HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: Phasers; edited, updated and reposted
Organization: Aston University
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 08:53:06 GMT

CXMP@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CXMP) writes:
: 
: On a related topic, there's the Doomsday Machine.  I remember Commodore
: Decker saying that the Doomsday Machine's beam was "pure antiproton,
: absolutely pure!"  Well, he was in shock, otherwise he'd have realised
: this isn't possible. :) *However*, a proton-antiproton beam could *is*
: possible and it *would* create radioactive elements.  No wonder Decker
: was in shock!  This is like a munition expert in the 40's hearing first
: learning about the atom bomb!  Of course, a proton-antiproton beam
: would only be used as a Doomsday device for this reason.  It is easy
: to imagine that it might be very inefficient, thus the Doomsday
: Machine's need to refuel.

Why will an antiproton beam not work, beyond that it is charged?
Even though the particles in the beam will diverge (less than in a
positron or electron beam, due to the particles being more massive)
They will still do a lot of damage when they hit something.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home)                     |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: fangs@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Wesley Lewellen IV)
Subject: Re: More evidence for UFP cloak!!!
Keywords: cloak
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 23:38:04 GMT

In article <goudswaa.717541357@sfu.ca> goudswaa@fraser.sfu.ca (Peter Goudswaard) writes:


>carrying this further, he could just as easily have asked for and
>received all the system programming, and a sample of the cloaking specs.
>
>Just a thought.
>

Yes, but . . . I can tell you the complete specifications on, say, a
free electron laser (i.e. pulse duration, peak and average power output,
maximum permissible beam strength without sustaining mirror damage, duty
cycle, etc. etc. ad nauseum) without telling you how to *build* the
bloody thing.  The specs of something like a cloak would most likely tell
you how effective a cloaking device it is, what it covers, what it will
and won't hide against (I wonder if it's proof against neutrinos? :-) and
so forth.  This does _not_ tell you how to build it, though, and if the
Echo Papa 607 was being sold for a profit, in a competitive field, the
actual cloaking mechanism would most likely be not be revealed, and
in fact would probably come in a "black box" with "no user-servicable
parts inside - opening this case will void the warranty and / or detonate
a 5 kT thermonuclear charge" label to protect their trade secrets.

That's not to say, of course, that the Federation couldn't just stock
up on a lot of black boxes...

- JWL IV
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: bm560@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas D. Salyers)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: ST:TNG Communicators
Date: 30 Sep 1992 18:27:29 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


    As far as the communicators go--my guess is that they "know"
when a person has finished by monitoring the tone and direction
of his or her voice.  Studies have shown that people's voices
change when they speak into microphones or telephones--they're
directed differently...

-- 
Tom Salyers    "Now is the Windows of our disk contents
Denver, CO      Made glorious SimEarth by this son of Zork."
IRCnick: Aqualung              --from _Richard v3.0_
From: brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: STTNG .au sounds
Date: 27 Sep 92 18:36:55 GMT
Reply-To: brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot)
Organization: Vidiot's Hangout

In article <kev.717557632@sol> kev@sol.acs.unt.edu (Kevin W. Mullet) writes:
<I'm quite interested in getting legitimate high-quality copies of the
<the sounds of the various computer alerts/alarms in STTNG.  I'd like to
<use these as alerts in my network management station.
<
<Is it safe to assume that copies made from broadcast without prior
<authorization are violations of copywrite?

Yep.

<I guess I'm asking two questions:
<
<1) Are the only legal copies of the STTNG computer console alerts those
<   that might be obtained from ILM?

ILM has nothing to do with ST:TNG, Paramount is the copyright holder.
-- 
      harvard\                          spool.cs.wisc.edu!astroatc!vidiot!brown
Vidiot  ucbvax!uwvax..........!astroatc!vidiot!brown
      rutgers/            INTERNET:vidiot!brown%astroatc.UUCP@spool.cs.wisc.edu
                                   brown@wi.extrel.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke)
Subject: Re: Computer / Saucer Separation
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:09:56 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.221434.24469@sol.UVic.CA> uhissen@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>  The main idea of this notation, I suppose, was that the actual ship was the habitation area, the other part is simply and engine assembly with a shell put around it for easier access.

Officially, we know almost nothing about the secondary hull.
Semi-officially, in Franz Joseph's blueprints (approved by Gene R.),
there are living quarters and life support in the secondary hull, though
most are in the primary hull.

>  I seem to remember the the "A" also being able to seperate but not to reatach out of drydock.

Gene said it could happen, but we never saw it.
-- 
   And thither came Conan, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, to tread the jeweled 
   thrones of the Earth beneath his sandaled feet.  --THE NEMEDIAN CHRONICLES 
hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu             _V_a_l_h_a_l_l_a BBS, 217-352-3682, WWIV4.21, 14.4k
From: jgm@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (John McBride--in my own private Idaho)
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1992 16:24:35 GMT
Subject: Re: Unanswered STNG questions
Organization: HP-Boise, ID
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech

>		2: Why don't we ever see the bathrooms?  Do they have 
>bathrooms?  Maybe they all take high-tech constipation pills, pills that 
>last a lifetime.  Do they just go to the holodecks and say, "Computer, 
>toilet!", and a toilet appears?  Or showers?  Man, they must really stink. 
>(Worf!! Pweoooweee!)  If there are bathrooms, then where does all the 
>waste go to?  Powers the ship?

I heard a rumor in r.a.s (unsubstantiated, of course) that we would see
or at least hear of (maybe flushing a la Archie Bunker?) a bathroom this year.
Then again, maybe I am all wet (so to speak).  We just saw a kitchen in
ST:TUC (The Undiscovered Canon-Machine), so maybe Paramount feels like
we have had our ration of the mundane aspects of a ship for a while.  
I guess we will just have to see.


John McBride
email:  ...hplabs!hpdml99!jgm  or jgm@hpdml99.boi.hp.com
       ----------------
      |                |
     /------------------\
    | Q: Are we not Men? |
   /----------------------\
  |                        |
  --------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Collisions!
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 92 02:16:14 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <23264@optima.cs.arizona.edu> william@cs.arizona.edu (William E. Hertling) writes:
>>|>   A) What happens when two equivalent size ships collide with
>>|>      shields up at sub-light?  Head-on?  Off-angle?  Chasing?
>>   It would be similar to the reaction of two magnets interacting at 
>>their common poles - they would sort of bounce off. Damage would 
>>correspond to the force of the collision.
>Unless the mass of the ships was greater than the shields capacity
>to deflect, in which case there would be actual ship to ship contact.
>I don't think that the shields on the Enterprise would protect 
>against another galaxy class starship for example, but I really don't
>know the specific mass/force and shield capacity.

Which brings an interesting idea to mind. Get a big ship. Like,
Borg-Cube size. Warp towards another ship, drop to impulse with
shields on full, and RAM the other ship, then warp away. You may
suffer damage, depending on how big they are, but if the ship is
anything like the Galaxy class, the impact should rip apart the
ship. Warp away to avoid the explosion when the antimatter pods
rupture.

Obviously, this isn't any good if you want to assimilate the
people onboard the ship, but gets rid of those pesky individuals.
:)

An improvement they should build into the Nova class - a 'jump
drive', rather like the manuver used in 'War Games' (was that it?
you know the one) where the ship with non-functional warp-drives
manages to skip away for half a second. If the saucer section of
the Nova class was able to generate a temporary warp field, it'd
be great in case of catastrophic damage to the secondary hull.
Assuming of course the Nova class is based on the traditional 2
hulls/2 nacelles design, like I favour. :)

Joshua
From: hugo@harlqn.co.uk (Hugo Tyson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Borg Scout Ship
Date: 29 Sep 92 14:41:43 GMT
	<92Sep08.161509.30158@acs.ucalgary.ca>
	<1992Sep8.204729.16709@leland.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Sep8.232554.14129@unislc.uucp> <1992Sep9.203847.9362@bsu-ucs.uucp>
	<RANNOU.92Sep16010236@watson.info.polymtl.ca>
Organization: Harlequin Limited, Cambridge, England


Dunno if I'm well behind this thread or not, but:

A (British) ton is 20 hundredweight (20 cwt.), and a cwt is 8 stones, a stone
is 14 pounds (14 lbs.) where a lb. is 16 ounces, same as in the US, and the oz.
are similar too.

So a ton is 20 * 8 * 14 == 2240 lbs.
A tonne, as it can be splet, (metric that is) is 1000 kg. =~= 2200 lbs.

They're a lot closer than you'd think.

	- Huge
--

Any opinions herein are mine only.  Even the postcode may be wrong
   ---------------------  Hugo Tyson  -------------------------
Harlequin Limited, Barrington Hall, Barrington, Cambridge, CB2 5RG
England;    Tel.  (UK) 0223 872522  (International) +44 223 872522
   ------------------------------------------------------------
If God/Darwin had meant us to use single-button mice,
     He would have given us prehensile noses.
From: ajm@seqp4.sequoia.com (A.J.Madison)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: stars flying bye
Summary: One explanation is that it is not stars
Date: 30 Sep 92 14:53:50 GMT
Organization: Sequoia Systems Inc., Marlboro, Mass.

In article <1992Sep25.144208.8915@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, chrstie@ccu.umanitoba.ca (William John M. Christie) writes:
> 
> Try using an old shareware program for the Mac (Classic or lower model,
> may not work on II's) called Orion.  It has the 3D positions of stars
> within a 32 light-year radius of the Sun.  If you move from one end of
> the sphere to the other in order to see stars move (like in the screens
> of ST:TOS or TNG) you have to travel at a few light-years per second (
> Most warp drives if I recall can only travel at kw**3, where k is some
> constant and w**3 is the warp factor cubed (from the old Star Fleet
> Technical Manual), which even at warp nine will give you nowhere near 
> the neccessary velocity to see the stars warp.

I have forgotten the exact source of the explanation, but one suggestion has
it that those colored streaks, most of them white, are not stars at all.  We
are seeing various photonic emissions from interactions with the warp bubble
and objects being deflected from the path of the ship.  The logic went
something like this:

1. Even at extremely high warp numbers, the Big-E would "pass" stars at very
low frequencies.
2. Therefore those are not stars we see wizzing by.
3. Deep space is not really a complete vacuum, therefore there are many other
candidate objects that could be seen zooming by.  Some of them big, like
comets or asteroids, some of the small, like interstellar dust and hydrogen
atoms.
4. Since the Big-E seems to devote alot of power to the warp drive, the
shields, and the main deflectors, it is reasonable that various interactions
with these fields would result in imagry in the visible spectrum inside the
warp bubble.

Of course the truth is that Gene just wanted scenes of an interstellar craft
hurtling through deep space at some almost unimaginable speed.  He also knew
we can't hear anything in space, but the shots of the Big-E going by in
silence was just too boring, thus the "whoosh" and "roar".
-- 
when everyone is out to get you, being paranoid is just good thinking.
         - Dr. Johnny Fever <in other words, standard disclaimer>
A.J. Madison                                           ajm@sequoia.com
Sequoia Systems Inc.
From: chuck@scilab.lonestar.org (Chuck Knight)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: ST:TNG Communicators
Date: 1 Oct 92 04:25:46 GMT
Organization: Science Lab; Arlington, Texas

Well, it used to be (first two seasons at least) that each of the
characters would touch the communicator to end the transmission...the 
same way that they initiate communication.  But then, they just started 
to not "end" their conversations anymore, and it's degenerated into what 
you see today.

     -- Chuck Knight
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: protec@cwis.unomaha.edu (Mathew Enenbach)
Subject: Re: Lights under viewscreen
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:23:28 GMT

     Isn't it obvious?  That's the galactic radar detector.

-- 
----
Mathew M. Enenbach
protec@cwis.unomaha.edu
University of Nebraska at Omaha
From: wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Retrofit Technology(and Excelsior)
Date: 5 Oct 92 10:27:02 EDT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Cornell University

In article <BvMy4E.3vI@news.cso.uiuc.edu>,
ses52823@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Sven E. Skoog) writes: 
> While we're on the subject of 'outdated technologies'...
> 
> STIII:TSFS made the Excelsior out to be the hottest thing since Tribbles.
> Isn't it a little less than plausible that such a vaunted vessel would be
> downgraded to the several-year task of 'examination of gaseous anomalies'?

Sure, officially they were studying "gaseous anomolies" ... right along the
Klingon border.  It seems plausible that they were also doing some sort of
border surveillence mission.  After all, US Navy nuclear subs regularly
conducted "oceanographic research"  right of the Soviet coastline. ;-)

-- 
Tom Schoene
wwo@cornella.cit.cornell.edu  -or- wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Whenever you're holding all the cards why does everyone else turn
out to be playing chess?"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: trw@spl1.spl.loral.com (Tim R Witort)
Subject: Re: Distance in the Holodecks
Organization: Loral Software Productivity Laboratory
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:31:00 GMT

In article <BvGKFx.EEK@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Carlos A. Pero) writes:

[couple of lines deleted]

|> 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've wondered the same thing. The holodeck is only about the size of a 
large room, so how could two people go in there to... say play frisbee
on a big grassy meadow? I suppose the holodeck would give each person a
holographic image of the other such that they seemed far appart:

                          |  |
        A                 |  |         B
        o---------------->|  |<---------o
        /\                |  |         /|
        ||                |  |          /\
                          |  |
                          |  |
                          |  |
                          ^  ^
     A's holographic______|  |______ B's holographic image of A
     image of B

They'd only be 20 feet apart, but they'd seem to be 100 feet
apart to each other. Not to much for the holodeck computer
I think.

-- Tim
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: Philip.Banks@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Philip Richard Banks)
Subject: Re: Computer / Saucer Separation
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:51:30 GMT

In article <dnrzc=d@rpi.edu> petitc@rpi.edu writes:
>
>  Hmmmm...I always thought the secondary hull was a 'outer layer' and a
>literal second hull, to absorb shocks and prevent them from affecting the
>crew.  So, it sorta looks like this:
>
>Crew Lives Here    |  (Hull)   |  (Secondary Hull)       Space

   I kinda hope not.. The last ship that had that hull scheme seemed to have 
real trouble avoiding icebergs.... :-)

   Philip
-- 
 Philip R. Banks  pbanks@comp.vuw.ac.nz (An Arc owner with a mission)  @@@@@/|
    (Quite what mission I am not too sure yet. But I do have one!)     @@@@/#|
 "There may be an om in moment,but there's very few folk in focus!"    @@@/--|
	--'Hallowed be thy Name' by Emerson,Lake & Palmer.             @@/###|
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: Disruptors
Organization: Aston University
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 08:47:08 GMT

fangs@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Wesley Lewellen IV) writes:
: 
: I heard once that the *hand* disruptors are actually sonic devices, using
: ultrasound (or whatever) to break apart intermolecular bonds.  Clearly this
: does not work in a vacuum, though . . . .  I also remember hearing that
: in Klingon, the word for "disruptor" has a literal translation as "the shake-
: it-till-it-falls-apart weapon" - almost as bad as German!  :-)

This is from the book the final reflection.

I think you may have mis-read this it is something like klingons use
hand held sonic weapons as well.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home)                     |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |
From: william@cs.arizona.edu (William E. Hertling)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Computer / Saucer Separation
Date: 3 Oct 92 00:54:56 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1992Oct1.191928.1@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> ij59@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes:
>Is there only _one_ main computer on the Enterprise-D?
>
>What is the status of the computer system when the saucer is separated?

[Very large sig deleted to save bandwidth]

There are three main systems. Two are located in the saucer section,
and one is located in the battle section.

Even if the main computer is down, there are numerous smaller computers
(distributed computing works I guess) that handle lesser tasks. Each terminal
(or station, or whatever you'd like to call it) has it's own processor.
Thus, just because the main computer is down, doesn't mean that you can't
manually control the ship. Without these smaller computers those, the Big E
would be useless when the main computer was down...you couldn't enter a single
command to ANYTHING, because your terminals wouldn't be working.

 


Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: rrogers@watson.ibm.com (Ryan Rogers)
Subject: Re: Computer / Saucer Separation
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992 03:09:17 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14 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  <1992Oct1.191928.1@vaxb.acs.unt.edu>  ij59@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes:
>Is there only _one_ main computer on the Enterprise-D?
>
>What is the status of the computer system when the saucer is separated?
>

   There are identical computer cores on both the saucer (primary) and
engineering (secondary) sections.  This from the Tech Manual...


Sincerely,
Ryan Rogers
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: fangs@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Wesley Lewellen IV)
Subject: Re: Collisions!
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 92 06:38:34 GMT

In article <23264@optima.cs.arizona.edu> william@cs.arizona.edu (William E. Hertling) writes:
>
>What really bothers me is why the Enterprise didn't destroy the 
>very first Borg ship they came in contact with, before it developed
>a defense against the photon torpedos. They had inflicted "20%"
>damage. They could have just continued firing and vaporized the
>ship before it had a chance to fix itself.
>
>william@cs.arizona.edu
>
I thought about this, too, and came up with the following:  

First, the Borg would not be running with *no* defense shield up;  it
isn't logical to do so.  So they probably would have had some "general-
purpose" defense shield, kind of like the Enterprise's, up when the
torpedo impacted.

Also, the idea behind a photorp is pretty basic:  take a reasonable-sized
chunk of antimatter, and slam it into a similarly sized chunk of matter
in close proximity to the target.  Even if the Borg never saw a Fed
photorp before, I would be very surprised if they never encountered
anything like it before.  Any space-faring species using matter/antimatter
propulsion systems or power plants would probably get the idea at one time
or another.

Finally, in the end analysis, the results of a photorp detonation
are LOTS of hard photons flying about, i.e. X- and gamma rays, and
perhaps some heavy nuclei, not unlike a "super neutron bomb."  Now,
if the Borg ever faced anyone who used X-ray weapons - which, incidentally,
we have NOW - they would have defenses against hard or enhanced
radiation weapons.  Again, it wouldn't be tailored exactly to photon
torpedoes, but then it wouldn't need to be to provide some measure of
protection.

- JWL IV

P.S.  Anybody else out there think that they should have left Picard as a 
      Borg?  

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: swindley@elec.uq.oz.au (Robert Swindley)
Subject: Re: Eating within the Holodeck
Keywords: holodeck
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 01:15:15 GMT

What i was really trying to get at....

   It's in some tech note somewhere that the holodeck
actually converts energy into matter to produce some
things on the holodeck. It has further been stated
that something created on the holodeck cannot be
removed ie it will dissolve/dissappear as the 
fields holding it together are no longer in effect`
after it leaves the deck.

   Now if a member of the crew was to _live_ on the
holodeck for an extended period, eating the food 
created by the holodeck, would the holodeck 
projection system claim back it's molecules???
(eg in the short term if i ate something on the
holodeck to sate my hunger and then left the deck
would i still be hungry???
  in the long term if i integrate (eat and process)
the food moleculs as part of my self what happens 
when i leave the deck)

chengster
From: ij59@vaxb.acs.unt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Could transporters power the ship?
Date: 2 Oct 92 21:52:22 GMT
Organization: University of North Texas

Can the transporters be used to transform matter into usable energy?

This would eliminate the need for the antimatter to power anything except
the warp drive or things that need lots of power very qquickly.

Or can they only manipulate matter, i.e. send it sowhere, rearrange it
(the replicators) but not actually store the energy in any usable form?

 ________    _______              _         ________     ____
|______  |  |_____  |            | |       |________|   |____|
      / /         | |  _  _   _  |  \       ________    ______   _______
     /  \         | | |_||_| / / |   \     |________|  |____  | |_______|
    / /\ \   _____| |   ____/ /  | |\ \     ________       / /
   /_/  \_\ |_______|  |_____/   |_| \/    |________|     /_/
 
        |  Nippon no anime wa ichi-ban desu!  Otaku rule!    |
        |      Hey, man, I _like_ Robotech.  So sue me.      |
        | Sukotto Miraa/Scott Miller (ij59@vaxb.acs.unt.edu) |