HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rpascazi@csws15.ic.sunysb.edu (Robert R Pascazio)
Subject: Re: Distance in the Holodecks
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 16:08:09 GMT

In article <BvGKFx.EEK@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Carlos A. Pero) writes:
>I have a question regarding spatial relationships in the holodeck. I don't
>have any of the tech manuals for the show, and I've only seen a few episodes
>address how the holodeck works. So hopefully, someone out there can explain
>this to me.
>
>In "Encounter at Farpoint", Data demonstrates the mechanics of the holodeck
>to Riker by throwing a rock at the wall. I believe he then babbles something
>about the illusion of distance how the holodeck allows movement, or something
>to that effect.
>
>Fine. I can understand the holodeck would somehow "move" the occupant
>backwards in the room (if walking a great distance) so that they do not
>collide with the physical walls of the holodeck. Probably by shifting the
>holodeck-controllable ground like a treadmill. 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?

The human mind perceives distance by using two techniques. One is the
comparison of optical data and this is combined with the learned distance
between the eyes to develope an answer. Just as important though, is the
refrence of that object to everything around it. For example, ever go in
that room at a Carnival that is sloped so when you stand on one end, the
people on the other end look like giants and when you are on that end, the
other people look like dwarfs? The human mind is easily fooled that way.

                                                  -Rob-
From: labrg@emory.edu (Ryan Montieth Gill)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Romulan Plasma weapons
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:19:34 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3


	What ever happened to the Roumlan Plasma weapons of old. They
	seemed like a rather effective weapon, why did they stop using
	them?  


Ryan Montieth Gill
labrg@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu
Academic Computing
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dcgonyie@eos.ncsu.edu (DWAINE CHARLES GONYIER)
Subject: Re: Warp Speed Formula Revealed
Originator: dcgonyie@c00069-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: dcgonyie@eos.ncsu.edu (DWAINE CHARLES GONYIER)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 21:43:49 GMT


In article <1992Sep29.192610.18447@odin.corp.sgi.com>, mikesteg@syclone.detroit.sgi.com (Michael Stegbauer) writes:
|>Path: taco!gatech!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!olivea!sgigate!odin!syclone.detroit.sgi.com!mikesteg
|>From: mikesteg@syclone.detroit.sgi.com (Michael Stegbauer)
|>Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
|>Subject: Re: Warp Speed Formula Revealed
|>Message-ID: <1992Sep29.192610.18447@odin.corp.sgi.com>
|>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 15:26:10 GMT+5:00
|>References: <1992Sep25.182945.12627@ncsu.edu> <1992Sep29.165914.21351@umbc3.umbc.edu>
|>Sender: news@odin.corp.sgi.com (Net News)
|>Reply-To: mikesteg@syclone.detroit.sgi.com (Michael Stegbauer)
|>Organization: sgi
|>Lines: 10
|>Nntp-Posting-Host: syclone.detroit.sgi.com
|>
|>
|> > you a bad time.  Besides warp 9.9999 is already 4.64 x 10^14 * c.  Why would
|> > you need to go faster?
|>
|>How about:
|>to catch Vger
|>to catch the Borg heading for earth
|>to deliver any number of medical cures, in any number of shows
|>to outrun Q
|>to get home in time to see ST:TNG ?
|>

These are some very good points.  I withdraw my (rhetorical?) question, and
add to the list:

-To escape oggers on Netrek
-To keep current with the new postings on this newsgroup
-To increase the processing speed of Unix terminals duringe peak hours
-To get home in time to set the VCR to record ST:TNG
From: kuchar@buast7.bu.edu (Tom Kuchar)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Types o'Phasers (Re: Infantry Vehicals in ST?)
Date: 30 Sep 92 12:08:04 GMT
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <29SEP199212381008@rosie.uh.edu> cosc1871@rosie.uh.edu (92F06787) writes:
>In article <chan.0clt@nucleus.cuc.ab.ca>, chan@nucleus.cuc.ab.ca (Mike Chan) writes...
>>I also wonder if they have
>>different kind of makes of Phasers. Like we have Smith and Wessons, so would
>>they have different kinds of phasers?
>
>Star Trek to my knowledge has several phaser models.  I'm working
>off of memory so I expect some corrections:

Here's a few ;-)

>TMS "Star Trek 2"  They had sleek phasers with the same layout
>	of the phaser-2 pistol, but the emitter on the front was a
>	wide blister, rather than the dish-type.  It made a neat 
>	crackling noise when fired.

These are the same phasers used in ST:TMP. These were to be updates
of the TOS editions. The pistol the hand held model was also inserted
into a pistol grip.  Although I don't think we ever saw security 
guards carrying these, the pistols could be up-graded by attaching
a fore-arm power pack that the pistols could be attached to. I've
seen these in productions sketches, but am unsure if the guards in
ST:TMP actually had these.  BTW, the security guards where the armour
in ST:TMP in most of the movies (including STVI).

>TMS "Star Trek 3"  Kirk carries a updated version of the phaser-2
>	pistol.  It has a cone-like emitter spout and almost identical
>	looks to the original phaser-2.

These were meant to be a sleeker version of the TOS phasers. These, too,
had hand held models in a pistol mount.  The producers of ST II wanted
new phasers, since they didn't like the bulkier looking ones designed
for ST:TMP

>TMS "Star Trek 5"  The phasers issued to the marines in that 
>	movie were similar to the one Kirk had in ST 3.  Definitely
>	saw a phaser energy clip (Chrome cylinder with buttons) snap
>	into the cylindrical phaser grip.

I've seen these described as a more `macho' version of the STIII
versions.  There's some kind blast deflector/grating covering the
upper part of the pistol and almost covers the muzzle.  These were
also used in STVI, although I'm not sure whether they were modified 
or not.

>TMS "Star Trek 6"  The phasers here differ from the phaser in ST 5
>	by having a rectangular pistol grip.  The energy-clip appeared
>	to be very visible.  Valeris seems to have 'cocked' a phaser
>	before firing.

-- 
Tom Kuchar			  
kuchar@buast7.bu.edu		  -or-                      kuchar@plh.af.mil
Department of Astronomy                              Phillips Laboratory/GPOB
Boston Univerity		                                  Hanscom AFB
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: skeeter@skatter.usask.ca
Subject: Re: warp speeds
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 02:37:47 GMT

From article <1992Sep30.144218.28829@umbc3.umbc.edu>, by cs202144@umbc8.umbc.edu (cs202144):

[stuff deleted]

> like 9.9999999999 or so, but since 10 is infinite speed and occupies all
> places in the universe at once the how could you go faster than that!
> 
> Unless you want to arrive before you left.
> 

There was a young lady named Bright
Who travelled much faster than light.
	She departed one day
	In a relative way
And returned on the previous night.
			- author?

skeeter@skatter.usask.ca				no nifty .sig

"The weight of ones wallet is inversly proportional to the size of ones heart."
							- me
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: rrheaume@emr1.emr.ca (Roberta Rheaume (CPB))
Subject: ST:TNG Communicators
Organization: CPCS, Energy Mines & Resources, Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:28:23 GMT

I am new to this news group, so pardon me if this question has already been 
answered.  I wonder how the communicator knows when a person has stopped 
talking to the communicator and has resumed talking to the person in front 
of them.  

For example, Picard may be talking to Data, who is standing in front of him, 
and then begins to call Riker on his communicator.  When he is finished 
talking to Riker, he says nothing like: <over and out> but just picks up the 
conversation with Data, sometimes without losing a beat.  Can Riker still 
hear Picard?  If not, how does the communicator know that Picard has stopped 
talking into it?

Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks for the help.

Roberta Rheaume
rrheaume@emr1.emr.ca
"Waiting for the Nintendo Holodeck"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: oosten@ee.ualberta.ca (Brian Oostenbrink)
Subject: Re: time's arrow
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:19:06 GMT

sberger@sedona.intel.com (Scott Berger) writes:
> > a couple topics for discussion from the Time's Arrow episodes:
> > 
> > 1. The crew returned to the past because of the discovery of the "artifact". 
> >    The artifact existed because the crew returned to the past.
> >    What is the origin of the artifact - ie when did the artifact come from ?
> 
> 	A related question: what would have happened if the second
> copy of his head had been brought forward? It was in better
> shape than the first one (I remember something about a 12%
> degradation in the pathways).
> 
> > 
> > 2. Assuming a thorough examination of the artifact in part I, why was the 
> >    filing only discovered in part II ?

I would add one more question:

	How old is Sam Clemens watch?  It was picked up after lying around
	for 500 years and returned to the past with Sam, only to be left
	to wait for 500 years to be discovered, etc...  Timex takes a 
	licking and keeps on ticking.

Brian Oostenbrink
Univ. of Alberta
From: jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Starships
Date: 2 Oct 92 04:01:03 GMT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

Phil.Hodges@f601.n105.z1.therose.pdx.com (Phil Hodges) writes:
>
>  Here's a question I've been pondering...why is the Enterprise the
>U.S.S. Enterprise?  It's supposed to belong to the United Federation of
>Planets, not the Earth.  Unless U.S.S. doesn't stand for United States?
>Does it stand for United Star Ship, or what? What's the deal?

Canonically it means either United Star Ship or United Space Ship,
depending upon which TOS episode you prefer.  It doesn't have anything
to do with the United States warship designation, although Gene
Roddenberry undoubtedly picked this particular set of letters to add a
naval tone to the name of the ship.

I think this is one of those things that they just did at first
because it sounded neat, and then were forced to explain.  And so the
explanation is awkward.

I suppose we're to believe that "United Star Ship" identifies it as
belonging to the "United" Federation of Planets, but you'd think (with
hindsight) that they could have thought of this before committing
themselves.

I think it's interesting that TNG has yet to spell out what USS means
to them.  Picard almost always identifies his vessel as "the
Federation starship Enterprise."

--------------------------------+---------------------------------------
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: bcasavan@panther.ecn.uoknor.edu (Brent Casavant)
Subject: Re: photorps are useless!!!!!
Summary: More reasons you can't just "beam away" photon torpedos.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:27:09 GMT
Distribution: NA
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Keywords: photon torpedoes, transporters, warp fields

In article <1992Sep30.163521.21629@wdl.loral.com> trw@spl1.spl.loral.com (Tim R Witort) writes:
>In article <cZ8VRB1w164w@uuisis.isis.org>, jp_torun@uuisis.isis.org (jp torunski) writes:
>|> why not use the transporters to simply "beam away" any photon torpedoes? or 
>|> plasma rays/asteroids etc..
>
>   The torps are traveling too fast to use the trasnporter.

In addition, you cannot transport through a warp field unless your warp
factor is exactly equal to that of your destination.  For example, if
the transported object is travelling at Warp 7.22684 the destination also
has to be travelling at Warp 7.22684, no more, no less.  And since photon
torpedoes use a warp field for propulsion you would first have to match
the warp velocity of the torpedo and then transport it.  And if that's the
case the torpedo isn't going to catch up to you anyway, just let it
run out of fuel.

Forgive me if some part of that is wrong, I don't have my STTNG Tech Manual
handy at this moment, but it's basically correct.
>
>|> 
>|> also, when attacking the Borg, why not just beam way large parts of the 
>|> ship, and re-materialize them inside a planet (overide safety factors), or  
>|> spread the matter all over the place?
>
>   You can't transport through your OWN shields let alone yours AND the
>BORGS!

And don't forget you can only transport objects of a certain size a certain
distance.  To "transport away" any meaningful chunk of a Borg ship would
require unbelievable amounts of power.  I can't remember anything larger
than a shuttlecraft ever being transported anywhere.  I'm sure you could
transport a huge chunk, but only a couple inches if that.  It's just not
feasible to expend that much power, lower shields, and (as above) match
your warp factor exactly to that of the enemy.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cosc1871@elroy.uh.edu (92F06787)
Subject: Re: Phasers
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:23:00 GMT

In article <69198@hydra.gatech.EDU>, cegtitd@prism.gatech.EDU (Tim Dodd) writes...
>In article <25SEP199214274324@elroy.uh.edu+ cosc1871@elroy.uh.edu (92F06787) writes:
>+In article <68986@hydra.gatech.EDU+, cegtitd@prism.gatech.EDU (Tim Dodd) writes...
>++In article <24SEP199216584686@elroy.uh.edu+ cosc1871@elroy.uh.edu (92F06787) writes:
>++)Umm.  I sremember the primitive TOS F/X never having a *slow*
>++)beam---ever.  There hasn't been a phaser dodged in TMS either.
>++)As far as putting the characters in fatal situations, a skillful
>++)writer will avoid that... I hope they still do :-)
>++ 
>++Then you apparently have missed "The Man Trap" (TOS) and "Conspiracy" (TNG).
>++-- 
>+Umm.  TOS The Man Trap had no slow beams.  The obsessed scientist
> 
>Yes it did.  The beam can clearly be seen coming out of the (hand) phaser
>and moving across space.  If it were really traveling at light velocity,
>you wouldn't be able to see the beam form its trajectory:  when the switch
>was pressed, it would just be there, like a flashlight or laser beam.  This
>same observation holds for the shipboard phasers in both TOS & TNG.  I'm
>sure this is due to faulty special effects rather than other considerations.

Oh, I see what you mean.  The beam wasn't instantaneous.  

> 
>Also, recall the extremely slow hand phasers in TOS's "Wink of An Eye".  If
>phaser beams really traveled at light velocity, their speed of propogation
>would have been unaffected due to the invariance of "c" across inertial frames
>of reference.

This is where it gets a bit muddy... :-)
According to TNG Tech Bible phasers are c velocity only.
Now, I have read L. Myerson's Trek Article and it goes something
like this:  Hand phasers have a top speed of 8 miles per second
because of etc,.
Now which one is valid (no I will not say canon) that depends
on your tastes :)

> 
BTW, the same article comments on the reason ship-board phasers
leave a trail of light despite traveling at warp speed.  By the
same token it makes a pretty darn good excuse for TOS/TMS 
phaser effects.
From: william@cs.arizona.edu (William E. Hertling)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Collisions Revisited...
Date: 3 Oct 92 23:41:05 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <3OCT199217481361@rosie.uh.edu> cosc1871@rosie.uh.edu (92F06787) writes:
>
>Thanks for all who applied, but I my second question may have
>been incorrectly worded...
>
>  The chasing ship was at *warp* speed and the torpedoes impacted
>  the bow... even if the technology to withstand a photorp was
>  adapted to the chasing ship, should the extra energy from just
>  moving soo fast damage it?

I know what your thinking...but there would really be additional damage
only if the photon torpedo has some great mass. picture, for instance,
two cars hitting one another. if the first car (the "torpedo") impacts
the second, stationary, car, then the damage is a function of the speed
of the first car. on the other hand, if both cars are moving towards each
other, then the damage is a function of the sum of the speeds of both
cars. However, the torpedo is not a great mass that is being hurled,
it is a great explosive. If an explosive is detonated directly in front
of a stationary car, it will do just as much damage as if it is detonated
directly in front of a moving car.

william@cs.arizona.edu

	-	D	R	A	G	O	N	-
From: chan@nucleus.cuc.ab.ca (Mike Chan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Infantry Vehicals in ST?
Date: 28 Sep 92 18:42:43 MST
Organization: The Nucleus 16 Lines 403-531-9353 -CNet Amiga-

       I am making a Star Trek role plating game and I was wondering if there
is such things as ground infantry vehicals? I also wonder if they have
different kind of makes of Phasers. Like we have Smith and Wessons, so would
they have different kinds of phasers? How about aircraft and naval vessels do
they have does also? Does Star Fleet have some kind of intellegence division
like the CIA or the FBi or even Interpol. 

      Also why doesn't the crew members even recognise any earth Holidays? Like
Christmas or even easter? I mean they go and party on Worf's Right of Passage
and other stuff but what about the holidays? and what Exactly is the use of
Credits? wouldn't that cause greed again?

Data Chan
Student/ Major RPG and ST Fan
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dickenjd@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (DICKENJD)
Subject: Okudagram GIFs?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 07:41:00 GMT

	Are there any extant GIFs of Mike Okuda's displays/panel
designs? Would anyone be willing to try their hand at scanning
some in from the TNGTM? 

J. David Dickens . . . dickenjd@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: medic@hardy.u.washington.edu (Travis Lauricella)
Subject: Re: Distance in the Holodecks
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 01:22:27 GMT

cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Carlos A. Pero) writes:

>Fine. I can understand the holodeck would somehow "move" the occupant
>backwards in the room (if walking a great distance) so that they do not
>collide with the physical walls of the holodeck. Probably by shifting the
>holodeck-controllable ground like a treadmill. 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

I would think it would be a combination of the "treadmill" and a "hologram
wall" which the computer would put between the occupants.  For example, say
Worf and Data are in a holodeck with real dimensions of 50' by 50'.  They 
start back to back in the middle of the room (at (25,25) on a Cartesian
plane) and begin to walk away from each other at the same rate.  When they 
hit a certain point, a treadmill kicks in for both of them (which they don't
notice because of (I think this is an 'official' term) inertia dampeners.
A hologram wall drops down from (0,0) to (50,50).  Data, looking back, sees
a hologram of Worf walking away.  The computer mimics the actions of Worf so
that Data is able to communicate and observe his actions.  Worf, looking back
at data, sees a hologram of Data.  Of course, the holograms of Worf and Data
shrink so that the perspective is correct, along with their surroundings.

A graphic example:   +----------+
                     |         /|      
                     |       /  |
                     |  W  /  D |
                     |   /      |
                     |_/________|

where W and D are Worf and Data, the +, |, and - are the real walls, and the
/ is the hologram wall.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: wildcard@nevada.edu ( WildCard !!)
Subject: Re: Unanswered STNG question
Organization: Shdowland BBS, Q&A Division
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 22:06:06 GMT

>>>  1: Who cleans the ship?

As any military person will tell you: The enlisted men.

>>>  2: Why don't we ever see the bathrooms? Do they have
>>>bathrooms? 

You'd want your privacy and have the freedom to use the restroom without the
viewers at home seeing you! Jeez...
:)



                                    - WildCard !!

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ "For any conceivable question, no matter how bizarre, there is some twisted +
+  genius somewhere who has devoted his life to researching the answer."      +
+                               - C. Adams, _More_of_the_Straight_Dope_       +
+-------------------     wildcard@redrock.nevada.edu    ----------------------+
From: z_clarkmj@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Beaming Down... is it smart?
Date: 5 Oct 92 11:32:51 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <91552@netnews.upenn.edu>, worthm@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Michael A Worth) writes:
> Well, to add in my $.02 worth, I must agree that there is a serious flaw in
>  beaming down. If beaming down to an unknown planet isn't inherently dangerous,
> then I don't know what is. And yet the Enterprise consistently beams down it's
> most senior officers (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Piccard, Riker,Giordi, and Data).
> That is akin to having our four star Generals in the Marines be the first to storm an entrenched beach. Wouldn't the Enterprise have specialized teams of
> people specifically trained to beam down and collect data, then contact the 
> ship? Just a quick thought..
> 



Without the senior officers on away teams, where's the adventure in the show?

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: grady@world.std.com (Dick Grady)
Subject: Re: The Bathrooms in the Enterprise (Re: Unanswered S
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 04:47:24 GMT

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:
>>: 
>>Well, I don't know how to tell you this, and it might actually upset you,
>>though my intent is not to upset anyone, forbid that, but they no longer
>>use bathrooms on starships in the twenty-fourth century, unless the
>>transporter is out, for yes, 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.
>
>Think about what you would do if you were designing a starship.  To
>put in transporter-based commodes, you would need to allocate space
>above and below each living unit for the pattern buffers and the other
>necessary machinery.  Then you would have to arrange for high-capacity
>power conduits into each living quarters, probably increasing the
>load of the entire power distribution system.  

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.

-- 
            Dick Grady               grady@world.std.com

       Do-it-yourself Term Limits:  Re-elect NO-ONE !