Timeline for How do the Star Trek com badges stay attached?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 9:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| May 23, 2014 at 16:20 | comment | added | coburne | "Magnets...ALWAYS with the magnets..." | |
| Aug 25, 2013 at 19:07 | comment | added | Joseph Giorandino | Just to clarify: "Magnatomic" is treknobabble and shouldn't be taken to mean "magnetic". There have been times when a commbadge has been stuck to something other than a starfleet uniform. I can think of think of no canonical explanation of the method of adhesion. It's just some sort of futuristic adhesive. Note though, that it is most likely necessary that either it only sticks to fabric, or pressure must be applied in order for the adhesive to work. Several episodes in the various TNG-era series have shown someone placing a badge on a table, or picking one up from a table, without having to " | |
| Aug 20, 2013 at 18:54 | comment | added | PiousVenom | @DVK: That makes me sad panda. But thank you for the answers. | |
| Aug 20, 2013 at 18:43 | vote | accept | PiousVenom | ||
| Aug 20, 2013 at 18:42 | comment | added | PiousVenom | @DVK: One of my first thoughts was that they were "magnetic" for cloth. There always seemed to be a "chirp" when they were put on, indicating it was on. Thanks. Happen to have an out of universe answer as well? | |
| Aug 20, 2013 at 0:13 | comment | added | Izkata | @bitmask There's another question on here about how phasers stayed on in TOS, and the in-universe explanation was the same, IIRC | |
| Aug 19, 2013 at 20:46 | comment | added | bitmask | Corroborating that with other sources constitutes an answer. +2 | |
| Aug 19, 2013 at 16:26 | comment | added | DVK-on-Ahch-To | @bitmask - the use of the term by SFTM can be cross-checked from a couple of other sources: google.com/search?q=magnatomic+adhesion so it's not a Wikia writers invention. | |
| Aug 19, 2013 at 16:26 | history | edited | DVK-on-Ahch-To | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 399 characters in body
|
| Aug 19, 2013 at 16:15 | comment | added | bitmask | Sounds more like recollection, not a literal quote from SFTM (otherwise, I'd begin to worry about SFTM). So, without further evidence we have to take their word that this information is genuine (which, to be fair, has nothing to do with spelling and grammar). | |
| Aug 19, 2013 at 15:49 | comment | added | DVK-on-Ahch-To | @bitmask - they are quoting SFTM which is AFAIK an authoritative resource. | |
| Aug 19, 2013 at 15:13 | comment | added | bitmask | Someone with that affinity for orthography is doubtful as a source of information. Especially when we have to take solely their word for it. | |
| Aug 19, 2013 at 14:53 | history | edited | Kevin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Updated to reflect my edits to the wikia article. It was terribly written.
|
| Aug 19, 2013 at 14:31 | history | answered | DVK-on-Ahch-To | CC BY-SA 3.0 |