Talk page help

Maintenance links

  • T: For the World is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky
  • A: TOS
  • N: 3x10
  • P: 60043-65
  • C: 63/18
  • M: November
  • Y: 1968
Memory Alpha talk pages are for improving the article only.
For general discussion on this episode, visit the TOS forum at The Trek BBS.

Plot Holes

Is it ever explained why the missiles were launched? Or that problem ever dealt with? On a smaller level, why is it assumed that it was a collision course, not an orbital course or something like that? - Notthe9 05:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

  • No one is really assuming anything, considering the known facts about asteroids, which is, that they do not simply "settle in orbit" if they are on direct course for any planetary body. As Spock said, "the course Ensign Chekov just gave for the asteroid would put it on a collision course with Daran V." Considering modern science believes that a 6 mile wide asteroid annihilated most all life, including the dinosaurs, on Earth from it's impact millions of years ago; for someone to state that a 200 miles wide asteroid is on a "collision course" and is not really an assumption or an exaggeration. Consider, too, that there are several unknown factors involved in what would be defined as a "collision course" that were not given, such as the velocity and trajectory of the asteroid. As for the missiles, other than being a plot device that led the Enterprise to discover the asteroid-ship, they were most likely a form of defense...most missiles typically are. --Alan del Beccio 06:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
You are correct that astroids do not just settle into orbit. Propelled starships do. The collision course theory continued after it was clear that the starship was intending to go to a planet (and not destroy it.)
As for the missiles, they were clearly a plot device to get the Enterprise interested, but as a defense mechanism would be more confusing. Why did it lauch them at the Enterprise without provocation? Why not be concerned that innocent people might die if it continued doing it (they never talk about fixing defensive systems that I remember)? Notthe9 15:14, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


The following note has been uncited for a while now:

  • An early press release misspelled the disease as "xenopallasathemia". Fan writer Ruth Berman picked up on the gaffe and reported it to Devra Langsam's zine Spockanalia, adding "Talk about too much of a god thing."

Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 10:53, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Numbering lists this episode as being 03x08:

That's airing order. We go by production order for our basic numbering. -- sulfur 03:07, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

Generational ship concept

I'm just wondering- how do we know that Rik Vollaerts didn't come up with the idea of a generational ship independently of the historical writers who did before? --31dot 14:18, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Removed Nitpicks

  • In the beginning of Act One, the stock footage of Chekov at the nav station is altered. If you watch closely, they looped the footage so that Chekov's usual gaze down at the console to push a few buttons is omitted, so that he appears to be looking straight ahead at the viewscreen. This shows up especially well on a bigger screen.
  • In the same scene, the reference to the temperature being "120 degrees" presumably refers to the Fahrenheit scale; while an ambient temperature of 120F would be very uncomfortable, but bearable, an ambient temperature of 120C would not only cause skin burns to all parties present and considerable damage to the book, it would also be hard to achieve without an exceptionally powerful heating element.

Chalet (talk) 15:54, March 20, 2017 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.