HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Subject: Re: Transporting vs. duplicating 
Distribution: world
Organization: Keristor Systems
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90c (ka9q DIS 1.18, CC 1.18c)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 23:53:34 +0000


In article <Bz2DIG.Gzs@cup.hp.com> mears@cup.hp.com writes:

>One proposed Trek-theory behind ST's transporters is that they are able
>to cause Dirac jumps to happen, and to control how and where they happen.
>Thus, to transport someone or something, you cause every particle in the
>object to go through a controlled Direc jump to a spot in the universe
>where you want to transport to.  Theoretically, the destination of the
>Dirac jump could be anywhere in the universe, but the transporters have
>a limited range because the `beams' used to control the jumps and keep
>the object `in focus' at the destination can only be accurately held
>with a certain distance.

Sounds like the Infinite Improbability Drive to me <g>...

James Blish's use of it for 'instantaneous' communication was his own,
however, *not* Paul Dirac's.  ISTR that Blish's version used the Dirac
*pulse*, not the jump (a Dirac pulse is a signal of infinite level but
zero time, so that it still contains a finite energy).

In all of his Trek novelisations, Blish used his own technobabble - for
instance, the Enterprise was powered by Nernst fusion generators, not by
matter/antimatter ones.  And if he'd been able to get away with using
spindizzies for propulsion instead of warp drives, I'm sure he would
have <g>...

Not that I'm knocking Blish's books - his own ones I do find good (by
the standards of the time - his style is not as polished as later
authors).

***********************************************************************
*  chris@keris.demon.co.uk      *                                     *
*  chriscr@cix.compulink.co.uk  *  FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life)  *
*  100014.3217@compuserve.com   *                                     *
***********************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: bkuhn@cs.loyola.edu (Bradley " b " Kuhn)
Subject: Re: Who would win?
Organization: Loyola College in Maryland
	<92344.112214TMS139@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: 11 Dec 92 23:51:42

In article <92344.112214TMS139@psuvm.psu.edu> TMS139@psuvm.psu.edu writes:

>   Who would win?  The Borg or the amoeba-thing?  Ditka or a hurricane?
>   :)

Da - Borg!

:-)

--

 -- Bradley M. Kuhn    Computer Systems Development, Inc.

     INTERNET: bkuhn@cs.loyola.edu, bkuhn@loyola.edu, kuhn@cpwsca.psc.edu,
               rhlab!bkuhn@uunet.uu.net (take your pick :-)
     BITNET:   bkuhn@loyvax.BITNET
     UUCP:     ...uunet!rhlab!bkuhn
     SNAIL:    100 W. Cold Spring Lane, Box: 141, Baltimore, MD   21210
     VOICE:    (410) 617-(4343 || 4497), (x4343 || x4497 on Loyola Campus)
From: mcclaine@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Casey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Shield transport
Date: 16 Dec 92 03:13:34 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <724275096.AA04404@urchin.fidonet.org> Robert.Gergely@f300.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Robert Gergely) writes:
>*** Quoting S114510 to All dated 01-00-80 ***
>> >>Also, when the Genolan blocked the doors with the shields, how did 
>> the
>> Enterprise beam Scotty and Jordie through them?
>> 
>> ---
>>  * Origin: Fahrenheit 454 -- FidoNet <--> UseNet gateway
>(1:106/1024.0)
>
>You know I was wondering about that myself.. It shouldn't be possible to
>beam 
>with the shields up.. I bet the reason they did that is the writers
>couldn't 
>think of another way to get Geordie and Scotty out, so they bent the
>rules a 
>bit...

	Didn't the Genolan's shields collapse just before Geordi and Scott 
were beamed out?  I will have to watch the episode again to see about that.
If that is not the case, maybe O'Brien has more tricks up his sleeve than
we give him credit for.  He has beamed through shields before, you know!


	_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/    NEW FOR 1993: 
	_/     _/  _/       _/     _/   The Ronald Reagan Commemorative 
	_/     _/  _/       _/                    Typewriter
	_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/   _/              
	_/   _/    _/       _/          This is the one you've been waiting 
	_/    _/   _/       _/     _/   for; the only one with no memory 
	_/     _/  _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/  	and no colon!
	Robert E. Casey  (mcclaine@hardy.u.washington.edu)
From: Rim_Admin%Galactic_Rim@uu0570.foggybottom.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Holodecks
Date: 20 Dec 92 21:50:52 GMT
Organization: Foggy Bottom / Washington, D.C.

well, some of the stuff on the holodeck is just holograms, but some other stuff
is actually replicated, once out of the holhdeck it is not under computer
control anymore... 
Foggy Bottom - your FirstClass Mac connection in Washington, DC
From: kkepkep@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (DragonClaw)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: more ropes...
Date: 20 Dec 92 15:59:31 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


  Oh come on. If they were afraid that the Cardassians would detect the
 anti grav field then what was all that deal with the use of phasers?
 Worf blew part of a hole with his phaser, i am sure the Cardassians
 should have some kind of scanning system to detect sudden energy bursts
 within a given region. Also it does not necesarily have to be anti grav
 botts. A simple mechanism on the harness would do it, then Crusher would
 not complain about the climbing. By the way Worf is afraid of bats????
 :)

								DC
From: jcharpak@acs.bu.edu (Joseph Charpak)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Harlan Ellison's Elastic Time Theory
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:24:13 GMT
Organization: Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

I hate to be a nudge but isn't the original version of City on
the Edge of Forever considered *really* non-canon since they
messed around with the plot and technology so much that it 
hardly resembled the final version anymore so it can't be
considered like one of the episodes?

Just asking...

Joe.

No .sig so shoot me (phasers on kill, shields up)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: petitc@vccnw04.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: Einstein and Warp Speed
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 05:02:16 GMT

cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu (Colin J. Wynne) writes:

>Basically, as Einsteinian mechanics have overtaken and subsumed Newtonian
>mechanics, one must simply accept the assumption that Zephram Cochrane
>discoveried a set of Subspace theories such that relativity holds for
>sublight velocities, yet allow for FTL travel forward in time.  As a
>mathematical example, I would suggest considering the Quaternary group of
>complex operators, which relate to the complex numbers roughly as the
>complex numbers do to the real numbers.  Thus, it would be conceivable for
>FTL values to be solved as imaginary numbers in one sense, but real values
>in another, where Einstein would be a Complex projection of the valid
>Quaternary operators.  (I know, I know... all technobabble.  But I still
>think it's possible to just find a supertheory that == Relativity for
>sublight values).

  That'll work.  One way to think about it is to consider Subspace 'energy
levels' actually alternate dimensions--all of which are empty.  Also, each
'higher' dimension has its own velocity 'c' and therefore, has its own
time dilation effects, as you approach its 'c' (That's where fractional
warp figures come in).  So, going from Warp 6 to Warp 7 means entering the
next highest subspace energy level, where 'c' is still higher.  But,
there is contact with 'real' space at the bubble boundary---light 'climbs up'
the bubble to reach the ship.  The quantum drag effect results from the
bubble still touching real space---sort of the reason that cars don't go as
fast as planes (if they use the same amount of power).

  More technobabble, but I'm working on equations to back this up.  Geez,
now all I need is an FTL drive.  I'll let you know---in Stockholm, when I
make it work.  :&)

-- 
Now on sale, in Aisle 5 of the Divine Supermarket---Lives, and Clues.  Buy
yours now and avoid the rush!  They make great Christmas gifts!
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right
to say it."  - Voltaire.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: oberoc@bourbon.ee.tulane.edu (Tino W. Dai)
Subject: Re: How to Kill a Borg
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-18317]: bourbon
Organization: Signal and Image Processing Laboratory (SIMPL)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 03:09:45 GMT

How to kill a borg
1) Let them assimalate a bunch of people which split personalities

2)Beam hydrogen and a match over to the borg ship

3)Have the really cute Q (the girl) destory them

4)Beam Sam Donaldson over to them

5)Implant into the collective conscienciness the ganes:Tetris, SimCity,
  Wing Commander 1 and II, etc





Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: sweet@ug.cs.dal.ca (garth r sweet)
Subject: Re: Holodecks
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 21:11:20 GMT

Greg Tapolow (gtapolow@nyx.cs.du.edu) wrote:
> In article <_-n2p9n@rpi.edu> petitc@vccsouth04.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:
> >John_Bafford%Laughing_Dragon@uu0570.foggybottom.com writes:
> >

[stuff deleted]

> 
> Since the Holodeck works with Visual Holograms coupled with force field
> generation and possibly a little kick from the replicators and
> transporters, my Fooble has asked a question. Please do not flame either
> of us on the material of the question, it is asked in all seriousness. If
> a woman were to be involved in sexual relations while on the H-deck with a
> Hologram(ic person). Everything would be reproduced. Since the man's
> ejaculation can cause the fertilization of the egg. Would this occur?
> Would the egg stay fertile if the crewperson left the H-deck?
> 
> We've just looking for general discussion, if the question seems strange
> or misplaced, just let the thread die here and don't worry.
> 
> Thanx
> 	Greg

	The holodeck/replicators don't/can't reproduce any human tissue
or cells, the 'people' seen in the holodeck are not real only synthetic
replicas, mind you I think the synthetic sperm would stay in the women
when she left as quite often people leave the holodeck wet or with 
holodeck objects etc.

+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
+ Name : Garth Sweet        + "HELP ME! I've fallen and....and...and I     +
+ email: sweet@ug.cs.dal.ca +  kinda like it down here. GO AWAY!"          +
+ phone: 902-865-8987       +                                              +
+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley)
Subject: Re: More warp/s'date babble...
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:34:59 MST
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

MLINDROOS@FINABO.ABO.FI (Marcus Lindroos INF) writes:
>Agreed, but TNG could be more consistent.  They should have settled
>for a single warp scale and a single stardate system 25 years ago.

That probably would have been ideal, but you have to cut them some
slack.  Given all the non-technical problems they had to solve
(characterizations, settings, etc.) I think they were satisfied
with technology that just SOUNDED plausible.  I doubt they foresaw the
extent to which fans would demand rigorous explanations.

The problems we have now are in trying to retrofit the explanations
to the observed phenomena.  Early in both series things were done
which sounded plausible at the time, but which don't fit later
explanations.

For my purposes it isn't necessary that an explanation work for
everything we've seen.  I just simply smooth out the data a bit and
"forget" about the exceptions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Jay Windley  *  University of Utah  *  Salt Lake City
                    jwindley@asylum.cs.utah.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: mcclaine@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Casey)
Subject: Re: GRAV, ANTI GRAV, MASS HYSTERIA
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:42:01 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.150859.12923@bsu-ucs> 00pwgrice@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu writes:
>CONSIDERING THAT THE GRAVITY ON THE ENTERPRISE IS ARTIFICAL, IT WOULD
>BE ASSUMED THAT THE EMISSION OF GRAVITONS IN A CONTROLLED STATE HAS BEEN 
>HARNESSED. GIVEN THAT THE GRAVITY ( OR SIMULATION THEREOF ) ON THE ENT. IS
>AN ARTIFICIAL SORT, IT WOULD STAND TO REASON THAT YOU COULD DESIGN/FORGE 
>A WAVE TRANSPARENT MATERIAL/CIRCUIT TO AVOID THE EFFECTS OF THE ARTIFICIAL 
>GRAVITY. [ARTIFICIAL IN THAT IT IS NOT A BY-PRODUCT OF A MASS BODY]

	Well, I don't think anyone needs to speculate on that one.  If you 
	watch Star Trek IV, The Voyage Home, when Spock is undergoing his
	rapid-fire testing on Vulcan, the computer asks him to modify a 
	magnetic sine wave so that antineutrinos can penetrate but 
	antigravitons cannot.

	I would think that this is indication enough that gravitonic 
	technology is quite versatile indeed even in the 23rd century and
	thus your circuit, material science idea would be believable.


						Rob

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: petitc@vccnw02.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: GRAV, ANTI GRAV, MASS HYSTERIA
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 21:04:51 GMT

mcclaine@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Casey) writes:

>	Well, I don't think anyone needs to speculate on that one.  If you 
>	watch Star Trek IV, The Voyage Home, when Spock is undergoing his
>	rapid-fire testing on Vulcan, the computer asks him to modify a 
>	magnetic sine wave so that antineutrinos can penetrate but 
>	antigravitons cannot.

  Where in ST:IV is this part located?  I never saw such a part.
-- 
Now on sale, in Aisle 5 of the Divine Supermarket---Lives, and Clues.  Buy
yours now and avoid the rush!  They make great Christmas gifts!
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right
to say it."  - Voltaire.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: More warp/s'date babble...
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 17:28:06 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1992Dec14.133243.24967@abo.fi> MLINDROOS@FINABO.ABO.FI (Marcus Lindroos INF) writes:
>In <1992Dec13.211040.547@u.washington.edu> mcclaine@hardy.u.washington.edu writes:
[SNIP! - Remember, hit Return BEFORE you hit 75 columns!]
>>> Does this mean that the Enterprise-D's "continuing mission"
>>> of six years in fact has taken place over 18 years? Yes, but only
>>> in Earth time. The biological clocks aboard the ship still show
>>> that the crew and ship have aged only six years. 

>I erred a bit. The real range of stardates between "Encounter at Farpoint" and
>the end of the fifth season is "only" about 4800 days, or thirteen years. So
>you could say that the relatives back on Earth only age about twice as fast
>as their comrades on the Enterprise. 

Problem: Wesley has been in the academy 3 years, and is repeating
his second year. The clock on Earth and the clock on the
Enterprise agree completely on this score. 3000 stardates = 3
years. My best guess is that 1 stardate = ~8 hours, ie. a single
duty shift aboard a starship. Is there any canonical evidence
that 1 stardate = 24 hours? (If so, then they either skip
stardates, or the scale is complete hogwash which we already knew
anyway. :)

>Bzzztt! Where does it say that *MANNED* spacecraft have ventured some 10,000
>ly. into space?! All we know is that the Technical Journal map [which is 
>"canon" BTW as it was seen hanging on a wall in one episode] shows an area

Which episode? (Not debating, I'd just like to know.)

>covering most of the galaxy's spiral arms on our side of the Milky Way, some
>19% of all stars fit inside. So far, so good. But the 
>Klingon/Federation/Romulan border that have been drawn on the map afterwards 
>are courtesy of the people who wrote the manual - we don't know this from
>watching the TV series!

Very true. The Galaxy is _supposed_ to be big. Roddenberry wanted
Sternbach and Okuda to recalibrate the Warp scale so it couldn't
just be crossed in a matter of months at high Warp.

>> 	Would you guys like a reposting of Myerson's paper?  It is worth 
>> 	reading.  I will post it.

Personally, no. It was interesting technobabble, but it wasn't
'Treknobabble' to me. Part of the beauty of Treknology to me is
its internal consistancy, and saying "to hell with reality!".
Trying to justify most Treknology with real-world technology
misses the point, IMHO. :)

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: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Scale 1/1 1701A-impossible dream?: -)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 06:04:34 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <cTTLVB1w165w@tradent.wimsey.bc.ca> genius@tradent.wimsey.bc.ca (Michael Cooper) writes:
>Sounds like a great idea now.  I like the idea of building the thing 
>underground.  It makes it a lot more structurally sound.  
[snip]
>The ship itself would serve as a museum, 
>and there is no real need to see the outside (hence the underground 
>construction).  Yeah, what else could you have?

Well, I agree with many posters that, on its own, it wouldn't be
a money-making proposition. I do think, however, that as a 'theme
hotel' it could work. Now, Disney and Paramount are not exactly
close buddies, but if Disney did do it, as one of the DisneyWorld
theme hotels, it might be possible. The Swan and Dolphin, the
Contemporary ("Toaster in the Sky!"), Polynesian, Grand
Floridian, the Enterprise, Yacht & Beach... I can see it. :)

Basically, you'd be there for some real purpose (ie, having fun).
Staying on board the Enterprise would be an added frill. You can
construct underground... tho in Florida that might not be a good
idea. I suppose in California, where Disney is all but out of
surface space, it might be a necessity.

It would likely cost about the same to operate as the Grand
Floridian, but because you could host a vast number of people, it
might just make money. Most importantly, it would fit the Disney
DREAM - Disney Resort Experiences Are Magical. :)

Unfortunately, unless Eisner takes that $157 million (was that
the figure?) and buys Paramount.... methinks it just won't
happen.

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: cboerm48@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Boerma)
Subject: Re: whimpy photon torps
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 03:05:06 GMT

schlegel@cwis.unomaha.edu (Mark Schlegel) writes:


>One of the things that has bugged me about the ST TNG is that they portray 
>the torpedoes as being so weak (in the effects) while the manual seems
>to convey that they are a very high yield weapon.  For example, I watched
>the "Best of Both Worlds" episode (about Picard being captured and converted
>to a Borg) and there are some scenes of torpedoes being fired at the 
>Borg ship and even impacting on the surface of the cube.  The explosions
>were TINY.  If you calculate the energy and compare it nuclear yields in
>megatons, the torpedoes have a big yield (I dont know the conversion
>of megatons to Joules).  The original series did a better job with the 
>torpedoes as far as scaling the stated power with the effect.

Two things: Number one the Borg ship is HUGE! I mean did you look at it 
compared to the Enterprise (supposedly the biggest StarFleet ship)? And 
the Borg ship had shields that could stand the blast and much more. 
Remeber as well that the deflector weapon had no effect either.

	         Number two, you're not going to be exciting explosions in space.
vaccums tend not to yeild great looking explosions.


			CTB
--
Oh, I hate tryin' to be witty in these things!	   |
So I'm even going to try. And if you don't like it,|
Tough! 	(Thank you had have a nice day)	         |    cboerm48@calvin.edu
																   |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cboerm48@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Boerma)
Subject: Re: How to Kill a Borg; Transporter= terrible weapon
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:17:05 GMT

forman@cs.washington.edu (George Forman) writes:

>Since our guys were able to beam on and off their ship, then
>you could just beam all of their brains out into space (or energy).

>You could spend awhile locking on to all their brains, then 
>beam them out together.   Or beam out their power sources.
>Or could you beam some anti-matter into their living room?
>(or anti-beam the anti-matter.)

Nay, just pick up the phone while they're transfering data through subspace.
the line noise'll kill 'em

			CtB
--
Oh, I hate tryin' to be witty in these things!	   |
So I'm even going to try. And if you don't like it,|
Tough! 	(Thank you had have a nice day)	         |    cboerm48@calvin.edu
																   |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: petitc@vccsouth30.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 03:56:43 GMT

gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:

>In article <1ar2rsr@rpi.edu> petitc@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:
>: Hahaha!  Is THAT a commando team?  If that's the way 'commandos' work in the
>:future, it's no wonder people are saying that Starfleet's dying.

>Ever notice how when they go into dangerous situations they draw phasers
>*after* they transport?  The obvious strategy for survival would be to
>beam in, phasers drawn, in a circle facing outwards, and in a crouch
>position.

  Gee.  Maybe if we want to get jobs, we can find a time machine and beam into
the future and give them tactical information which seems to have been lost
over the years.  I can imagine the Want Ad now...

Wanted:  20th century barbarian to teach good tactical and survival techniques
for 24th century civilized people who keep getting killed in such situations.
Pay not applicable, and you can't return home.

  Any takers? :&)


-- 
Now on sale, in Aisle 5 of the Divine Supermarket---Lives, and Clues.  Buy
yours now and avoid the rush!  They make great Christmas gifts!
Cynicism is only realism projected into the future.
If your fondest wish is to fly, don't draw up plans for flippers.