HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: daniel@polaris.async.vt.edu (Daniel Pawtowski)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: WHY NOT VISUAL ALSO??
Date: 14 Oct 92 06:59:46 GMT
Organization: Escape from Blacksburg, VA

In article <01GPWEGPSS7K000HXF@phillip.edu.au> T9214504@phillip.edu.au writes:
>
>
>             What would it involve in sending back visual as well as
>             audio from an away team? It was once done with Geordy's 


I believe the Trek staff has noted this several times.  The real reason is that
an aud-only communications setup provides a convient excuse to explain 
events to the TV audience.
Also recall:  In the episode where Geordi becomes invisible, the Away Team 
had been making visual logs with a hand-held device.  Also, I believe a 
Tricorder can record and transmit visual data if the operator so chooses.

Daniel "I see" Pawtowski
dpawtows@vtssi.vt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: rrogers@watson.ibm.com (Ryan Rogers)
Subject: Re: Bluescreen mistake/badly done?
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 02:20:54 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14b by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: rrogers@watson.ibm.com (Ryan Rogers)
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In  <24008@optima.cs.arizona.edu>  william@cs.arizona.edu (William (Dragon) Hertling) writes:
>In article <wyFRsB1w165w@prag.com> su@prag.com (Sean D. Ackley) writes:
>>
>>I noticed in the latest episode "Relics" that when Scotty walks into
>>the holodeck for the first time to the old Enterprise bridge the
>>matting/blue screen work was not up to par with the other episodes.
>>
>>Usually they do a good transition job.  Any explanations?
>
>I'm not sure what you were referring to, but I assumed that they used
>old stock footage for the bridge, since I also assumed that the original
>set was long gone. I'm really not what if this has anything to do with
>your question, but it was just something I was wondering about myself.
>
>william@cs.arizona.edu
>
>

   Nope...they *totally* recreated the bridge for the episode.  Everything,
right down to each switch on the helm, was refabricated.  Paramount still
had the old molds from TOS (even though the old bridge set had been
destroyed).

   Oh...my sources: ET and Creation Con (Rick Berman?).


Sincerely,
Ryan Rogers
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jhk1@cec1.wustl.edu (Jonathan Howard Krivitzky)
Subject: Re: TAII and Data's head questions (Spoilers)
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:32:53 GMT

In article <7076@transfer.stratus.com> asweeney@camelot.sw.stratus.com (Andy Sweeney) writes:
>How come the writers decided Geordi could fix Data's head when
>Data couldn't? After all Data should know more about it he made
>Lal(sp)  
>
>Thanks
>Andy

	Data's headless body did not exist in the 24'th century for the
head to be reattached to until after the accident.  Geordi was only trying
to fix the head as a last resort to save Data and it worked.
	

	-- Jon K.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: liebea@vccsouth13.its.rpi.edu (Adam Fred Lieberman)
Subject: Re: Distance in the Holodecks
Reply-To: liebea@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 03:42:45 GMT

In article <92Oct11.183556.31021@acs.ucalgary.ca>, jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct11.172613.21094@netcom.com> linley@netcom.com (Bruce James Robrert Linley) writes:
|> >cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Carlos A. Pero) writes:
|> >>But what would happen if two people were in the holodeck
|> >>simultaneously, and walked apart from each other a distance
|> >>greater than the actual confines of the room? Would they just be
|> >>a set distance and the holodeck somehow fool their vision to make
|> >>them appear farther away? 
|> >Yeah, but what if the two people walking in opposite directions were each
|> >holding one end of a rope known to be longer than the width of the holodeck?
|> >The distance illusion would be killed because the rope would never tighten.
|> 
|> Sneaky... but all the 'deck needs to do is use forcebeams to
|> tighten the rope, leaving the 'slack' in the middle cloaked.
|> 
|> Joshua

     Ah... The question becomes whether the holodeck has a general system for
handling all such special situations.  I mean, did the original programmers
expect people to bring a long rope into the holodeck?  Or is the computer
smart enough to figure out what to do in real time?

                                       -Adam Lieberman
                                        liebea@rpi.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo)
Subject: Re: ships
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:47:50 GMT

jpw@minerva.ece.drexel.edu (Joseph Wetstein) writes:


>Does anyone know the specs of all the Enterprises (a,b,c,d... etc)?

>What happened to the 'A'? 'B'?

>Just wondering...

No one really knows....there is a new poster out withe cutaway of the Galaxy
class USS Enterprise..and in the lower left hand corner they have all of the
starships named Enterprise and all of the Captains that have served on them.
The Enterprise B has 1 captain listed (I forget who it was right now) and it
didn't not have a destruction/decommission date like the original and the
C Enterprise.  I assume they are going to leave that open for future story
lines...maybe in a Star Trek movie about the Enterprise B...now that  would be
interesting.


--
|Jeffrey S. Jo                   |	         F-14D Tomcat                 |
|Computer Operations		 |             VF-142 Ghostriders             |
|University of Nebraska at Omaha |       United States Navy F-14 Tomcat       |
|tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu         |              Fighter Squadron              |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley)
Subject: Re: Tordedos vs phasers
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:20:52 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

jd@slc3.lat.oz.au (John Dimogotsis) writes:
>
>	Can someone tell me what thw difference is betwwen these two weapons 
>and under which circumstances they are used.

The phaser is a beam weapon, and the photon torpedo is a projectile
weapon.

Phasers project a beam composed of two elements.  One is familiar
electromagnetic radiation, similar to a laser.  The other is not
specified, but can cause matter to "transition out of the continuum."
Different power settings vary the proportion of EM to non-EM energy,
with higher settings being less composed of EM energy and more of the
mystery energy.

Phaser energy travels at the speed of light, and as such is not useful
when the emitter and/or the target are moving faster than light.

Photon torpedoes are physical casings containing matter and antimatter
which is forced into contact when the weapon detonates.  The resultant
annihilation provides the destructive effect.  Photon torpedoes can
move at warp speeds since they have small warp engines fed by the
reactants.

>	In the original TV series I seem to recall fasers used very often.
>While in the New sereies as well as the Movies torpedos are prefered.

For TOS the weapons' capabilities were not well known.  The phaser
effect was possibly easier to produce for the optical effects crew
than photon torpedoes.

In the TNG context, torpedoes are preferrable because they are guided
weapons which can be used at warp speeds.  Phasers may have a more
destructive effect, but they are essentially "line-of-sight" devices
which can only operate at the speed of light.



--------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Jay Windley                     | jwindley@asylum.cs.utah.edu
Department of Computer Science  +---------------------------------------
Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City   | Error non est sed facilitas.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Within the Transporter Beam (Realm of Fear)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 00:42:45 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta
Keywords: wow, hand, me, another, beer

In article <1992Oct8.020144.24597@rtsg.mot.com> svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda) writes:
>The only problem I have with the view (although I too thought it
>was about time) was that if you are really being disintegrated,
>why would your view just slowly fuzz out like that?  Through the
>fuzz, the room was pretty clear.  It seems like your eyes would
>be disintegrating right along with everything else, so just as
>soon as you lost enough eye material (and optical nerve) your
>view would get blurry, then nothing.

If this were the case, then when half of your heart had beamed
out, the other half would die rather quickly. Blood would
splatter, your brain would stop, and you'd die.

There are two possibilities:

1) Like TOS (not TFS), you are frozen in a stasis field during
transport. Ie, you don't notice it happening.

2) TFS and TNG, where you see people move during transport is a
little more complex. As I say all the time, your body stays in
ONE PIECE from ITS point of view. Your brain stays intact. Two
carbon atoms in your neurochemicals can be in different places
from an objective POV, but from their point of view they are
right next to one another. If this weren't the case, you'd die as
parts of your body were removed atom by atom.

>  For that matter, how could 
>someone possibly "see" something withing the energy "flow", or 
>see the white flow itself, and how would you "grab" someone 
>else, when the after all, entire concept of "arms" is rather 
>acedemic at the point?

The 'white flow' is the pattern buffer and the actual 'distance
transversed' on the subspace beam as seen by someone in
transport. The bug things _naturally_ exist in this half-phased
state between energy and matter. The people trapped in transit
were locked into this state (IMHO, they shouldn't have looked
like bugs, tho).

>It really bothered me to watch Brockly grimace in the white-out
>flow.  What exactly were we looking at?  Surely he was completely
>little bits of energy by then.

The camera was little bits of energy as well. And the photons
passing from Barcley to the camera were still photons, but in the
stream with you.

Joshua
|         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: jhk1@cec1.wustl.edu (Jonathan Howard Krivitzky)
Subject: Re: warp overshoot
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:09:18 GMT

In article <13OCT199213492342@rosie.uh.edu> cosc1871@rosie.uh.edu (92F06787) writes:
>>My favorite is in STIV:TVH where Kirk orders Warp velocity for
>>the Bird of Prey while still flying amongst Earth's clouds.
>> 
>>Good thing Sulu, at least, was smart enough to wait. :)
>
>Or did he? :)
>

	I hope that didn't add to the distruction of the ozone layer :^>
>
	--Jon K.
From: william@cs.arizona.edu (William (Dragon) Hertling)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: holo deck
Date: 12 Oct 92 23:10:37 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1bcdn8INN20p@charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu> lawson@ecst.csuchico.edu (M. Todd Lawson) writes:
>
>    Speaking of holo decks, here's another question:
>
>   If the holo deck is only 30 x 30 feet approx., Why is it that one
>  person can be inside and another person will enter but be a mile away
>  from the first person? Shouldn't the second person enter 20 or so feet
>  away from the first?

if your system has the messages from the past week or so, read them. we've
discussed this. in short, the holodeck door should be considered as a
fixed location in a virtual reality. anyone who enters the door will
enter the virtual reality in the same place. someone else who is elsewhere
in the virtual reality will appear to be some distance away due to special
techniques the holodeck uses. again, read the message of the last week or
so for a description of these techniques.

william@cs.arizona.edu
From: petitc@nuge115.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Transporter Energy
Date: 14 Oct 92 19:41:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: rpi.!a2zxj
Reply-To: petitc@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.

In article <92Oct14.170316.15211@acs.ucalgary.ca>, jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes:

|> Whoah. Since when does passing energy (etc) through subspace
|> bypass shields? With TNG technology, thats the basis of shield
|> operations - subspace modulations. 


 NOT!  What about the Rutian (sp?) Terrorists.  They used a transporter device
that pushed the person through subspace, BYPASSING shields.  Its only problem
was the humanoid flesh couldn't be transported in this way without taking
damage.  My suggestion was to convert the person so that he ISN'T flesh and then
do the transport.

-- 
Trust:  A very precious social commodity, due both to high value and terrible
scarcity.
MATWDTM:  Mothers Against Teenagers Who Drink Too Much (failed name for MADD)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)
Subject: Re: For Crying out loud !
Organization: CIRES, University of Colorado
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:53:20

In article <1992Oct15.110426.19949@yang.earlham.edu> uril@yang.earlham.edu (Uri J. Lessing) writes:


   I can't believe that you would dare criticize are nitpicking.  If we are 
   to escape from our own dull boring dateless lives we must have complete 
   and utter detail.  By the way Kirk did wear a yellow tunic at Ensign 
   Smith's birtday.  He turned 32 and had a small boil under his left shoulder.
   -- 

   Uri J. Lessing |  Earlham College |  Richmond, Indiana


Actually the ensign's name was Tompson, and it was a wedding, now a
birthday. His tunic was yellow, though. Spock's was blue, and had a
tiny hole just under his left breast, which you can only see if you
carefully examine the entire episode frame by frame. I didn't notice
Tompson's mole, but if it was the same mole he showed in episode 14,
then it was shaped like JFK's profile.
--
Edward Hartnett			ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Scotty's Trip
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 22:45:32 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1bkf05INNbil@charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu> lawson@ecst.csuchico.edu (M. Todd Lawson) writes:
>    Here's one,
>
>     If Barclay was able to see the things in the beam, that shows he
>   was aware of time during the transporting process.  Scotty was in the
>   beam for 75 years and not aware of time. Huh? 

OOoh, nasty one. :)

I haven't seen it yet, but from the clips, its possible Scotty
was in a TOS technology transporter... those used stasis fields
so that you weren't moving once transport was initiated (tho they
do in the movies... sigh). TFS technology might have been using a
prototype of the TNG technology, in which case it could have the
statis field as a backup in case anything went wrong.

Thus, after he beamed out, the statis field could have been
engaged, freezing him for 75 years. :)

Joshua
|         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: svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda)
Subject: Re: Within the Transporter Beam (Realm of Fear)
Keywords: wow, hand, me, another, beer
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 02:01:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.175123.18389@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> davesp@ecs.comm.mot.com (Dave Spensley) writes:
|Possible spoilers...

Ditto

|Was anyone else floored when a transport was shown with respect to
|the "transportee"?  I have been hoping for a shot like this for the
|last few years, and I hadn't seen one until "Realm of Fear".  (I
|presume this effect had not yet been shown in TNG.)  IMHO, it'd add
|a little more variety if we (the viewer) followed the away team from
|the team's perspective as they transported.

The only problem I have with the view (although I too thought it
was about time) was that if you are really being disintegrated,
why would your view just slowly fuzz out like that?  Through the
fuzz, the room was pretty clear.  It seems like your eyes would
be disintegrating right along with everything else, so just as
soon as you lost enough eye material (and optical nerve) your
view would get blurry, then nothing.  For that matter, how could 
someone possibly "see" something withing the energy "flow", or 
see the white flow itself, and how would you "grab" someone 
else, when the after all, entire concept of "arms" is rather 
acedemic at the point?

It really bothered me to watch Brockly grimace in the white-out
flow.  What exactly were we looking at?  Surely he was completely
little bits of energy by then.

I would rather have seen sort of a fade to black, with a de-fade
at the new location.  Or even have the old location and the new
location just sort of smear together, as your eyes and senses
transfer bit-by-bit (groan:-) from one to the other.  But I guess
that wouldn't have made much of an episode.

Also, when Chief was explaining why all the redundancy in the
(something techno-babble) made the transporter perfectly safe, 
was anyone else thinking, "Gee, this guy needs to read comp.risks!"
:-)

		Dave Svoboda, Palatine, IL
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: haywire@wpi.WPI.EDU (the Insane One)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Klingon Battle Cruisers
Date: 10 Oct 1992 19:42:25 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu

In article <1992Oct8.210018.10800@ultb.isc.rit.edu> smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:

>Non-canon explanation: Basically, that was the first time we
> ever saw the inside of a Klingon
>ship.  As Klingon culture has expanded in TNG, some things have been
>"created" or "revealed" that don't quite mesh with previous shows,
>etc.  Relax and go with the flow.
>
>Canon explantion (attempt):  The command chair is in the middle in the
>STIII BoP, is probably in front in the STVI BoP, and was in front in
>the TNG episode where Riker served on a Klingon cruiser (name escapes me).
>(1) Exposing one's back to a potential enemy is a sign of strength.
>(2) No Klingon would attack from behind, unless he was without honor
>	(in which case, I presume, the rest of the crew would tear him to
>	shreds)

Okay this was my misunderstanding because in TOS Klingons had no honor.

The episode where riker was on a BoP, I thought the chair was in the back.

The second point I tried to make was that it really isnt wise for the
commander chair to be in front of all the stations because he would
need all the information he wants piped through his view screen. It is
more generally accepted to have the command chair in a place where the
commander can oversee all his orders are being carried out correctly
and that all he has to do is look up/down at a station panel to see
the relavent info on station screens. Most Starfleet ships are designed this
way(The only exception I could find was the Galaxy class main bridge: All the
science and tactical stations are postioned in such away that the commander
would have to go up there to see what was going on at these stations)
From: adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: The Bathrooms in the Enterprise (Re: Unanswered S
Date: 8 Oct 92 09:28:39 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computing & Electrical Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <BvKyn1.D9s@world.std.com> grady@world.std.com (Dick Grady) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.150544.21482@hellgate.utah.edu> jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley) writes:
>>cowboy@trans.csuohio.edu (Joe Rosenfeld) writes:
>>>: 
>>> ...			the transporter is used to evacuate all
>>>wastes.
>>
>>I disagree.
>>
>>The transporter is a very energy-intensive machine.  It takes a lot of
>>energy to run it, and it takes a lot of space to accommodate the
>>equipment.  You don't see it on the show, but the Tech Manual shows a
>>huge pattern buffer under the transporter pads, and a large bay of
>>machinery above them.
>
>You'd only need those pattern buffers, etc, at the transporter itself,
>not in each living unit.  After all,
>transportation to and from a planet's surface doesn't require pattern
>buffers on the surface.

So everyone on the Enterprise relies on the 20 various types of transporter
scattered throughout the ship for their bodily waste disposal?  Think of
the queues!

And what happens if, for some reason, the ship is deprived of power and
half the civilian population needs to go to the toilet, probably as a
direct reaction to whatever caused the power failure? :-)

Would anyone with a sick imagination like to consider the results of a
transporter malfunction?

Finally, the Tech Manual says on p.152, "accomodations typically include a
bedroom, living/work area and a small bathroom".

-- 
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cs
 UUCP: ..!uknet!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian   |  ARPA:   adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke)
Subject: Re: Turbo lift question.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 04:01:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.015426.24100@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> tkeiser@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Anthony L Keiser) writes:
>
>     Turbolifts also have an amazing AI program that adjusts the time a car
>takes to get to its destination to the length of the conversation going on
>within it.  Incredible!!  I bet Geordi had something to do with it.

No, not Geordi... this device existed in TOS, when Spock took the
Romulan Commander ("Enterprise Incident") down one deck, and the trip
took a full minute...

(Reversing the deck numbering doesn't explain that either, as they went
straight down from the bridge.)
-- 
What did Dan Quayle get on his IQ test? 
                                             Drool.
hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu             _V_a_l_h_a_l_l_a BBS, 217-352-3682, WWIV4.21, 14.4k
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Distance in the Holodecks
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 18:35:56 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1992Oct11.172613.21094@netcom.com> linley@netcom.com (Bruce James Robrert Linley) writes:
>cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Carlos A. Pero) writes:
>>But what would happen if two people were in the holodeck
>>simultaneously, and walked apart from each other a distance
>>greater than the actual confines of the room? Would they just be
>>a set distance and the holodeck somehow fool their vision to make
>>them appear farther away? 
>Yeah, but what if the two people walking in opposite directions were each
>holding one end of a rope known to be longer than the width of the holodeck?
>The distance illusion would be killed because the rope would never tighten.

Sneaky... but all the 'deck needs to do is use forcebeams to
tighten the rope, leaving the 'slack' in the middle cloaked.

Joshua
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: lidz@quads.uchicago.edu (adam lidz)
Subject: Re: "TerraWatt"
Reply-To: lidz@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 10:51:50 GMT

No, they said they didn't have the POWER they needed. . .