MovieChat Forums > Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) Discussion > Does the Genesis machine make sense?

Does the Genesis machine make sense?


I realize the suspension of disbelief is required to accept what Genesis could do, but...

I can accept what is shown is the proposal to the Federation that Genesis is designed to terraform a planet. That is what is presented in the proposal and nothing more.

In the subterranean test site we see what appears to be sun beams. Plus generally it takes sun to grow must life forms like the plants in the test site. So it can create a sun like energy source in a cave?

At the end of the movie, a planet and a sun are created. How could that happen from a machine designed to terraform a planet.

If the Genesis machine can create a solar system from just being executed, why did they need an entirely dead planet? Why not just eject it into space?

Also if Genesis terraformed a planet with a sun does it creates another sun?

I am open to explanations.





reply

bump

reply

bump

reply

The genesis device itself is from a place where there is no sun.

reply

Since you're eager for a response, I'll try my best:

The Genesis Project, as shown in action in that video, is basically what the Genesis Device does: terraform a planet-sized rocky body, nothing more.

I honestly don't think that Genesis can create suns: I can only guess that the test site had a massive artificial light source, nothing more, and it was NOT created by Genesis. As for the full-size planet at the end, I can guess that even though a planet was created out of the matter of the nebula, it was not intended to be used this way, needed a rocky body to work properly, and used Protomatter anyway, which was unstable enough, especially on a nebula. The sun for the newly-formed world must've been already there, a local nearby star which just happened to be near the detonation of Genesis.

Considering how massive suns are relative to their orbiting planets (and our sun is massive compared to Earth, and our sun is TINY compared to some stars), not to mention their extremely volatile nature (massive amounts of nuclear fusion energy contained by massive gravity), I seriously don't think that Federation scientists can go so far as to create them, and never could. They can blow them up easily (trilithium) but that's another story.

There is another factor: IF the sun had been created by Genesis, it would've exploded in a supernova around the same time that the planet itself disintegrated, and our heroes would be dead. It didn't, so we can assume that the sun was not created by Genesis.

No, Genesis does not create suns, only what the video said. Otherwise, a sun would've been featured, too.

reply

In other words, the plot required it. That's what I thought.

reply

Well, it is science fiction.

reply

You response was beneficial. The film as a whole is science fiction. What genesis does as opposed to what the films states it does falls closer to the genre of fantasy. I have finally accepted that.

reply

I wasn't trying to be sarcastic. Perhaps I just misunderstood your question.

reply

I was dead serious. After thinking about your answer, I researched the definitions of SF and fantasy. I then realized the film moved from SF to fantasy for the ending. Though that was probably not the intention

reply

It never made any sense to me how Kirk and company were eating apples from the Genesis cave, and then later on, the Genesis planet was revealed to be unstable and began to destroy itself. Wouldn't those apples grown in the Genesis cave cause some serious damage to anyone who ate them?

reply

another factor/reason why the Genesis planet was unstable was because Kirk and gang and Khan were all in the Mutara Nebula .

reply

I haven't seen this in a while, but I don't remember Genesis creating a sun.

reply