In the Strange New Worlds episode “The Old Scientists,” Star Trek once again delves into one of its favorite narrative devices: time travel. While the franchise has a long history of exploring temporal anomalies and paradoxes, this episode raises a familiar question: does Star Trek get time travel wrong? Specifically, does its depiction of time as a single mutable continuum hold up against more modern theoretical interpretations, like the many-worlds model of quantum mechanics?
Let’s break it down.
The Star Trek Approach: A Single Mutable Timeline
In most iterations of Star Trek, time travel operates under the assumption of a single, unified timeline. Actions taken in the past directly affect the future, creating high stakes for characters who must “fix” the timeline to restore order. This approach has given us some of the franchise’s most iconic moments, from the crew of the Enterprise saving whales in The Voyage Home to the Temporal Cold War in Enterprise.
But this framework also leads to logical inconsistencies and paradoxes. If the timeline can be altered, wouldn’t that risk creating endless loops and contradictions? For example, the grandfather paradox—if you go back in time and prevent your own birth, how could you have traveled back in the first place?
The Branching Timeline Model: A More Plausible Alternative?
An alternative model, often discussed in modern physics and sci-fi, is the many-worlds interpretation. This suggests that each change to the past creates a new branch of reality. In this framework:
- The original timeline remains intact: Traveling back to the past doesn’t alter the “future” you came from because your actions spawn a new branch.
- New elements create new realities: Introducing future technology or ideas into the past affects only the new branch, not the timeline you left.
- No paradoxes: There’s no need to “fix” the timeline because the original is unaffected.
This approach avoids many logical pitfalls and aligns with quantum mechanics’ multiverse theories. However, it also fundamentally changes the stakes of time travel. If every timeline is just a branch, does it matter if one goes awry?
Why Star Trek Sticks to Its Model
While the branching timeline model might be more plausible, Star Trek‘s approach is rooted in narrative tradition rather than theoretical accuracy. Here are some reasons why:
1. Dramatic Simplicity
The stakes are higher when the characters’ actions threaten the only timeline that exists. It creates a sense of urgency and moral responsibility that resonates with viewers.
2. Emotional Impact
If time travel merely creates a new branch, the emotional weight of “saving the future” diminishes. By keeping the timeline singular and mutable, Star Trek ensures that every decision feels monumental.
3. Established Canon
From episodes like The City on the Edge of Forever to movies like First Contact, Star Trek has consistently portrayed time as a continuum that can be altered. Shifting to a branching model would require a significant overhaul of the franchise’s storytelling.
What “The Old Scientists” Gets Right
Despite its adherence to the single-timeline model, “The Old Scientists” still offers a compelling exploration of time travel. By introducing elements of humor and character-driven storytelling, the episode keeps the focus on the human (or alien) element rather than getting bogged down in theoretical physics.
Moreover, Star Trek has always been more about exploring ethical and philosophical questions than adhering strictly to scientific accuracy. The single-timeline model allows for deeper exploration of themes like responsibility, sacrifice, and the interconnectedness of actions and consequences.
Should Star Trek Embrace Branching Timelines?
For fans who prefer a more scientifically grounded approach, the branching timeline model may seem like a missed opportunity. Imagine Star Trek exploring the ethical dilemmas of creating alternate realities or the existential questions of living in a splintered multiverse. These ideas could bring fresh depth to the franchise.
However, such a shift would also complicate storytelling. Would audiences connect as strongly with characters trying to “fix” a branch of reality that doesn’t impact their own? Would the stakes feel as meaningful?
Conclusion: Star Trek’s Time Travel Legacy
While “The Old Scientists” and Star Trek as a whole may not align perfectly with modern theories of time travel, the franchise’s approach serves its narrative goals. The single-timeline model creates dramatic tension, emotional resonance, and a sense of responsibility that keeps viewers invested.
That said, the branching timeline model offers intriguing possibilities for future storytelling. As science fiction continues to evolve, perhaps Star Trek will one day embrace a multiverse approach, adding new layers to its already rich exploration of time travel.
Until then, we can appreciate the timeless appeal of a universe where the past, present, and future are all part of one great adventure.
EssayBoard 
Leave a comment