HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Thursday, 19 Nov 1992 20:49:47 EST
From: doogie <IO20703@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Copyright info needed

I have been interested in starship blueprints for quite some time, and
have drawn several of my own that I consider good enough to sell.  I
would like to print them up professionally, and perhaps start a small
business selling them, but I have no idea what copyright laws apply
to this, or who to talk to about it.
If anyone has any ideas or information, I would greatly appreciate it.
My e-mail address is: io20703@maine.maine.edu
Thanks in advance for any help.  Please mail response directly to me,
as I don't get many chances to read netnews.
Thanks again.
Jed Bailey
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: kiloquad????
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 17:17:06 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <4273@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> gee7759@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Glenn Elliott) writes:
>: In article <92Nov12.081109.1685@acs.ucalgary.ca> jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes:
>: >                   = 1^3 * 1^15 bytes = kilo-quadrillion bytes
>: >If 'quad' was slang for 'quadrillion bytes' (Petabyte sounds too
>: >goofy), I can see 'kiloquad' coming into use to describe an
>: >Exabyte. As always, no canonical answer yet.
>
>I agree that this is the best theory to date, but why bother calling
>it a kiloquad?  If you can extrapolate far enough to call a quadrillion
>bytes a quad, why wouldn't you call a quintillion bytes a quint?

As I tried to point out, my theory requires that the unit of a
'quad' as in use for a fairly long time (at least a couple of
years) before storage devices with 1000 times the capacity came
into use. So 'quad' was pretty much the slang standard, so
'kiloquad' grew out of that.

Personally, I think that number is _way_ to high, based on Data's
memory capacity. But with the speed with which the computers and
tricorders (and PADDs) can access data, I agree with one poster
(whoever you are :) that they must be heavily indexed, perhaps up
to half the capacity of a isolinear chip being devoted to
indicies.

Was it 'Metamorphosis' in which Geordi turned into the chameleon
beast? They stored quite a large amount of video on one chip,
probably uncompressed, sensor readings, etc.

Also, in the Tech Manual, the tricorders are equiped with a power
draining "emergency dump" of data to the ship's computer's. That
would imply a transfer rate of a kiloquad per second - scary
thought. No wonder it drains the energy cell. 

As for how an isolinear chip works, I imagine they have surface
level 'routers' for the light, with holographic light paths. The
chip itself would store data using holographic alignments of its
crystal structure, and light would be used to read and write to
it, with the chip itself containing most of the 'mechanics' of
this in the light-paths. In other words, all done with mirrors.
:)

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: koziarz@chinet.chi.il.us (Louis Koziarz)
Subject: Re: An ANALOG computer: Possible??
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:08:41 GMT

>|> Why not make an ANALOG computer? Instead of working with On/off
>|> (represented by 1s and 0s), why not have something like 3/4 on, 
>|> 1/4 off or 1/8 on, 7/8 off (represented by #s 1-9). Something 
>|> like that?
>
>Computers/Electronics work on the priciple of logic , yeah ?
>ie. there is always a clear cut decision ... that is why they work in binary.
>Clear cut decisions would not be possible with an analogue computer ..

Isn't fuzzy logic trying to bridge the two?  

-- 
Louis Koziarz
koziarz@chinet.chi.il.us
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Not the Technical Manual
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 17:05:48 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <8758@dirac.physics.purdue.edu> hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson) writes:
>chris@keris.demon.co.uk (Chris Croughton) writes:
>>>First,  I do have a problem with many time travel stories in Star Trek.
>>Not just in Star Trek, I assume, but most other time travel stories as
>>well...
>>It depends on your model of time.  One theory says that small changes
>>will only have local effects, so in a few hundred years time it won't
>>matter. 
>This idea has never seemed realistic in the least to me.  Someone once
>pointed out that all you have to do is run around a town on any given
>night and knock on doors and run.  

Heck, if any man moves as a result of you, the sperm he carries
will likely be jostled - completely changing the genetic makeup
of his descendents. Chaos plays hell with time travel theories.
:)

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: cs202144@umbc8.umbc.edu (cs202144)
Subject: Re:  Software/hardware
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 00:50:10 GMT

>	Yes and no.  Some of the elements in the parts or even entire parts 
> for computer hardware in ST:TNG can't be replicated accurately enough to be 
> used.  Therre was an episode in one of the earlier seasons that this 
> problem was mentioned in, but I can't remember which one.

But this is terribly wasteful and inefficient. You are more or less saying,
'Lets build a seperate little computer for each and every possible thing
we would want them to do!' How would you like to have that many computers
(no matter how small)...Having a single, very complex computer, that can
be given new instructions to do things based on what it is already designed
to do.

Take the holodeck for instance. We know it uses programs, but this programs
must be just that because the holodeck cannot know EVERYTHING that ANYONE
might want to experience! If I was stuck on the Enterprise I might want
to act out a real life AD&D Adventure or something of the like and that
game probably doesn't even exist in the Star Trek universe. But it could still
be done, by me showing the computer the manuals or explaining what monsters
there are and their relative size, strength, etc. with respect to humans or
some other race.
From: cs92mjd@cen.ex.ac.uk (M.J.Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: NCC-1701-D DECK LAYOUT
Date: 18 Nov 92 10:51:44 GMT
Organization: Computer Unit. - University of Exeter. UK

So what are all the 'unavailable' decks? Why not take 'em out and have a ship
with 20 decks. You could make it half the size then :-)...

Mikey D
--




"Ride and find where all the freedom has gone..."

Michael J. Davis          |   M.J.Davis@ac.uk.ex.cen
Dept of Computer Science  |   M.J.Davis@cen.ex.uk.ac
University of Exeter      |
UK                        |   #include<disclaimer.std>




   








--
From: det@phlan.sw.stratus.com (David Toland)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: An ANALOG computer: Possible??
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:44:50 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: phlan.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Nov16.153624.28746@gssec.bt.co.uk> squigg@gssec.bt.co.uk (Stephen Quigg) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.190145.8691@iscsvax.uni.edu>, perdue4575@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:

  <stuff deleted>

>|> Why not make an ANALOG computer? Instead of working with On/off
>|> (represented by 1s and 0s), why not have something like 3/4 on, 
>|> 1/4 off or 1/8 on, 7/8 off (represented by #s 1-9). Something 
>|> like that?
>|> 
>|> There are on/off switches for lights, but then there are dimmer
>|> switches too. Why not make a computer full of dimmer switches,
>|> instead of on/off switches. See what I'm trying to say here?
>|> 
>|> You're welcome to post a reply, or email me anytime.
>|> 
>|> --Tim Perdue
>
>Computers/Electronics work on the priciple of logic , yeah ?
>ie. there is always a clear cut decision ... that is why they work in binary.
>Clear cut decisions would not be possible with an analogue computer ..

Either the computer has discrete "steps" (logic levels, usually voltage,
sometimes current) or it has continuously variable levels.  Continuously
variable levels can only be as precise as noise immunity and stability
allow.  Doubling the resolution typically costs 10 times as much (or
more).  On the other hand, digital circuits can be made very noise
tolerant.  Furthermore, digitally modelled values can be doubled in
resolution by ading a single bit.  This is usually close to linear cost
per logarithm of the resolution (MUCH cheaper incrementally).

Because of the numerical stability inherent in digital storage and
processing, results are fully repeatable from one run of a program
to the next.  Whether this is true of analog processing depends greatly
on the system of equations being modelled - some systems are inherently
unstable and lead to chaotic output.  This is not ALWAYS a bad thing,
the instability of a system is often of interest; however, there are
REPEATABLE digital methods of determining the stability of a system
also.

By the way, there's no real advantage in having 10 (e.g.) discrete levels
vs. 2 discrete levels.  As long as there ARE discrete levels, and that
output level partitioning is deterministic on input level partitioning
(which is to say that varying any input within the same level's range
will not cause any output to move to a different range), you might as
well limit yourself to 2 logic levels and get as a bonus a higher
noise immunity at the cost of more "digits".

Traditionally, analog computers have rarely been useful for anything
but modelling physical or mathematical relations.  The broad uses
of digital computers for text processing, data storage and retrieval,
image processing, etc have little chance of working well on an analog
computational technology.

-- 
det@phlan.sw.stratus.com   |  "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
                           |  that doon with."
From: cs202144@umbc8.umbc.edu (cs202144)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: An ANALOG computer: Possible??
Date: 19 Nov 92 12:56:27 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus

> Been there, seen that, done that...
>
> Digital computers using base 10 and true analog computers have both
> been done for a long time, mechanically as well as electrically.

Pardon my ignorance, but they actually have computers that do 'pure' base 10
instead of base 2 and converting to base 10? How is this done and what kind of
programming can it accept?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Distribution: world
From: Ira_J._Seskin@fourd.com
Organization: 4th Dimension BBS
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 17:09:52 EST
Subject: Re: Possible FAQ, but...

>>Gene Roddenberry added the sound effect because he said that the ship going
by in silence was "boring".  Any suggestions?<<
Hay. Yopu have to remember it's only A TV show. It's entertainment. I was
talking to one of STTNG science advisors at a Convention I went to......first
and last, BTW. Anyway....he was being asked all these technical questions by
complete "get a life"ers who just wouldn't let up.  He finally reminded the
group....'IT'S TELEVISION!!!". Call it artistic/creative license or
whatever....but remember its produced for 20th century earth Saturday Nite (
at least here) entertainment!!.
 
-Ira-

********************************************************************
System: fourd.com                                Phone: 617-494-0565
Cute quote:  Being a computer means never having to say you're sorry
********************************************************************

Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.tech:6327 rec.arts.startrek.current:18597
From: silvers3@husc8.harvard.edu (Jolyon Silversmith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Handicaped in Star Trek TNG.
Date: 17 Nov 92 04:34:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Nov16.233410.17519
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

>> 	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.
>
>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...
>
But in fact they have. The first season episode "Too Short A Season" has
scenes in which a crippled admiral is transported on board, wheelchair and
all; in later scenes, the wheelchair is used on the bridge.

Apparently the unit was supposed to appear to hover or something, but mechanical
problems restricted its use in the episode...
-- 
Jolyon A. Silversmith __________________________________________________________
silvers3@husc.harvard.edu            President             "Eternal Vigilance is
Mather House 100              ACLU of Harvard College      the Price of Liberty"
Cambridge, MA 02138 ____________________________________________________________
From: squigg@gssec.bt.co.uk (Stephen Quigg)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: An ANALOG computer: Possible??
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:27:30 GMT
Organization: BT Glasgow Systems and Software Engineering Centre, Scotland.


-- 
In article <1992Nov16.153624.28746@gssec.bt.co.uk>, squigg@gssec.bt.co.uk (Stephen Quigg) writes:
|> 
|> |> A couple of months ago, I was reading an article in Popular
|> |> Science about TeraFlops computers of the future and I came to
|> |> wonder if there wouldn't be a better way to build a computer.
|> |> 
|> |> I'm no computer engineer or programmer or anything else, but
|> |> I'm gonna throw this idea up here and see if any of you can
|> |> provide some feedback. Here goes:
|> |> 
|> |> Why not make an ANALOG computer? Instead of working with On/off
|> |> (represented by 1s and 0s), why not have something like 3/4 on, 
|> |> 1/4 off or 1/8 on, 7/8 off (represented by #s 1-9). Something 
|> |> like that?
|> |> 
|> |> There are on/off switches for lights, but then there are dimmer
|> |> switches too. Why not make a computer full of dimmer switches,
|> |> instead of on/off switches. See what I'm trying to say here?
|> |> 
|> 
|> Computers/Electronics work on the priciple of logic , yeah ?
|> ie. there is always a clear cut decision ... that is why they work in binary.
|> Clear cut decisions would not be possible with an analogue computer ..
|> 
|> Anyone agree with this ?

I hereby relinquish all resposibility for this momentary lapse of
reason ..... I won't let it happen again!

Stephen Quigg
squigg@gssec.bt.co.uk 
British Telecom , GSSEC , Glasgow
(Nothing in any of my mail represents my Employer in any way)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.current
From: joseph@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Joseph Dawson)
Subject: Re: Handicaped in Star Trek TNG.
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 23:38:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.095528.20681@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> gothick@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Matthew B. M. Gibson) writes:
>Good *God* man - do you really think that by the 24th century wheelchairs
>*still* won't be able to go up steps?  There are several models around which
>can cope with them now...
>
>Cheers,
>
>Matt
>

Yes I do think they still have Wheelchairs.  In re-run of a show I saw that
Picard said that he had a teacher that was in a wheelchair.  And as the name
is Wheelchair and not a floting platflorm or some such thing I must assume
it still has wheels.  

As current chairs that climb steps are not called wheelchairs but stair 
climbers, or some other name then wheelchairs.  

Point to Point transport would be the way to move a wheelchair acound a step
problem.  

Joe
From: ajm@seqp4.sequoia.com (A.J.Madison)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: transporter youth question
Summary: You are quite correct!
Date: 18 Nov 92 15:51:49 GMT
Organization: Sequoia Systems Inc., Marlboro, Mass.

In article <1ebccnINN1np@bigboote.WPI.EDU>, haywire@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (the Insane One) writes:
> In the episode where Picard, Guinan, Rho, and Keiko are transformed into 
> kids by a transporter accident, what happened to Picards heart??
> Didnt he have a mechanical heart replacement. So what happened to it 
> when he became a kid? If it was still there wouldnt it have caused him problems
> since his chest is alot smaller now??
> 
> haywire


I believe the technical term for what you discovered is YATI.  It has been a
long time since I saw the episode where Picard had heart surgery, but if I
remember it correctly, yes, they did end up implanting an artifical device.

Not only would his chest have been smaller, but the circulatory to pump 
interface would be doubly incompatibile.  (Thats just double talk for, did
his aorta stretch to fit the pump?  Would it have, considering it was
modified during transport?

If I remember it wrong, and Picard has an organic heart, he may be all set,
but otherwise, I'd consider the issue another screw up on the part of the
scriptwriter(s).
-- 
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.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.tech:6334 rec.arts.startrek.current:18646
From: deaster@gumby.Altos.COM (Le Chevalier Blanc)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Handicapped in Star Trek TNG
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:05:37 GMT
Reply-To: deaster@altos.COM (Le Chevalier Blanc)
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Organization: Altos Computer Systems, San Jose, CA

Suddenly, and without prior warning
nor provocation, stevev@miser.uoregon.edu (Steve VanDevender) said:
->Unfortunately we never get to see anyone demonstrating how much
->of the ship is accessible.  I guess 24th century medicine is too
->good.

Actually, there was the episode with Admiral Jameson on it (the admiral
that took the anti-aging serum so that he'd be young to negotiate with
an old adversary who had taken federation scientists hostage).  He
was in a wheelchair in parts of the episode.

					-Dave
-- 
David J. Easter ) ...!uunet!altos!deaster | deaster@altos.COM (Honarary Weasel)
Support Engineer) "Chivalry is not dead, it's just paralyzed from the neck up."
Altos Computers ) Disclaimer: mine, mine, mine; get, get, get; mine, mine mine!
"Sadder still to watch it die than never to have known it." -Rush `Losing It`
From: crl0195@hertz.njit.edu (Curt R Lindmark)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: transporter youth question
Date: 17 Nov 92 23:42:39 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <92322.134703ACS110@psuvm.psu.edu> ACS110@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>An excelent point. I guess the transporter would shift the tissues
>around it to make room for the now much larger heart. Or mabey the
>artificial heart is very small and wouldn't cause a problem.

It was mentioned earlier that Picard does not have an artificial heart, like
a Jarvik-7, but a clone heart grown from his own DNA, resulting in a perfect
replacement for his old one.  As far as the transporter is concerned, it is
his own heart.

O========|>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<|========0
 Curt R Lindmark      crl0195@hertz.njit.edu         Defender from ages past

Picard: "Mr. Worf, fire at will."
Worf: "With pleasure, sir." (draws hand phaser, takes aim)
Riker: "Oh no, not again" (ducks for cover)

Disclaimer: NJIT is responsible for nothing I don't say which isn't mine.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley)
Subject: Re: Why turn the lights off on the Enterprise ?
Date: 21 Nov 92 15:08:12 MST
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

In article <1992Nov18.144841.3660@cs.hw.ac.uk> adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt) writes:
>
>Q: How many red-shirts does it take to change a light-bulb?
>A: Two.  One to find out the light is still switched on, and one to
>   switch it off and change the bulb.

No, the answer is three.  One to change the light bulb and two to
carry out the corpse.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Jay Windley  *  University of Utah  *  Salt Lake City
                    jwindley@asylum.cs.utah.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: 9225803@ul.ie
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: re.Orentation
Date: 20 Nov 92 12:44:15 GMT
Organization: University of Limerick, Ireland

Previously,Drew inquires about course heading terminology used.Although this 
has probably been explained before,I might as well repeat it.
                                            Imagine two discs intersecting at 
right angles and then enclosed in a transparent sphere.Each disk is graduated
into degrees which then determine the ships heading.For example a course
heading of 233 mark 134,would direct the ship at the 233 degree mark at the 
horizontal disk,but would then angle it at the 134 degree mark at the vertical
sphere.This way any heading can be followed in the 3 dimensional plane.
sphere.In this way any heading can be followed in  3 dimensional space. 



================================================================================
* Paul Dix               *                                                     *
* 9225803@ul.ie          *                                                     *
* University of Limerick * "Attempting the hell to communicate?"               *
* Ireland                *      -Spock of Vulcan,Star Trek IV-the Voyage Home  *
*                        *                                                     *
================================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dalton@nevada.edu (William Turlough Cat)
Subject: Re: Next class starship
Keywords: starship class Enterprise
Organization: NCC 1701-F USS Enterprise
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 05:27:11 GMT

In article <1ehiooINNgsb@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> dwhall@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Dean W Hall) writes:
>Everyone overlooked one small thing.  So small you can't even see it.
>I'm talking about Wesley's Warp Bubble.  The next class Starship will not
>travel at Warp speeds.  It will all be computational.  The "ship" will be
>enclosed by a Warp Bubble and mathematically repositioned in the Universe

Sounds much like Block Transfer Computations from dw but used for travel.

>(much like transporters, but more range)  Once Wesley can get this technology
>to be stable, Picard's successors will be riding around in the universe's
>biggest bubble blower!!  :)
> -Dean
>Feel free to gripe at me (Telnet): dwhall@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
>__________________________________________________________________
>|*			       					*|
>|			Admiral Dean Hall	 		 |
>|						        	 |
>|	Resident omnivorous, bipedal, binocular, prehensile-	 |
>|		  thumbed, ugly bag of mostly water		 |
>|*								*|
>==================================================================
>

William Turlough Cat aka beiad
From: fink2@alcor.concordia.ca (Gemini)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Klingon Home World???
Date: 18 Nov 92 18:50:39 GMT

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,
-- 
******************************************************************************
"Three quarks for Muster Mark."

                      -JJ
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA