Why do the "temporal police" from the 29th century that appeared in Voyager (USS Relativity and all that) not correct the timeline when Spock creates a black hole with Red Matter and gets sucked back to the 23rd century? You'd think that they would somehow attempt to eliminate the accidental alternate timeline... I would love an in-universe answer to this question.

  • I guess the temporal police hadn't been established before the alternate timeline where the Kelvin was destroyed, so to them it was normal? IDK - Time travel questions can get really confusing just warning you ;) Jul 26, 2014 at 4:23
  • @N.Soong The way I understand it, the Relativity is somewhat protected against changes in their past. They should be able to realize the difference once they existed in the future. And they did exist in the future [gosh, I need more tenses!].
    – Einer
    Jul 26, 2014 at 6:52
  • 1
    It's a parallel timeline, not an alternate timeline. Speculatively, the Relativity may not give a crap as long as it doesn't impact the main timeline
    – Valorum
    Jul 26, 2014 at 8:27
  • 2
    Maybe the Time Cops feared messing with Spock might bring Shatner back on screen instead, something that wouldn't have to be considered the greater good? Who knows. :D
    – Mario
    Jul 26, 2014 at 8:31
  • 1
    Because Lindelof and Abrams aren't very good writers? Jul 26, 2014 at 12:36

3 Answers 3


Alternate answer, prompted by @N.Soong and @Einer 's comments. The Temporal Police are protected against changes to their own history, since the whole point is for them to fix harmful changes to the past.

However, if 2009's ''Star Trek'' is an alternate universe, then it's a branch and not a change to history (and apparently it's possible to change history instead of always branching it). So the Temporal Police wouldn't have stopped it, anymore than they would have (as near as we know) stopped the presumed creation of the Evil Goatee Universe.


Maybe they already will did have done. But not yet.[1]

If you think of it, it is very logical: The events leading from one point in the past to a point in the future must actually have time to happen. Imagine you obtain a sophisticated piece of technology from the future (lets say a ship) and you extract the technology (you will probably need some months for that). Then you analyse it (will at least take several months), copy the technology, sell it and thereby giving birth to a new age of computer-technology. Eventually smart-phones, Stackoverflow and Curiosity will be developed - all based on that technology. All of that takes time.

At one point this technology will be installed on a ship with a warp 5 engine, and centuries later even on a ship that can travel through time. For all of this to happen, it takes time.

Now if you look at the events in Abramsverse from the 29th century, it takes no time at all, since from that perspective all of it already happened. But from Spock's perspective it will take centuries until all those things will have come to pass that will be noticed by the Relativity as a change, as a deviation from the way things are supposed to be.

The Relativity will probably intervene, but not before it happened. Since from their perspective it already happened, they will intervene instantaneously, but that's not the perspective of Spock. He has to wait until the chain of events unfolds that will lead to the intervention of the relativity.

[1] This is not Timey Wimey Stuff this is Future Semiconditionally Modified Subinverted Plagal Past Subjunctive Intentional.


To answer your direct question -- I'd think that they'd leave old Spock alone because he attempts to not interfere with the new past timeline once he's brought back.

Of course, there's still a case for the Temporal Police to interfere.

Later, old Spock does provide some useful info in ''Into Darkness.'' Perhaps this interference is minimal enough to escape the TP's notice, or to not warrant intrusion.

Another answer to all of this is bias and respect. Spock may simply command enough respect in the Temporal Police force that they look the other way, especially since they know he's going to be mindful of damaging time.

''Edit:'' ...and this answer to another question reminds me that Spock wasn't so good about not interfering in the first movie, the 2009 ''Star Trek.'' So I prefer my alternate answer, now.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.