Should the first space-travel ship(futuristic) be named the USS Enterprise?

[BronyPony 575]

Once they do make the first ship capable of travelling far distances into the Universe and to the unknown, should they name the ship the USS Enterprise? I feel it should because it would be symbolism to the idea that humans can reach so far with just the start of a dream and the inspirations we get can bring science forward.

 

What does everyone think?

[Rainbow Skywalker 642]

Well, personally I was thinking that it should be something like "The Millennium Falcon" as it would symbolize total awesomeness.

...

Ok, so maybe I don't always have the best ideas.  Yeah I think it would be cool to see the first ship go out under a Trekkie name.  However in order to satisfy the ST versus SW fandom clash, I think they would at least need some sort of space station named "Yavin 4" or something else of the like. 

 

Either way, I would vote for a more creative name to a spaceship.  They've all been pretty boring so far.

[Guest]

Fun fact. There was one orbiter in the american shuttle program, that had that name, because the Star Trek fans made a petition, demanding it. It was only built for gliding/landing tests though as far as i know.

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

You have to understand the the "Enterprise" is the name of the Federation flagship. The Federation prides itself on being organized, disciplined, welcoming, humanitarian, etc... the qualities of your average, peaceful space-faring faction. There is nothing special or groundbreaking about it, because in a few hundred years everyone will become complacent with its status. Rich kids don't find having a lot of money or being born with a silver spoon to be a blessing. Likewise, kids who are born in space won't find it to be a mysterious frontier filled with adventure. Our descendants won't find any of this to be interesting, let alone revel over the Enterprise's original symbolic meaning. To them, it'll simply be another starship.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Mami

[BronyPony 575]

Fun fact. There was one orbiter in the american shuttle program, that had that name, because the Star Trek fans made a petition, demanding it. It was only built for gliding/landing tests though as far as i know.

Nice fact, though that ship wouldn't reach the specifications of Universal travel. 

 

 

You have to understand the the "Enterprise" is the name of the Federation flagship. The Federation prides itself on being organized, disciplined, welcoming, humanitarian, etc... the qualities of your average, peaceful space-faring faction. There is nothing special or groundbreaking about it, because in a few hundred years everyone will become complacent with its status. Rich kids don't find having a lot of money or being born with a silver spoon to be a blessing. Likewise, kids who are born in space won't find it to be a mysterious frontier filled with adventure. Our descendants won't find any of this to be interesting, let alone revel over the Enterprise's original symbolic meaning. To them, it'll simply be another starship.

Now, please don't start a class war within this discussion(first of all, the rich kid stereotype is not needed). My question simply referred to how we would name our for accomplishment of interstellar space flight.

[Fire Bomb 121]

With how unreliable it would be, and the fact that it would look nothing like the enterprise, it would not be a good name. With current understanding of space travel, light, and things of the sort, an engine capable of bending light, letting a ship move faster then 300,000 km/h, could tear the ship apart and kill the entire crew aboard. Not to mention the differences in the engines on a real space ship and the enterprise.

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

 

 

Now, please don't start a class war within this discussion(first of all, the rich kid stereotype is not needed). My question simply referred to how we would name our for accomplishment of interstellar space flight.

 

When there's an abundance of something to go around (i.e, rich kids having money), they will not be very impressed by it. They will perceive it as normal, the same goes for our descendants born into a space-travelling lifestyle. Even if we were name the first ship the "Enterprise", it would hold very little value. So we built a ship that travel great distances... so what? Don't you think that it was only a matter of time before this had happened anyway?

 

As I said, there's nothing groundbreaking about it if it's so predictable.

 

The first warp-capable ship in Star Trek wasn't even named the Enterprise, but rather the Phoenix. Hardly anyone ever talks about it regardless. They don't even mention Cochrane all that much, because history is largely forgotten unless it is deeply embedded into your cranium.

[BronyPony 575]

When there's an abundance of something to go around (i.e, rich kids having money), they will not be very impressed by it. They will perceive it as normal, the same goes for our descendants born into a space-travelling lifestyle. Even if we were name the first ship the "Enterprise", it would hold very little value. So we built a ship that travel great distances... so what? Don't you think that it was only a matter of time before this had happened anyway?

 

As I said, there's nothing groundbreaking about it if it's so predictable.

 

The first warp-capable ship in Star Trek wasn't even named the Enterprise, but rather the Phoenix. Hardly anyone ever talks about it regardless. They don't even mention Cochrane all that much, because history is largely forgotten unless it is deeply embedded into your cranium.

The only people(rich or poor) who would not take appreciation to the events would be people who do not understand the beauty of the Universe. Saying that it only applies to the rich simply ignorant at most. I may have a lot of money, but it does not ruin my ability to appreciate the Universe more. I work in the fields of science and I am more astounded about the concepts of the Universe then anything. I would advise you reconsider your statements.

 

 

 

"If life were predictable it would cease to be life, and be without flavor."

The concern about the philosophy of predictability is that it just seems that if you feel something is predictable then it must be boring is just quite naive to the understanding of what it means to have such nature of complexity.

 

We may be able to predict events occurring in certain circumstances, but the thing is scientists are completely put to awe by the mechanics of the Universe. The only person who would find it boring would be someone who does not understanding the implications.

 

Just my opinions.

[I used to be a stranger 7,989]

"The Space Shuttle Enterprise (NASA Orbiter Vehicle Designation: OV-101) was the first Space Shuttle. It was built for NASA as part of the Space Shuttle program to perform test flights in the atmosphere. It was constructed without engines or a functional heat shield, and was therefore not capable of spaceflight. On September 17, 1976, the first full scale prototype was completed." [Wikipedia]

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "the first space travel ship (futuristic)" seeing as the first thing we're going to send beyond Sol's influence is called Voyager-3, and the first thing that landed on the moon was either Eagle, Columbia, or  SA-506, depending upon what part of the mission you were looking at.

 

Naming spacecraft is usually a thing of certain weightiness (obviously not on the Engineering side) so it is indeed carefully considered, but Popular Culture is seldom recognized or acknowledged. For example, the naming Lineage of Enterprise does not terminate at Gene Roddenberry's science fiction TV show. He so-named the vessel after any one of the eight (soon to be nine) ships in the history of the United States Naval record, which were all named USS Enterprise. It is upon this lineage, and the histories of these respective ships, that would inspire a new space vessel to be named.

 

Suggestions for the names of the vessels to be sent to Mars in ~2035 were being named after famous scientists, such as Issac Asimov and Johannes Kepler under NASA's Constellation Program, but obviously it will be a different series of suggestions now that future plans for such are going to be in a cooperative effort by 14 national space programs^[1].

 

On a different note, JPL's MESSENGER probe, sent to explore Mercury, was so-named as both a reference to Mercury's mythical role as a messenger of the gods, and a contrived acronym made from instruments it carries.

 

When it comes to science fiction, people can name their ships whatever they want because people will focus on the function and shape of the spacecraft a lot more than the name. Unless it's named the Qwib-Qwib.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Blue

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

The only people(rich or poor) who would not take appreciation to the events would be people who do not understand the beauty of the Universe. Saying that it only applies to the rich simply ignorant at most. I may have a lot of money, but it does not ruin my ability to appreciate the Universe more. I work in the fields of science and I am more astounded about the concepts of the Universe then anything. I would advise you reconsider your statements.

 

The concern about the philosophy of predictability is that it just seems that if you feel something is predictable then it must be boring is just quite naive to the understanding of what it means to have such nature of complexity.

 

We may be able to predict events occurring in certain circumstances, but the thing is scientists are completely put to awe by the mechanics of the Universe. The only person who would find it boring would be someone who does not understanding the implications.

 

Just my opinions.

 

The universe? It's nothing more than a collection of nebulae, frozen rocks, extremely hot gases, various scattered particles, and countless amounts of dark matter tossed into a big, theoretical hypersphere which we all exist in. It includes us. A tiny, tiny, civilization that is most likely lost in the wake of other species, let alone the universe's vastness.

 

We appreciate the beauty of mystery. Not the beauty of what's actually there. Don't mix up the two.

 

This is also what Starfleet goes out of their way to research. Even Q called them out for it saying how boring and mundane our culture and race itself had become, stating that we were so much more fun in the medieval times. Think about how much of a slap to the face that statement alone is. I realize some of my peers' thirst for launching themselves into space, discovering things in a largely unknown frontier, but really - with the way our species is rapidly progressing on the technology front, this once fascinating ideal quickly becomes easy to imagine. So easy that it becomes trite.

 

 

 

We may be able to predict events occurring in certain circumstances, but the thing is scientists are completely put to awe by the mechanics of the Universe. The only person who would find it boring would be someone who does not understanding the implications.

 

No kidding. The average guy won't get it unless someone with the ingenuity does it for them. Which is pretty bad. But sadly, life does not revolve around scientists.

 

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work of scientists every day, but looking at the big picture, the thought of our race not becoming space-faring one day is simply unimaginable. Every one was hyped when the Wright brothers built the first successful airplane, and now, only those willing to remember history will give a damn about it. Because hey, we now have fighter jets that can travel faster than sound. Commercial airlines that can carry well over a hundred people. No biggie! It's all part of our daily routine now. The same will happen with our descendants and their travels in space ships.

 

Besides, a name is just a name. Those who didn't sit down and watch Star Trek don't remember the Enterprise for its encounters, they remember it because it is merely iconic. If it were named the Turtle instead, things would not change at all.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Mami

[BronyPony 575]

The universe? It's nothing more than a collection of nebulae, frozen rocks, extremely hot gases, various scattered particles, and countless amounts of dark matter tossed into a big, theoretical hypersphere which we all exist in. It includes us. A tiny, tiny, civilization that is most likely lost in the wake of other species, let alone the universe's vastness.

The Universe isn't just a collection of nebulae and other sediments and elements that exist and can exist. Those who look to big are blind to see what is the smallest thing that is fundamental to the existence of the Universe. Those who declare such things are blind, in my opinion.

 

 

 

We appreciate the beauty of mystery. Not the beauty of what's actually there. Don't mix up the two.

But both beauties are of the samething. This argument is the same one that was presented with potential infinity and actual infinity. They may describe two different things, but are the same.

 

 

 

This is also what Starfleet goes out of their way to research. Even Q called them out for it saying how boring and mundane our culture and race itself had become, stating that we were so much more fun in the medieval times. Think about how much of a slap to the face that statement alone is. I realize some of my peers' thirst for launching themselves into space, discovering things in a largely unknown frontier, but really - with the way our species is rapidly progressing on the technology front, this once fascinating ideal quickly becomes easy to imagine. So easy that it becomes trite.

 

This is the same vibe you are giving off, though. Declaring the Universe to be a collection of such things and nothing more is the same thing that Q petitioned. The Universe isn't just what we see. The Universe has order and development. It has process. This is the core of the mathematician's(like me) discovery. One who does not look at the numbers and their beauty do not understand the potential of the Universe.

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work of scientists every day, but looking at the big picture, the thought of our race not becoming space-faring one day is simply unimaginable. Every one was hyped when the Wright brothers built the first successful airplane, and now, only those willing to remember history will give a damn about it. Because hey, we now have fighter jets that can travel faster than sound. Commercial airlines that can carry well over a hundred people. No biggie! It's all part of our daily routine now. The same will happen with our descendants and their travels in space ships.

Those who are not surprised about what is to come will cause that outcome to be less of an accomplishment. This is the same thing as if someone were to travel into the future, find what is to exist and then predict it to happen and soon it never comes true. Expect the unexpected. What is expected will not occur always.

 

EDIT: For example, with my mathematical work, I developed what are known as super-dimensions. Each super-dimension consists of an infinite range of number systems that exist(if you want to read the paper I wrote about it, just ask). Now, I could simply define each super-dimension as a collection of infinite number systems. However, that isn't just what it is. Each super-dimension consists of an infinite amount of number systems, all infinitely of them containing unique properties related to that number system. The beauty isn't in what the super-dimension contains. The beauty is in the nature of the number systems and their complexity.

Edited August 28, 2013 by BronyPony

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

 

 

Those who are not surprised about what is to come will cause that outcome to be less of an accomplishment. This is the same thing as if someone were to travel into the future, find what is to exist and then predict it to happen and soon it never comes true. Expect the unexpected. What is expected will not occur always.

 

That can't be helped. This is the curse of statistics and trends. Moore's Law alone makes people more content (and complacent) about the future of computer hardware, for example. I doubt that anyone would remember what the Ford Model T is without looking it up, because now I can hear the revs of sports cars outside of my twenty six-story building every day.

 

 

 

But both beauties are of the samething. This argument is the same one that was presented with potential infinity and actual infinity. They may describe two different things, but are the same.

 

First comes curiosity. Then comes fascination. Then comes the time to study it in detail and finally, it is made into common knowledge. Whether the latter will get recognition (let alone as much as its potential counterpart) is another matter entirely. Sorry mate, but I really can't mince words here. The average person will not give a hoot about it once it's been put into production or at least made into common knowledge. HDTVs and the internet are taken for granted today yet both would seem amazing at the turn of the 20th century.

 

 

 

This is the same vibe you are giving off, though. Declaring the Universe to be a collection of such things and nothing more is the same thing that Q petitioned. The Universe isn't just what we see. The Universe has order and development. It has process. This is the core of the mathematician's(like me) discovery. One who does not look at the numbers and their beauty do not understand the potential of the Universe.

 

Look above.

 

 

 

The Universe isn't just a collection of nebulae and other sediments and elements that exist and can exist. Those who look to big are blind to see what is the smallest thing that is fundamental to the existence of the Universe. Those who declare such things are blind, in my opinion.

 

 

If you insist on this, message me when you feel that studying comets, massive balls of gases, and rocks with frozen wastelands is considered interesting or beautiful.

[BronyPony 575]

That can't be helped. This is the curse of statistics and trends. Moore's Law alone makes people more content (and complacent) about the future of computer hardware, for example. I doubt that anyone would remember what the Ford Model T is without looking it up, because now I can hear the revs of sports cars outside of my twenty six-story building every day.

 

 

 

 

First comes curiosity. Then comes fascination. Then comes the time to study it in detail and finally, it is made into common knowledge. Whether the latter will get recognition (let alone as much as its potential counterpart) is another matter entirely. Sorry mate, but I really can't mince words here. The average person will not give a hoot about it once it's been put into production or at least made into common knowledge. HDTVs and the internet are taken for granted today yet both would seem amazing at the turn of the 20th century.

 

 

 

 

Look above.

 

 

 

 

 

If you insist on this, message me when you feel that studying comets, massive balls of gases, and rocks with frozen wastelands is considered interesting or beautiful.

Why can't we have the discussion here, since you brought up this topic.

 

It sounds like you don't take the Universe very seriously. In fact, it is very ignorant to declare the Universe not beautiful or interesting. I don't know where you got this ideology, but in my opinion it is ignorant because those who cannot see the beauty do not truly understand it.

[Scootalove 10,684]

There are more creative names than naming it the USS Enterprise, unless the government can't think of more clever names. The beauty of space would be pretty nice to experience in a futuristic space ship that can travel in time and space.

[Darkshift 85]

HELL NO,MILLENIUM FALCON FTW,maybe I like Star Wars and hate Star Trek but so what USS has already had its abbreviation with machines.

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

Why can't we have the discussion here, since you brought up this topic.

 

It sounds like you don't take the Universe very seriously. In fact, it is very ignorant to declare the Universe not beautiful or interesting. I don't know where you got this ideology, but in my opinion it is ignorant because those who cannot see the beauty do not truly understand it.

 

People see Mars as the first planet we will step foot on. I think of it as a frozen, barren wasteland with a distinct lack of oxygen with a signature red-coloured atmosphere. This is only because I've read up articles, google results, and books (for years now) about it to the point where it gets old and I let the reality of today kick in. The same goes for the universe. I've looked up countless info about its origins, structure, content, and its fates. You don't seem to grasp this notion of "trite".

 

It's cool to think that the universe is a mysterious frontier filled with adventure and the works (whatever counts as "adventure" is up to the person, which is based off of their imagination) but that's about it. Other than that, it's just a collection of what I've just described in my second post. Once we get off this planet, it will be less and less interesting because we'd have already transcended the realm of conjecture.

[Lost 1,409]

Once we get off this planet, it will be less and less interesting because we'd have already transcended the realm of conjecture.

Not at all, we explore the depths of our own ocean and have done for many years yet we still find it fascinating, the same will hold true for the Universe when we finally start exploring space further and colonising other planets. The universe may no longer be beautiful in your eyes but it is in mine, and many others.

 

 

As for the original question, it doesn't really matter what the first ship is named, it wouldn't add or detract from the importance of the event.

[--Thunder Bolt-- 534]

I'd be cool with the first warp-capable starship (assuming such a thing is possible) being called the Enterprise.  I don't think it's very likely though.  Assuming continued technological progress and human expansion into the Solar System, it will be a long time, probably a century or more, before we have the physics and engineering--not to mention the available super-high-density energy sources--required to power an Alcubierre drive, create a wormhole, or whatever it would take to make a faster-than-light starship possible.  In that intervening time, it's possible, even likely, that Star Trek could become as obscure as a popular ballad from the Renaissance is now.  Non-Western cultures could well come to the fore between now and then, so that the first FTL starship could be named after something or someone important in their culture.  The Zheng He, after a Chinese admiral who led a fleet of ships on a mission of exploration in the early 1400's, the Vimana, after the flying palaces of the gods described in the Mahabharata, perhaps a god, hero, or adventurer from African history. 

 

I think it would be cool if it was the Stanislav Petrov, named for the man who saved the world.  Saved.  The.  World.

 

As for the Millennium Falcon, I wouldn't be too surprised if that's a popular name for asteroid miners, freighters, and courier ships at an earlier point in space-travel history.  It might happen even sooner, if one of the present-day space tourism pioneers decides to name one of their ships in honor of the Falcon. 

 

 

When there's an abundance of something to go around (i.e, rich kids having money), they will not be very impressed by it. They will perceive it as normal, the same goes for our descendants born into a space-travelling lifestyle. Even if we were name the first ship the "Enterprise", it would hold very little value. So we built a ship that travel great distances... so what? Don't you think that it was only a matter of time before this had happened anyway?

 

As I said, there's nothing groundbreaking about it if it's so predictable.

 

I disagree.  A future spacefaring society would only go to the significant expense and trouble of building a starship if they considered the enterprise *ba-dum-tish* worthwhile.  For example, if we discovered a life-bearing planet relatively nearby.  We could do this using "wide baseline array" space-based telescopes capable of detecting and analyzing the spectral characteristics of exoplanet atmospheres.  If we find one that has a significant amount of oxygen (like Earth), we could be pretty sure it is life-bearing, because oxygen is highly reactive, and would only persist in an atmosphere if there's something continually producing more of it, like photosynthesis.

 

Another possible way that our descendants might eventually spread to other solar systems, if FTL drives turn out to be impossible, would be a kind of gradual expansion with slower-than-light ships.  Once the inner and outer Solar System are fairly densely colonized, people (or sapient machines or some hybrid of the two) could start spreading to Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud objects, and from there to brown dwarfs or other bodies that might exist between solar systems, until they reach Oort Clouds around other stars.  These people might be more like space gypsies or high-tech "hunter-gatherer" tribes than the Federation Starfleet, as they'd be setting out for open spaces far from the rest of human-cybernetic civilization, too far away for normal trade and communication to be very practical. 

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

 

 

I disagree.  A future spacefaring society would only go to the significant expense and trouble of building a starship if they considered the enterprise *ba-dum-tish* worthwhile.

 

I realize that. Once their descendants are assimilated into a space-faring lifestyle it will be commonplace, thus no longer amp'd up like it used to be. Which is not a bad thing. Do people of today really think about how their automobile functions or its history? Generally, no. This industry has been going strong since the invention of the Ford Model T. It is a part of everyday life, and the technicalities are spared. It doesn't mean that they won't stop and think about the achievements their ancestors accomplished, however.

 

 

 

Not at all, we explore the depths of our own ocean and have done for many years yet we still find it fascinating, the same will hold true for the Universe when we finally start exploring space further and colonising other planets. The universe may no longer be beautiful in your eyes but it is in mine, and many others.

 

No one's bothered to discern what's observable in the universe from the imaginary. That is the problem. You are giving off the vibe that comets and massive balls of gases in space are beautiful. Honestly.

[BronyPony 575]

I realize that. Once their descendants are assimilated into a space-faring lifestyle it will be commonplace, thus no longer amp'd up like it used to be. Which is not a bad thing. Do people of today really think about how their automobile functions or its history? Generally, no. This industry has been going strong since the invention of the Ford Model T. It is a part of everyday life, and the technicalities are spared. It doesn't mean that they won't stop and think about the achievements their ancestors accomplished, however.

 

 

 

 

No one's bothered to discern what's observable in the universe from the imaginary. That is the problem. You are giving off the vibe that comets and massive balls of gases in space are beautiful. Honestly.

Or you just don't realize the true beauty of the complexity of the Universe. That is the other possibility. I don't see where you get your ideology from, but again those who are blind to the true existence of the Universe are blind to its beauty.

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

Or you just don't realize the true beauty of the complexity of the Universe. That is the other possibility. I don't see where you get your ideology from, but again those who are blind to the true existence of the Universe are blind to its beauty.

 

Likewise, I can tell you that you're blindly idealistic for your own good. Even though I've acknowledged the beauty of mystery you still insist on making me repeat myself. I don't even have an idealogy. I simply discern what's observable from the imaginary. When you get that through your cranium, you can quote me again.

[BronyPony 575]

Likewise, I can tell you that you're blindly idealistic for your own good. Even though I've acknowledged the beauty of mystery you still insist on making me repeat myself. I don't even have an idealogy. I simply discern what's observable from the imaginary. When you get that through your cranium, you can quote me again.

Well, first of all we have diverted far away from the discussion and secondly to consider the beauty of the Universe to be imaginary is quite weird, to say the least. To each their own.

 

But you dragged irrelevant topics into this thread, which is weird as well.

[Akemi Homura 7,680]

Well, first of all we have diverted far away from the discussion and secondly to consider the beauty of the Universe to be imaginary is quite weird, to say the least. To each their own.

 

But you dragged irrelevant topics into this thread, which is weird as well.

 

All right? My original post still stands. If the Enterprise were named the "Turtle" instead it would not be significant. The ship itself is known to the general public only because it is iconic, not because of its five-year mission. I doubt there will be enough Star Trek fans anyway for it to be truly impacting when the time comes, because by then it would likely have been a few centuries.

[GuerrierCosmique 146]

No, because the first space shuttle was already named Enterprise already and I don't like Star Trek that much due to it's sterile environment and ugly costumes, I prefer Babylon 5. They should christen it Prometheus (the first interstellar colony vessel in David Weber's "Honor Harrington" universe, launched 2103), Galactica, Serenity or Hyperion.

[~Silver Essence~ 2,621]

Seems fitting.

 

After all, it's all up to them to give the final word on what is should be called.

 

Overall, I do like the name, and I think that should be the name.