HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: phuag@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr C J Tilbury)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Klingon Home World???
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Date: 19 Nov 1992 15:22:51 -0000
Organization: Computing Services, University of Warwick, UK
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: anise.csv.warwick.ac.uk
Summary: Good example about the Naming convention.
Keywords: Sol 3 is really Sol III

In article <fink2.722112639@alcor> fink2@alcor.concordia.ca (Gemini) writes:
>annie@fatboy.manassas.ibm.com writes:
>
>>|> after all are earth, tera and sol 3 different planets.
>
>>Uh, isn't "sol" the sun? 
>
>Yes, that's right. Sol is our sun, and our planet is the 3rd from the sun,
>hence:  Sol 3;  That's why the sun and its planets together are known as
>the Solar system, just like Rigel 6 is the 6th planet of the Rigel system.

Heh. This whole confusion is a good example of exactly why the convention
uses Roman Numerals.

	"after all are earth, terra and sol 3 different planets."

is less clear than
	
	"after all are earth, terra and sol III different planets."


Just my $4 trillion (and rising!) worth,
Chris.
From: gregm@planet10.WPI.EDU (Gregory M Marr)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Handicaped in Star Trek TNG.
Date: 23 Nov 1992 06:52:06 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: planet10.wpi.edu

In article <cboerm48.722490577@ursa> cboerm48@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Boerma) writes:
>This brings up an intersting point that I've often pondered. Other than for
>reasons of plot and such, why are there trasporter rooms? 
>
>I mean I've seen when there's a medical emergancy or something, they beam the
>people right to sickbay. I'm assuming what happens is that the trasporter beams
>them from the surface into the trasporter systems, then does a second beam to
>sickbay. I think they'd have to route it through the Trasporter systems, 
>couldn't go straight from the surface to sickbay.... But I'm getting off
>topic here.
>
>My point being, why don't they just beam the people from where ever they are 
>to where ever they need to go? Why waste the time for Riker to walk from the
>Bridge to the Room before trasport??
>
>Well go ahead and scream your answers in....
>
>
>			CTB
When someone is beamed from someplace other than a transporter room,
so some other place other than a transporter room, they are first
beamed into a transporter room, which takes x amount of energy. Then,
without being materialized, they are beamed to the final destination,
which also takes x amount of energy, so they end up using twice as
much energy. There are also other problems with transporting within
the ship. (I can't explain them, because I've never actually heard
them explained, just mentioned.) Unless it's a medical emergency or
some other extreme emergency, the time savings isn't worth the extra
energy required, and the extra risk.  It probably wouldn't be much of
an energy drain for just once, but if it happens regularly, these
energy drains add up. (especially when they are having problems
getting enough power where it is needed, i.e. shields, life support.)

-- 
|        |      W.P.I. Lens and Lights : Providing Professional Quality
|        |      Projection, Audio and Lighting for WPI and beyond since 1962.
| / _|_  | /    508/831-5595, Box 5498, 100 Institute Rd, Worcester, MA 01609
|/  \|   |/     lnl@wpi.WPI.EDU    Greg Marr - Secretary : gregm@wpi.WPI.EDU
From: lomasm@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Martin Lomas)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: An ANALOG computer: Possible??
Date: 15 Nov 92 16:12:02 GMT

In <1992Nov13.042412.29949@ncar.ucar.edu> jsloan@ncar.ucar.edu (John Sloan) writes:

>From article <1992Nov12.190145.8691@iscsvax.uni.edu>, by perdue4575@iscsvax.uni.edu:

>> Why not make an ANALOG computer?

><sigh> Please tell me that I'm not the only person who reads this
>newsgroup that's old enough to remember analog computers. I've even
>programmed one (although a more accurate one might be "wired"). Analog
>computers are thought to be obsolete, although in fact they are leading
>a healthy but fast fading life as embedded systems in such roles as
>engine management systems and various closed loop feedback systems
>(these particular ones are "hardwired", and hence perhaps not true
>general purpose analog computers). I also find neural networks to be
>strangly reminiscent of analog computers, in a discrete sorta way.

>If you'll excuse me, I'm gonna put my teeth in and maybe watch a little
>bit of Mary Tyler Moore on Nick at Night.


Analogue computers suffer noise/speed/accuracy/programming problems compared
with digital computers.  The idea of accurate long term analogue memory
would be most interesting (:-))!

Martin.
From: det@phlan.sw.stratus.com (David Toland)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Re: Why is Data so limited?
Keywords: Bioengineering, Spock, Vulcans
Date: 18 Nov 92 13:33:51 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: phlan.sw.stratus.com

In article <74@zog.UUCP> SysOp@zog.UUCP (Zog the Monster) writes:
>Tho non-canon, the book "_Spock's_World_" goes into a fair amount of detail
>how Spock was genenitcally engineered by the Vulcans.  After all Vulcans and
>Humans are not genetically compatible, so he had to have a little "help".

Certainly no one with even a basic knowledge of biology could even suggest
that Spock could have resulted from simple sexual relations between a
human and a Vulcan.  The two species don't even have the same blood
chemistry (Cu based vs Fe based)!  They certainly don't have the same
chromosome count (necessary for sexual reproduction), and I'd be surprised
if Vulcans even have the same nucleotides in whatever passes for DNA.

I can hardly even imagine how they had Spock even WITH advanced genetic
technology!



-- 
det@phlan.sw.stratus.com   |  "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
                           |  that doon with."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: forman@cs.washington.edu (George Forman)
Subject: Transporter solves all (was: Handicaped in Star Trek TNG.)
Summary: transporter is nifty & could be used to solve lots of problems
Keywords: transporter, locks, risks
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 00:38:08 GMT
Expires: 12-Dec


> Why don't they just beam the people from there ever they
> are to wherever they need to go? [Why walk?]  -- cboerm48@ursa.calvin.edu

Good idea.  Technically feasible, but the risk seems excessive
when walking/turbo-lifts will do fine most of the time.
The transporter has a low MTBF-- we've seen plenty of transprter 
axidnts. (Whoops, a few letters didn't materialize.)

Also: availability.  The transporters go down regularly & don't
seem to work in radiation fields.  Wouldn't want to be trapped in
one part of the ship when the power browns out.  So, they'd have 
to have the turbo-lifts anyway, & making them fast enough makes
it practical/cost effective to use them for all regular transportation.


** But why don't they use the transporter to solve a lot of their other
problems:   beam the bad guy who's in control of the bridge into the brigg.
Beam the hand/phaser of the aggressor into space.  Beam the M-4 computer
off the ship.  Beam the anti-matter into space before the breach. (?)
Beam the Enterprise away from the Romulan conflict. :)


Heck, they could solve a lot of problems with really cheap 
technology: like a lock (combo/voice print/badge id) on Engineering
and the Bridge.  And in Jeffrey's tubes.   When they get a guest
on board, they could ask the computer to track them (as standard
procedure, since so many guests turn out to abuse their privileges
on board by stealing dilithium crystals & taking control of the Enterprise
from engineering...rotten lot) & report on anything suspicious-- why
do we hire a security officer anyway?  To maintiain security.  I'm
glad he doesn't do his job, though, because it provides for much 
more interesting episodes....otherwise ST would be like Adam-12.
Arresting guests for stealing dilithium crystals again.


Isn't Star Trek fun?  How long till we can fly our own (simulated) missions?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cboerm48@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Boerma)
Subject: Re: Handicaped in Star Trek TNG.
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:49:37 GMT

David_Woodsworth@mindlink.bc.ca (David Woodsworth) writes:

>> Jonathan Howard Krivit writes:
>>
>>         I read somewhere that the design of the bridge was specifically
>> created to be "open access" - I only wonder how the transporter can be
>> wheelchair accessed - with those steps up to the platform.

>Seems to me that the transporter, of all things, does not require wheelchair
>access ... after all, if you want to get off the transporter platform, just
>have yourself beamed off it to somewhere else.

This brings up an intersting point that I've often pondered. Other than for
reasons of plot and such, why are there trasporter rooms? 

I mean I've seen when there's a medical emergancy or something, they beam the
people right to sickbay. I'm assuming what happens is that the trasporter beams
them from the surface into the trasporter systems, then does a second beam to
sickbay. I think they'd have to route it through the Trasporter systems, 
couldn't go straight from the surface to sickbay.... But I'm getting off
topic here.

My point being, why don't they just beam the people from where ever they are 
to where ever they need to go? Why waste the time for Riker to walk from the
Bridge to the Room before trasport??

Well go ahead and scream your answers in....


			CTB
From: wolle@uni-paderborn.de (Wolfgang)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Holodeck
Date: 21 Nov 1992 20:36:14 GMT
Organization: Uni-GH Paderborn, Germany
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gold.uni-paderborn.de

In article <1992Nov16.150447.21964@williams.edu>, 92bbb@williams.edu (Bradford Behr) writes:


|> 
|> Two people together in holodeck program. They see the same nearby
|> replicated objects and faraway projected holographic images. Then,
|> they turn and start walking away from each other. When they approach
|> the bounds of the actual holodeck room, the holodeck computer throws
|> up a wall (replicated or holographic) between them, such that each
|> person is in their own "sub-holodeck" and can operate independently.
|> If necessary, a holographic representation of the other person off in
|> the distance is included. For more than 2 people, more than 2
|> subdivisions of the deck.
|> 
|> Does this seem like it'll work?
|> 
|> 
|> -- Brad
|> 
|> 


Hm, I thought about those holodecks myself and what you said is basicly the same I think about it. But there is still something I can't explain:
what happens if you keep on running in one direction untill you reach the walls of the holodeck ? 
Will you be beamed back a couple of meters each time you approach the walls ? Maybe your feet don't touch the ground at all and you're actually walking on an energyfield of some kind and you will be gently pushed back when you get too close to the wall ...???
Or maybe ....  Or could it be, that ... ???

Does anybody have an answer to this problem ?


          Bye

              Wolfgang.


                   ```
                  (o o)
**************oOO**(_)**OOo**********************************************
* Email:                      * "There is a theory saying the universe  *
* wolle@uni-paderborn.de      *  will explode and instantly be replaced *
* You can also reach me as    *  by something even more bizzare and un- *
* Ged@PaderMud                *  explainable at the very moment someone *
* (Lord of Dragonland)        *  should find out what it is there for   *
* The world of PaderMud is at *  and why it exits.                      *
* telnet 131.234.2.32 3000 or *  - There is also another theory saying  *
*        192.26.174.1 3000    *  that this has already happened."       *
*  "Don't dream it - be it !" *  ( Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy )   *
*************************************************************************
From: drew@tcom.stc.co.uk (Scooby Doo)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Orientation
Date: 16 Nov 1992 13:51:53 GMT
Organization: BNR Europe, New Southgate, London N11 1HB.
NNTP-Posting-Host: bnsgs200.bnr.co.uk

In article <1992Nov12.153823.60776@cc.usu.edu> sl6wv@cc.usu.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.213738.20469@yang.earlham.edu>, uril@yang.earlham.edu writes:
>> In article <26106@optima.cs.arizona.edu>, william@cs.arizona.edu (gniltreH mailliW) writes:
>>> In article <192@newave.newave.mn.org> john@newave.newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:
>>>>Use the right hand rule from physics, and your thumb will point to the

	I'm sure that in a number of episodes, the Captain (eg. Kirk) has said
something along the lines of 'change course to one four three mark two'

Assuming that 143 is akin to a heading and that 'mark 2' might have something
to do with the attitude of the ship this implies they may have somekind of 'map'
or atleast someway of orientating themselves. Though perhaps this could be
a relative figure, changing course 143 degrees from the current course....

Drew.

Independant Rationaliser. 

--
	UK : (081) 945 3726		| The car in front is a Toyota...
Drew	ESN : 6 730 3726	    	| But not for long!! 
Wagar	US : +44 81 945 3726	    	| 
	Internet : drew@bnr.co.uk	| GTi drivers do it faster!
Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 11:35:22 -0500 
From: Joseph Wei-Cheng Ku <JoeKu+@CMU.EDU>
Subject: buying a sound card.


Hello. I finally decided to buy a sound card. But I have no idea which
one to get. I know that sound blaster is sort of the standard now, but I
heard that, well, it sucks. I am currently looking at the pro-audio
spectrum 16. 
Heard that it's SB compatible. Can anyone comfirm this?
How is the sound quality of this card compared with the SBpro? 
I would also like to get a CD-rom sometime in the future, so do I need a
seperate scsi controller to have CD-ROM drives?

finaly, Is it worth spending the extra bucks? 

I know that this topic has come up before, but I wasn't paying attetion then.
Any help is appreciated.
thanks.
-jk
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Time Travel (was Re: Not the Technical Manual Sections 1 and 2)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 20:37:25 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

[snip - discussion about screwing with the past & chaos theory]

Ran across a rather interesting quote in _Children_of_Dune_ a few
days ago:

	"It is not the present which influences the future, thou
	fool, but the future which forms the present. You have it
	all backward. Since the future is set, an unfolding of
	events which will assure that future is fixed and
	inevitable." (Leto Atreides II, p278, _Childen_of_Dune_,
	Frank Herbert)

Sums up my thoughts on the topic rather nicely. :)

Joshua
|         A shimmering net undulating like an infinite borealis.             |
|                                                  - Chapterhouse: Dune      |
|                                                                            |
| jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca  Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary |
Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:40:40 -0500 
From: Joseph Wei-Cheng Ku <JoeKu+@CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Enterprise computer system

 
>So, does the Enterprise-D computer run unix, dos, or windows?  And, where can
>I get a copy of whatever it is they use?
 
None of the above! it runs on OS/2; the operating system of the future!

heeheee heee hee

-jk
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 09:10:27 EST
From: <ACS110@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: ? about DNA and the little People

It is at least concievable that DNA sequences do actualy change
durring a persons life. We have no knowledge of such an affect but
then again we've never tried to look for it.

Or it could be Trek-nobabble.

                             --A.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.tech:6335 rec.arts.startrek.current:18648
From: sl3nf@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Why is Data so limited?
Date: 16 Nov 92 18:23:23 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1du8cqINNm0j@transfer.stratus.com>, savoia@sw.stratus.com (Rick Savoia) writes:
> In article <1992Nov12.125733.17547@umbc3.umbc.edu>, cs202144@umbc8.umbc.edu (cs202144) writes:
>> 
>> Anyway the Romulans are really into bio-eng and all that and so are the Vulcans
>> to a less drastic extent. How do you think they made Spock? That took alot of
>> genetic manipulation! 
> 
> They didn't MAKE Spock. 

	Well, that depends on your sorce.  If you take the position that the
novels are an extention of the Star Trek universe, instead of separate from it,
then they did _make_ Spock.  In the novel Spock's World, the author goes into
some detail as to exactly how difficult it was to genetically engineer things
so that Sarek and Amanda would be able to have a child together.

         "Time well spent is a waste indeed."
                 sniggerfardimungus
                in%"sl3nf@cc.usu.edu"
         The usual disclaimers apply anywhere 
              you can find a sticky spot.
From: putzolu@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu (David Putzolu)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Warp Shield Dropping
Date: 16 Nov 92 00:51:28 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Davis

In article <mpp1x8k@rpi.edu> petitc@rpi.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.043103.12751@usl.edu>, tlb2665@usl.edu (Burleigh Thomas L) writes:
>|> In article <19115@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> putzolu@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu (David Putzolu) writes:
>|> >In article <5-n13ml@rpi.edu> petitc@rpi.edu writes:
>|> >>
>|> >>  If Warp fields are senesitive to gravity wells, then why doesn't the E need
>|> >>to drop its shields before going into warp? 
>|> >
>|> >What? How are these related? I have never heard of regular shields
>|> >affecting gravity. Also, I don't recall having seen the enterprise
>|> >entering warp with the shields on - but I am not sure. Still, what
>|> >is your point?
>  No, I never said that there was NO shielding when IN warp, but during that
>period when the Warp Field is being generated, and we aren't yet in subspace,
>you can't have shields on during that time.

I believe that it IS possible to have shield up when going into Warp -
witness the time that the Big E was in battle with the two Ferengi
run klingon ships recently - Riker specifically said, 'take us out
of here' and Worf said 'warp engines are unavailable', and all the 
while the shields were up (although damaged). Also, remember the time
that the E was battling the Borg - they broke off & entered warp,
but never lowered shields.

"Anti-Viral Software? Nah, I'm careful enough"     ______-==-______
                                       ____-------=----------------=-------____
                 ________________  _ _-    --------________________--------
                (______________(_||_) _______ /
                   /_____/_____            _-
Ex-Capt David Putzolu          \__________-
U.S.S. Yamato
Senior, CS & Psych, U.C.Davis - putzolu@cs.ucdavis.edu - my opinion
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: henry@cerberus.bhpese.oz.au (Henry Chatroop)
Subject: 'TNG Warp' to 'c' conversion
Organization: BHP, Newcastle, Australia
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 08:45:38 GMT

I am currently writing a program to convert 'TNG Warp' to multiples of
'c' (speed of light or 'cochranes'). For example, if I type in '5.0'
it should return with '214.0'.

The only good reference I have found is the "Star Trek - The Next
Gereration Technical Manual" which on page 55 has some conversions
and a simple graph. However I am interested in a more accurate
representation, especially in the > Warp 9.0 region.

Therefore are there any 'official' tables/formulas available to
convert 'TNG Warp' to 'c'?

Thanks in advance.

Henry Chatroop
From: kubler@stein.u.washington.edu (Michael Kubler)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: whoops
Date: 19 Nov 92 04:12:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov19.041211.23342
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle










Well, my delurking isn't going so well sorry about the   
bandwidth wasted with my last post I hope this one works...
I am looking for the treknobabble answer to how they
explain TOS episode (mirror, mirror) I think it was "bad"
Spock with a beard,... I am running a TNG game and want to
torture my players a bit
Emailed response anyone?
kubler@u.washington.edu
Michael
Thanks
 
Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.tech:6336 rec.arts.startrek.current:18661
From: varhus@waltz.seas.upenn.edu (Kristofor A Varhus)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Handicaped in Star Trek TNG.
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:22:57 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Nov16.115431.6375@gw.wmich.edu> 31babik@gw.wmich.edu writes:
>[deleted]
>
>Considering that they are able to transport people to and from anywhere on 
>the Enterprise (as we've seen in a number of episodes), there would be no 
>need to get a wheel-chaired bound person up onto the transporter pad...
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>                         Lisamarie Babik
>                      31babik@gw.wmich.edu
> CS MAJORS:  We do more after 11:00 p.m. than most people do all day.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Now what I'd like to know is: why do they even have transporter pads at all?
It doesn't seem that they would need them due to the fact that what I believe
was called "parallel transportation" is possible, that is, transporting to and
from any point on the ship.  Even if the pads are necessary to give the
transporter enough power, the people/things to be transported do not have to
be on them.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kristofor A. Varhus			|       THIS SPACE AVAILABLE
varhus@eniac.seas.upenn.edu		|        E-MAIL IMMEDIATELY!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: CT16@music.mus.polymtl.ca (Martin Filteau)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: analog computers
Date: 20 Nov 92 03:01:38 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal


There's not much interest in building a general purpose analog
computer today mainly due to too small noise margins.. etc.

However, some hardware implementation of neural nets use
analog multipliers to increase through-output.  And in a sens,
I think we'll see analog computers in the form of neural networks
in the future...

Another interesting application for analog devices will
certainly be fuzzy logic controllers...

But for general purpose computers, we'll be stick with
digital ones for some time...

                  Martin Filteau (undergraduate student)
                  Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal
                  Dept. of Electrical Eng.