HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jsq002@acad.drake.edu
Subject: Federation v. Empire??? NOT!!
Summary: Empire 1 - Federation ZILCH!
Keywords: death, destruction, mayhem
Reply-To: jsq002@acad.drake.edu
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:03:55 GMT


     To make a point about the Death Star/Imperial Star Destroyers in a
     battle with ANY TNG ship:  According to the Star Wars sourcebooks,
     a single Imperial Star Destroyer has the firepower to 'reduce a
     planet to slag' inside a very short period of time; the Death Star,
     as we all know, is a moon-sized battle station capable reducing a 
     planet to _DUST_ in about three seconds.  Regardless of whether or
     not they may have phasers or photon torpedoes (they do - that's
     how the Alliance destroyed the first DS), the magnitude of firepower
     we are discussing is mammoth - even more powerful than that of the
     Borg.  And we haven't even started to discuss the fact that both the
     Star Destroyers and DS have squadrons of TIE fighters at their 
     disposal.  Don't get me wrong - I love ST, but with the vast amounts
     of firepower involved here, I don't really feel that the Federation
     fleet would stand a snowball's chance in hell of beating an ISC's
     ass, let alone the bloody Death Star.

     Something else to consider is this: According to the films themselves,
     all of the SW movies took place "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far
     away".  Considering that that could mean anywhere from 500 - 1 million
     or more years before STTNG, Imperial technology would be far more advanced
     than Federation technology by the 24th C, and even more so than that by
     the time they could _GET_ to the galaxy where SW takes place.  

     Simply put, the Federation would get its collective ass beaten, and it
     would be all over except the crying. (sorry guys.)

	Jason 
===============================================================================
Jason S. Quick						Drake University
jsq002@acad.drake.edu					Des Moines, Iowa USA
===============================================================================
Disclaimer: My opinions do not reflect those of Drake University, mainly because
            I don't put my opinions on reflective surfaces.
From: drac@uumeme.chi.il.us (Bruce Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Warp Speed Info PLEASE!!!!!
Date: 10 Jan 93 08:35:16 GMT
Organization: UUMEME Public Access Xenix

Well, according to "certain materials" (such as the "bible" that prospective
ST:TNG authors were told to refer to) stated that:

1) Warp speeds are equal to the cube of the warp# times speed-of-light, up to
warp 9... therefore, warp 8 would be 512*c, warp 9=729*c... after warp 9, there's
sort of an expansion of the scales involved, such that warp 10 would be
a completely instantaneous transit from one point to another (oboy... 'beaming'
from Earth to Andromeda in nothing flat!  8-{)}  )... the OLD series, however, 
simply continued warp #'s from 9 thru 10, 11, 12, etc etc.... and once or
twice, the OLD Enterprise hit warp 14 or so... (with the Kelvans, and Nomad).

The change in nomenclature was supposedly from some high-up Starfleet thinktank during the 75 yrs or so between the old series and the new...

-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| The above statements are the  | Bruce Maynard  (Da "drac") |
| delirious meanderings of a    | Hoffman Estates            |
| complete moro... er, MANIAC!! | IL 60194                   |
From: hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Date: 11 Jan 93 19:19:32 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

gt3716a@prism.gatech.EDU (Josh 'I'd MUCH rather be driving' Freeman) writes:
>What do you expect from a wormhole?  If spacetime is 4-D it would be concievable
>that one could have a wormhole act as a shortcut. After all, the normal laws of
>physics do not strictly apply since the worm hole is akin to a black hole, but
>with an exit also IMHO


Just to mention, since it doesn't seem like you read my article on 
relativity and FTL travel, it doesn't matter how you get there, as
long as you go from point A to point B faster than light could, then
you can have a violation of causality. (Oh, that is as long as you are
not using a special fram of reference.)  

And YES, wormholes as we have them theorized today DO violate causality.
They are a mathmatical invention which have no reason for being, and 
part of their creation may still violate other physical laws.

But in any case, the way they are theorized today, they do violate
causality.  For example, you could be in one frame of reference when
you enter the wormhole on one side.  Then on the other side of the
wormhole, you could change your frame of reference and reenter the
wormhole.  If you do this correctly, you can meet yourself on the
original side of the wormhole before you go into the wormhole.  If 
this is the case, you could stop yourself from entering the wormhole.
But then you never went into it in the first place, so you never did
your little trick to stop yourself.  But then you DID enter the thing
in the first place,... This is an obvious causality loop.

Now, perhaps in ST days, they have found a phenomena that (with the use
of subspace) does the same thing that todays "wormholes" are supposed to
do.  Then if subspace works the way I have suggested in my article, and
they have named this new phenomena a wormhole (redefining the term since
we 'didn't  understand anything about subspace in our time'), then their
wormholes are just fine with me.


-Jay
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Excelsiorclass ship that was blasted in DS9
From: starman@crash.amigans.gen.nz (Robin Halligan)
Date: 8 Jan 93 23:09:11 PST
Reply-To: starman@crash.amigans.gen.nz
Organization: No organisation at all
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Gary Snow (gsnow@clark.edu) wrote:
: In article <1993Jan6.045524.747@sol.cs.wmich.edu> 52kaiser@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Matthew Kaiser) writes:

: 
: HEY!!! Knock it off, some of us haven't seen the first episode yet, it
: doesn't start here till Thursday........please put SPOILERS in your
: subject line!
: -----
: Gary Snow
: uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu

Yes but how long will you want to post the spoilers in ?
It will most likely be 4-5 years before we get it in New Zealand
Hell we are only just getting season 3 here.
In fact the Videos of TNG were available here befor the tv series 
unfortunatly our main TV stations here treat STAR-TREK as kiddy programs
and mosr SI.FI like that (Doctor Who ect).

--
starman@crash.amigans.gen.nz  (Robin Halligan)
Amigans Public Access UUCP Node Wanganui New Zealand

I'm a K 1 W 1 from the land of the long white cloud
    from the day i begun till the day i'm done
                     I'm a K1W1
From: max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Warp Speed Collisions
Date: 10 Jan 93 08:05:41 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

MLINDROOS@FINABO.ABO.FI (Marcus Lindroos INF) writes:

> Excellent idea! This would explain why starships moving at relativistic
> velocities aren't perceived as much of a threat by people living on the
> planets. Even a photon torpedo with a mass of 500kg travelling at "only"
> 0.7c would contain enough kinetic energy to make a 20km deep crater
> if it impacted on a planet. But the warp engines reduce the mass of a vessel
> in realspace. Robert gets my vote for this year's "Zephram Cochrane Prize:-)"

Someone has mentioned this before.  That person even mentioned that their 
information came from certain interpretations of what is present in the 
_Technical Manual_.  If such information is present in that text, I would 
be quite impressed with the authors . . . foresight, imagine that!


  ____  Erik Max Francis -- ..!apple!uuwest!max -- max@west.darkside.com   __
  \  /  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1  San Jose, CA  95117  37 20 N 121 53 W  ACGT  /  \
   \/   Like strategic interstellar conquest games?  Ask about UNIVERSE!  \__/
        Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.   All things that are, are lights.
From: msaletni@jade.tufts.edu (Michael J. Saletnik)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Federation v. Empire??? NOT!!
Date: 11 Jan 93 21:55:05 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

I hate getting in on this discussion, but...

In article <1993Jan11.140355.1@acad.drake.edu> jsq002@acad.drake.edu writes:

>planet to _DUST_ in about three seconds.  Regardless of whether or
>not they may have phasers or photon torpedoes (they do - that's
>how the Alliance destroyed the first DS), the magnitude of firepower

The Trek universe is the only place we've seen photon torpedoes.  In
the first "Star Wars," the weapon used was a proton torpedo.  I
remember noticing how close the names were as a 4-year-old.

						Michael
--
Michael J. Saletnik, Tufts University E'91 G'93
michael@binkley.ext.tufts.edu msaletni@pearl.tufts.edu
Manager of Computer Resources, Dept. of Civil Engineering
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Silly Ship Classes (Re: Excelsiorclass ship that was blasted in DS9)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:47:23 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <y127wB6w165w@ailanthus.com> tallman@ailanthus.com (Robert Oliver) writes:
> In article <1993Jan9.194125.11848@liberty.uc.wlu.edu> cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.e
> >Also, wasn't the Saratoga from ST4:TVH an Avenger class, i.e. just like
> >thge Reliant?  The one from DS9 looked more like what some tech sources
> >call a Knox class -- a slightly smaller Reliant without the overhead
> >weapons pod.

>Also, any 
>talk about an Avenger class is a bunch of invalid tech fandom nonsense. 
>If tech fandom can define classes then we might as well call the Saratoga 
>a Pineapple class Dreadnought. Or maybe a Screwdriver class Battleship or 
>a Tortoise class Scout or ....

Along these lines, I recently acquired a catalogue from the
"Intergalactic Trading Co." which sports blueprints from various
sources. Some of them are Starlog things, like Avenger (Miranda)
and some obscure name for the Oberth class (eg, Grissom), but two
caught my eye.

First is a drawing of the "Alaska Class NCC-1701C". Its basically
a short, fat refit-Constitution class ship with Transwarp
nacelles. It only vaguely resembles the ship seen in "Yesterday's
Enterprise". That should happily kill rumors of the Alaska class
I noticed a while back.

The second is (aiiiiee!) an "Olympus Class Dreadnaught". Yep, you
guessed it. Take a top of the line ship (Galaxy) and slap on a
third Warp nacelle (in this case, protruding from a long, wide
beam sticking out from below the main shuttlebay). Obviously,
just fandom work.

The only fan-ship I've seen that actually looked reasonable is
the USS Chandley (sp?) that I've seen in FASA's lead model
advertizements in Starlog, which had a Miranda-look, but no
roll-bar and instead of short pylons had these funky grey-painted
radiators sticking out and down from each side, supporting the
Warp nacelles.

Joshua

PS: How difficult d'ya think it'd be to convert one of the
Enterprise models (the 18" kind) into a Nebula class? Suggestions
for what to build the turret from?

|         A shimmering net undulating like an infinite borealis.             |
|                                                  - Chapterhouse: Dune      |
|                                                                            |
| jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca  Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu (Colin J. Wynne)
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:57:39 GMT
Organization: Washington & Lee University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Marcus Lindroos INF (MLINDROOS@FINABO.ABO.FI) wrote:
:
: Most important among the rest is Gamma Hydrae some 120 ly. from our Sun. If
: STAR TREK II:THE WRATH OF KHAN is to be believed, the Klingon neutral zone is
: in the vicinity of that star system.

Well, this should be the Romulan Neutral Zone.  One of the TOS episodes --
Enterprise incident, I believe -- places Gamma Hydrae as the Romulan
border.  In TWOK, we should just assume that the simulation had Romulans
using Klingon D-7 cruisers, as per the tech-swap treaty between the two
empires.

As for a star catalog of places travelles, check out both the TOS and the
TNG commpendia; as far as TOS goes, I know the book mentions the relevant
star systems for every episode, and you could go from there to find out
real ones.

CJW
 --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  =====  Colin J. Wynne                     Washington & Lee University  =====
  =====  cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu              Lexington, Virginia      =====
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
From: max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Below absolute zero???
Date: 12 Jan 93 19:33:26 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

drew@bnr.co.uk (Scooby Doo) writes:

> >> 	But how is this possible? Absolute zero (0 Kelvins) has been  
> >> calculated at approximately -273.15C, and it is a known fact that nothing 
> >> may achieve a temperature lower than that. You'd think that the ST  
> >> technical advisors would know better!
> >
> >Answer:  It's not possible.  The writers for that episode just screwed 
> >up.
> 
> Of course it's possible. There was a strange energy field hanging around
> that had never previously been encountered....

For the umpteenth time.

Symptoms of the disease of assuming that the Star Trek writers meant 
everything that they did . . .


  ____  Erik Max Francis -- ..!apple!uuwest!max -- max@west.darkside.com   __
  \  /  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1  San Jose, CA  95117  37 20 N 121 53 W  ACGT  /  \
   \/   Like strategic interstellar conquest games?  Ask about UNIVERSE!  \__/
        Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.   All things that are, are lights.
From: ynecelc@sx.mont.nec.com (Ellison Chan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:12:22 GMT
Organization: HNSX Supercomputers

In article <1993Jan9.040417.9652@liberty.uc.wlu.edu> cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu (Colin J. Wynne) writes:
>Umm, in DS9: Emissary, they say that the worm hole carried them either
>7000 or *70,000* light years from Bajor.  SOmeone might check that,
>because the latter is truly impossible to swallow.

It was 70 000 light years. Why is this difficult to believe.
I thought that this was a little to small myself.
-- 
Ellison Chan, Comp. Sys. Analyst               2350 Place TransCanadienne
HNSX Supercomputers Inc., NEC Corp.        Dorval, Quebec, Canada H9P 2X5
E-mail: ellison@SX.Mont.NEC.COM          (514)684-7705, FAX (514)684-8619
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: petitc@nuge102.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: Telepathy - Anyone want to take a shot?
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:17:48 GMT

ZEINEJOHNSONDS%DFYC@pcmail.usafa.af.mil (D. Satin Zeine-Johnson) writes:

>> However, telepathy is a highly refined version of empathy.  A good 
>comparison

>I disagree.  That's like saying being an operatic soprano is a highly 
>refined version of being a concert pianist.  They are related, not versions 
>of each other!  An empath receives (and a projective empath also sends) 
>EMOTIONS.  A telepath receives (and a projective telepath also sends) 
>THOUGHTS - usually discussed as language (words) when discussed verbally, 
>for communications purposes.  A telepath gets emotions ONLY when they are 
>directly affecting the THOUGHTS of the person being "read".  Being a 
>telepath does not make it inclusive - you don't automatically get the 
>empathic abilities as part of the package.

  I disagree.  Both telepathy and empathy look in the other person's mind.
However, you may have a point, in that a superb empath is probably a rotten
telepath. The reason is that you've gotta look at the person's mind very
differently for empathy and telepathy.

>Case in point.  Luwaxanna Troi is certainly NOT an empath!  She is reputed 
>to be "one of the most powerful Betazoid telepaths", but has never 
>demonstrated the least whiff of empathic ability.

  Considering how much she loves to brag, I wouldn't be surprised if she were
exaggerating that one totally.

-- 
Your Lucky Number is 3.1415926 but must be played between 3 and 3:15 PM on
January 11, 1993.
"The greatest beauty in the world is beauty that is private."
"Protect endangered species!  Contribute to the Exxon Supporter's Fund!"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: 1701-D Flagship
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 17:31:56 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1ic7piINNqc5@nighthawk.ksu.ksu.edu> starride@nighthawk.ksu.ksu.edu (David Chase) writes:
>stanaway@ssd.comm.mot.com (Chris Stanaway) writes:
>	In the episode that I am thinking of it travels at warp 4
>to meet up with the Enterprise. Also the warp engine nacelles
>are transwarp nacelles not the normal warp engines of old. Plus
>it would not take a large engine to push(warp) something as big
>as the saucer section. Remember that by the time of STNG  
>even large shuttles have limited warp capacity.

Pure, unadulterated, horse-puckey. Transwarp is dead. Paramount
has said the -D does not use Transwarp. The Tech Manual says it
doesn't use Transwarp.

According to the Tech Manual, the Primary Hull (Saucer Section)
can 'coast' at Warp velocities for a time. This could be
accomplished by generating a very low level subspace distortion
field with the impulse engines, just enough to maintain the Warp
field. 

>	The reason the all the Enterprise's look like they do is
> that is the ship look that the producers thought the audience
> would go for the most.

Speculation on your part. Probert designed the -D to look new,
but still have the same general shape - saucer, secondary hull,
warp nacelles. I can dredge up the Starlog and a quote if you
really want. The fact that this would make the fans happy isn't
really relevant. Like most of this discussion.

> Many of the things that are taken for granted as being
> locically thought out. A statement that is INCORRECT. Many of
> the StarTrek standards are standards because people believed
> them to be and then the producers/writers/fans tried to make
> sense out of them.  

Uh, right. I think. At any rate, if you're going to say "it
doesn't make sense from the point of view of the characters
solely because it wasn't designed from the characters point of
view", then of *course* its not going to make any sense. You're
intentionally trying to see inconsistancies where you want them,
and that is indeed your right. Wow, you've seen them. The rest of
us don't, or ignore them. I don't think there's any argument
about that.

Joshua
|         A shimmering net undulating like an infinite borealis.             |
|                                                  - Chapterhouse: Dune      |
|                                                                            |
| jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca  Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary |
From: hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Heavy/Light Cruiser
Date: 7 Jan 93 15:11:17 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

I realize this is getting a little beyond the Star Trek subject, but
could someone give me a list of classifications for naval vessels and
a brief description for each.

Thanks in advance.

-Jay
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: DS9 Runabout names *very small spoiler*
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 22:35:40 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <C0DCp2.Cow@news.cso.uiuc.edu> mlj44080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Michael Lee Jacobs) writes:

>Okay we have the Rio Grande, and the Yang-Tze so obviously we are looking
>at Terran Rivers here..any guesses/info on the third runnabout's name?
>WE have a South American River and an Asian river so Id guess the Rhine, 

The Rio Grande is a South American river in Star Trek's century?

Guess there've been some plate tectonics at work!

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dave@admiral.uucp (Dave Litchman)
Subject: Re: Holodeck (again)
Organization: The Admiral's Unix System & The Grid BBS
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 05:40:07 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.151327.10056@dmu.ac.uk> se2ah@dmu.ac.uk (Wibble) writes:
>If the holodeck is so good that it can infact do all of these wonderful mind
>bending stunts. Then why, in the first episode does riker through a rock at the
>wall an it actually hits it.  Surely the computer could make it appear to go
>off into the distance.
>
>There are a few other strange things about the first episode like why do they walk all the way back to the place where riker came in, on a later episode all
>they need to do is say exit and one appears next to them (this would be because
>they haven't actually moved that far from the exit, the computer has just moved the scenery).

Easily explained. In EaF, the Holodeck was running Holodeck Manager, v.1.0.
In more recent episodes, the software has been upgraded.


-- 
"Dammit Jim, I'm a free man, not a number!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ray, when somebody asks you if you're a god, you say YES!" -- Winston Zeddmore
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dave@admiral.uucp (Dave Litchman)
Subject: Re: NCC-1701D vs. Death Star
Organization: The Admiral's Unix System & The Grid BBS
Distribution: rec
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 08:18:18 GMT

In article <JVIGNEAU.93Jan7085415@cs.USS.Enterprise.mil> jvigneau@cs.USS.Enterprise.mil (Joe Vigneau) writes:
>Subject says it all...

No, it doesn't. In case you didn't see, the subject just says "NCC-1701D vs.
Death Star". What the hell does that mean? Are you trying to say "In a battle
between the two afore-mentioned craft, which would win"? If you are, don't
waste our time. All possible combinations of "Enterprise-D vs. (whatever)"
have already been done, including the Death Star. There is never a conclusion.
Any further discussion is a waste of bandwith. Heck, the original discussions
were a waste of bandwith!


-- 
"Dammit Jim, I'm a free man, not a number!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ray, when somebody asks you if you're a god, you say YES!" -- Winston Zeddmore
From: scherrer@mtxinu.COM (Deborah Scherrer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: course of the Enterprise?
Date: 5 Jan 93 20:52:35 GMT
Organization: mt Xinu, Berkeley, CA

Recently we were making a 3-dimensional model of our galaxy to show
kids where our solar system lies, and where a few of the commonly
known stars and nebula are in relation to us.   Turns out that, with
a model about 14" in diameter, most of what we see with the naked
eye, and have heard of, is within about 1/2" of our solar system.   

It would be great fun to show the kids how far the Enterprise has
claimed to have traveled.  Has anyone ever charted the various
"voyages of the Starship Enterprise" to get a feel for where it's
visited in our galaxy (other than the center of the galaxy in
Star Trek V and an abortive attempt to get outside the galaxy in "Where
No Man Has Gone Before)?   Are all the names of stars they use for real,
or do they generate them just for the occasion?   Anybody collected a
list of them?
-- 
Deborah Scherrer                                 scherrer@mtxinu.com
Mt Xinu, Inc.                               ..!uunet!mtxinu!scherrer
2560 Ninth Street
Berkeley, CA  94710                                     510-644-0146
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech