would it be a true battle to them, say at random this happened to a planet, it would be the start of a battle no doubt but would it, on its own, be a battle or a massacre...

I expect they'd count it in the same categoryas being on the business end of a tactical nuclear strike - not really a battle, but if it's due to enemy action then it's good enough for Sto'vo'kor.

Of course, if it was just some random Klingon happening to be sightseeing on a planet earmarked for insta-terraforming it probably wouldn't count.

either way i think we all know the klingons would be lining up to kick some ass...

And the difference between this and every other day of the week is what, exactly?

[KuvahMagh]

I expect they'd count it in the same categoryas being on the business end of a tactical nuclear strike - not really a battle, but if it's due to enemy action then it's good enough for Sto'vo'kor.

True enough I suppose, so long as the victim dies with honor and all that...

[Sonic Glitch]

I always figured part of the reason the Genesis Planet failed may have been because it was formed out of a nebula and not an already stable planet. I see no reason that it shouldn't work if it were used on an already stable planetoid. Perhaps nebulae and starships were not meant to be planets. :-0

Remember, Genesis was not meant to make planets from nothing, but to reorganize what was already there.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

I always figured part of the reason the Genesis Planet failed may have been because it was formed out of a nebula and not an already stable planet. I see no reason that it shouldn't work if it were used on an already stable planetoid. Perhaps nebulae and starships were not meant to be planets. :-0

Remember, Genesis was not meant to make planets from nothing, but to reorganize what was already there.

It did reorganize what was already there, the Mutara Nebula. Also David Marcus' statements made it sound like it was the instability of the protomatter that made the planet unstable not the nebula.

[Sonic Glitch]

It did reorganize what was already there, the Mutara Nebula. Also David Marcus' statements made it sound like it was the instability of the protomatter that made the planet unstable not the nebula.

Yes, but according to the computer file Kirk, McCoy and Spock watched it was never meant to do things like that. It was meant to be used on planets, not detonated in the middle of a gasesous nebula. Also, the protomatter instability was his FIRST GUESS, scientists usually experiement to check such things but we don't have an oppurtunity to see that in ST III, due to his unfortunate death, so perhaps it WASN'T the protomatter?

[Blackstar the Chakat]

It did reorganize what was already there, the Mutara Nebula. Also David Marcus' statements made it sound like it was the instability of the protomatter that made the planet unstable not the nebula.

Yes, but according to the computer file Kirk, McCoy and Spock watched it was never meant to do things like that. It was meant to be used on planets, not detonated in the middle of a gasesous nebula. Also, the protomatter instability was his FIRST GUESS, scientists usually experiement to check such things but we don't have an oppurtunity to see that in ST III, due to his unfortunate death, so perhaps it WASN'T the protomatter?

Well, I'm a little rusty on my astronomic science but don't nebulas contain a lot of material necessary for planets?

[Mikey]

The material necessary for a planet depends on what type of planet you want. I think what MM&I is saying is that part of the Genesis effect was "used up" in forming the planet, rather than be 100% applied to converting an existing planet. I tend to agree based on Marcus' statement that the inherent instability of protomatter was probably the issue, but MM&I raises a valid point. This is why experiments are duplicated, and why prototypes aren't deemed abject failures if they don't perform the exactly as an end product is desired.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

Another problem is that Carol Marcus was very adament about not so much as a microobe being on the test planet. If there was a risk that a second prototype would destroy the test planet that would effect the entire solar system it's in. She might insist the entire system is uninhabited which would make it that much harder to find a test side.

[Sonic Glitch]

The material necessary for a planet depends on what type of planet you want. I think what MM&I is saying is that part of the Genesis effect was "used up" in forming the planet, rather than be 100% applied to converting an existing planet.

Well, I'm a little rusty on my astronomic science but don't nebulas contain a lot of material necessary for planets?

That and I figure Genesis was not designed to reorganize matter into planets. It was meant to be used on already formed, stable planets and only alter their biosphere. NOT form them out of what is essiantly "thin air". I'm not saying the protomatter didn't play a part in the collapse, I'm saying that the collapse may have been a combination of the instability and the fact that the device did something it was not designed for that led to the destabilization.

[katefan]

I always figured part of the reason the Genesis Planet failed may have been because it was formed out of a nebula and not an already stable planet. I see no reason that it shouldn't work if it were used on an already stable planetoid. Perhaps nebulae and starships were not meant to be planets. :-0

Remember, Genesis was not meant to make planets from nothing, but to reorganize what was already there.

If that were the case then I think David would have said so in ST III. He seemed to think it was the use of proto matter that was the problem.

In any case, I always thought one of the big problems with the Genesis planet was it's proximity to a star. Without it being within that narrow margin that allows life to develop the planet should have turned into a lifeless rock. Guess they were lucky the nebula was juuuuust close enough to Regula to make the miracle happen.

[Mark]

I always figured part of the reason the Genesis Planet failed may have been because it was formed out of a nebula and not an already stable planet. I see no reason that it shouldn't work if it were used on an already stable planetoid. Perhaps nebulae and starships were not meant to be planets. :-0

Remember, Genesis was not meant to make planets from nothing, but to reorganize what was already there.

If that were the case then I think David would have said so in ST III. He seemed to think it was the use of proto matter that was the problem.

In any case, I always thought one of the big problems with the Genesis planet was it's proximity to a star. Without it being within that narrow margin that allows life to develop the planet should have turned into a lifeless rock. Guess they were lucky the nebula was juuuuust close enough to Regula to make the miracle happen.

That raised an interesting point for me. This planet was formed in a "place" it shouldn't have been. By not being properly aligned in an orbit, and in proper synch with other orbital bodies, wouldn't that have created gravometral stress, that COULD have been a contributing factor to the destruction of the Genesis Planet? I mean, if protomatter is inherantly unstable, couldn't stresses like that be a direct contributing factor to destabilizing the entire planet?

[Mikey]

Damn straight it could. Another reason that there must have been an inherent problem, rather than the fact that after just the one full-scale test they called it an unremediable failure.

[Sionnach Glic]

I think, in the end, that we have to just agree that we'll never know. Each possibility is as likely as every other.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

I always figured part of the reason the Genesis Planet failed may have been because it was formed out of a nebula and not an already stable planet. I see no reason that it shouldn't work if it were used on an already stable planetoid. Perhaps nebulae and starships were not meant to be planets. :-0

Remember, Genesis was not meant to make planets from nothing, but to reorganize what was already there.

If that were the case then I think David would have said so in ST III. He seemed to think it was the use of proto matter that was the problem.

In any case, I always thought one of the big problems with the Genesis planet was it's proximity to a star. Without it being within that narrow margin that allows life to develop the planet should have turned into a lifeless rock. Guess they were lucky the nebula was juuuuust close enough to Regula to make the miracle happen.

That raised an interesting point for me. This planet was formed in a "place" it shouldn't have been. By not being properly aligned in an orbit, and in proper synch with other orbital bodies, wouldn't that have created gravometral stress, that COULD have been a contributing factor to the destruction of the Genesis Planet? I mean, if protomatter is inherantly unstable, couldn't stresses like that be a direct contributing factor to destabilizing the entire planet?

Yes, but that may only speed up the process. Could you imagine the fiasco if the planet seemed stable long enough for a large colony to be set up and then it exploded?