From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: relative speed
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 92 18:22:27 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1992Sep5.144741.3556@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rpascazi@engws9.ic.sunysb.edu (Robert R Pascazio) writes:
>In article <1992Sep4.234356.7906@marlin.jcu.edu.au> eektl@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Kenneth T Leong) writes:
>>If two starships were back to back and then both raced off at warp 10,
>>would the speed of one starship relative to the other be double? If so,
>>could this relative speed be acheived as an actual speed by a single
>>starship?

Warp 10, as previously stated, is impossible. Its not like Light
Speed, a speed you can't reach (well, you can't) but its an
infinite speed. Warp 9.99 is perhaps 10 times as fast as 9.9.
Warp 9.999 is 10 times faster than that. Warp 10 isn't needed -
slap on enough 9s and you'll get there nearly instantly anyway.
But... going back to the question, lets use Warp 9.9.

>This just goes back to the theory of relativity. The accelerated speeds
>do not effect the physical phenomena. This is because (I think) warp is
>actually light speed (warp 9 being 90 percent the speed of light). 

This is Startrek.tech, ie, trying to justify using pseudo-physics
whats portrayed in a fictional universe for public entertainment.
Check the Faq.

>What
>warp technology is, is the creation of an anti-mass and anti-inertial
>field. This allows accelerations close to the speed of light with 
>neglegible (not logrithmic at least) increase in power consumption. 

Wrong, actually. Warp fields are subspace fields, measured in
cochranes, that create a nested Continuum Propulsion Distortion
(affectionately known as 'Warp'). This is all mumbo-jumbo, but it
is (usually) internally consistant. Accept subspace, and most of
Trek is feasable.

>If the observer from starship A took measurments of starship B every
>once in a while, it would appear the starship is moving away faster
>than warp 10. This is because the light(probably need subspace detection
>equipment here) would take longer to reach B as A moves off. In actual
>distance though, if information could move instantaneousely the other
>ship would suffer from relativistic effects and appear to slow an never
>exceed warp 10. 

Again, you completely miss what Warp 10 describes. Its infinite
speed. If I'm at Warp 9, and you're at Warp 9, and we head away
from each other, we appear to be travelling away from each other
at Warp 9.5 or so.

Relativity doesn't come into effect with low Warp speeds, as you
are forced to make your observations with 'Subspace Radio'. This
propogates through subspace at 9.9997, so until you're going
about 9.9995 or so you shouldn't notice, and Warp fields act as a
Newtonian system. 

Given that 9.9997 isn't an actual limitation to subspace signal
speed or object velocity, just the speed the current technologies
operate on, we don't know if there are Warp-Relativistic effects
yet. Warp 9.9 is the fastest a ship has travelled under normal
CDP propulsion. The 9.9997 'limit' has been broken several times,
but not by traditional Warp drives.

Even in the 24th century, they don't know all there is to know.
:)

Joshua
+      "Each woman is a promise that she can't keep that appeals to           +
|  a hope you can't control." - joe theseus, Deadface: Earth Water Air Fire   |
|                                                                             |
+ jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca   Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary +
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech