From: Anthony_Battles_-T@cso.3mail.3com.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Warp speed and Relativity?
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:57:00 GMT

one more try.


---------------------- Replied Message Body -----------------------
Date: 4-9-92  08:31am  
From: {MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM}:ugate:3Com
  To: Anthony Battles -T:CSO:3Com, Joe Massa:hq:3Com
Subj: Returned mail: User unknown
-----------------------
Original header follows:
Received: by gw.3Com.COM id AA10314
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:33:13 -0700
Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:33:13 -0700
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM>
Message-Id: <199204091533.AA10314@gw.3Com.COM>
To: Anthony_Battles_-T@CSO.3Mail.3Com.COM
Cc: Postmaster@gw.3Com.COM
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
-----------------------------------------------------------------
   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
While talking to bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM:
>>> RCPT To:<rec-arts-strtrek-tech@nsd.3com.com>
<<< 550 <rec-arts-strtrek-tech@nsd.3com.com>... User unknown
550 rec-arts-strtrek-tech@nsd.3com.com... User unknown

   ----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: by gw.3Com.COM id AA10311
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM); Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:33:13 -0700
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 08:28 PDT
From: Anthony_Battles_-T@CSO.3Mail.3Com.COM
Subject: RE:Warp speed and Relativity?
To: MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM, rec-arts-strtrek-tech@nsd.3com.com
Message-Id: <920409.082959@3Mail.3Com.COM>

Another try in sending this out.
See below.



---------------------- Replied Message Body -----------------------
Date: 4-9-92  08:15am  
From: {MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM}:ugate:3Com
  To: Anthony Battles -T:CSO:3Com, Joe Massa:hq:3Com
Subj: Returned mail: User unknown
-----------------------
Original header follows:
Received: by gw.3Com.COM id AA09833
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:16:41 -0700
Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:16:41 -0700
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@gw.3Com.COM>
Message-Id: <199204091516.AA09833@gw.3Com.COM>
To: Anthony_Battles_-T@CSO.3Mail.3Com.COM
Cc: Postmaster@gw.3Com.COM
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
-----------------------------------------------------------------
   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
While talking to bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM:
>>> RCPT To:<rec-arts-startred-tec@nsd.3com.com>
<<< 550 <rec-arts-startred-tec@nsd.3com.com>... User unknown
550 rec-arts-startred-tec@nsd.3com.com... User unknown

   ----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: by gw.3Com.COM id AA09830
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for rec-arts-startred-tec@nsd.3com.com); Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:16:41 -0700
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 08:14 PDT
From: Anthony_Battles_-T@CSO.3Mail.3Com.COM
Subject: RE:Warp speed and Reletivity?
To: rec-arts-startred-tec@nsd.3com.com
Cc: rec.arts.startrek.tech@CSO.3Mail.3Com.COM
Message-Id: <920409.081327@3Mail.3Com.COM>

I think everyone is making this all too hard for themselves.
Light speed is acheivable, its all a matter of using the right 
propulsion system, and our technology hasnt been  able to acheive that 
yet.
We must remember, What was thought could not be done, has. And the 
laws in space are just a little bit different than on the earth. I.e. we 
will not burn up if we reach the speed of light in space. If we did that 
on earth Yes we would burn up. Alot of talk about atoms dispersing, and 
time continuums associated with light speed are basically theories that 
have not been proven. So how can we call that law?


---------------------- Replied Message Body -----------------------
Date: 4-9-92  02:48am  
From: {rec-arts-startrek-tech-request@bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM}:ugate:3Com
  To: anthony battles:hq:3Com, ric goldman:hq:3Com,
      Brian Whittaker:hq:3Com
Subj: Rec.Arts.Startrek.Tech
-----------------------
Original header follows:
Received: from bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM by gw.3Com.COM with SMTP id AA05108
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Thu, 9 Apr 1992 02:50:18 -0700
Return-Path: <rec-arts-startrek-tech-request@bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM>
Received: by bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM id AA25123
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4nsd for rec-arts-startrek-tech-redist); Thu, 9 Apr 1992 02:50:11 -0700
From: rec-arts-startrek-tech-request@bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM
Message-Id: <199204090950.AA25123@bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM>
Date: Thu,  9 Apr 92 02:50:05 PDT
To: rec-arts-startrek-tech-redist@bridge2.NSD.3Com.COM
Subject: Rec.Arts.Startrek.Tech
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To post to newsgroup       rec.arts.startrek.tech
send a 3+Mail message to: {rec-arts-startrek-tech@nsd.3com.com}:ugate:3com

To get off this list, send a 3+Mail message to:

    {rec-arts-startrek-tech-request@nsd.3com.com}:ugate:3Com

Summary of Subjects in this digest:

2595 Re: Warp Speed and Relativity?
2596 Re: Warp Speed and Relativity?
2597 Re: Ent D vs Star Destroyer
2598 TOS Stardates taken in TNG mode (was Re: >>stardate conversion...


-------------------------------------------------------

To: Rec.Arts.Startrek.Tech
From: max@west.darkside.com (Max Pandaemonium)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Warp Speed and Relativity?
Date: 8 Apr 92 07:45:43 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

0juan_e@spcvxb.spc.edu writes:

>      To answer your question about relativity, inwhich it only affects things
> only at sublight speeds -yes and no.  According to Eistein, as an object begi
> to approach the speed of light (.4c - c=Speed of Light), aging for the object
> begins to slow to a crawl; by the time the object is at c, the effect of Time
> upon it doesn't exist.  This is all based on Newtonian physics taking into 
> account the variables of gravity; speed, acceleration, and mass of object;
> and the distance travelled by object.

It's based on Einsteinian physics, you mean.  Recall that Newtonian 
physics means non-relativistic physics.

A body can never reach the speed of light, though it can get arbitrarily 
close.  You can never surmount that last decimal point to reach exactly 
c.  But 0.999 999 999 999 999c is just fine . . .

> What warp physics does, is explain the creating of artificial fields (possibl
> gravitonic pulses) that distorts a certain area of space around an object -
> placing the object in a sort of "null" space, inwhich the mass of the object
> is either reduced to the mass of subatomic particles or cancelled; this type
> of physics would cancel Newtonian physics of an object -since the mass has
> been reduced to a point below the minimum for the Newtonian Gravitaic constan
> to apply.  Though the mass of an object is reduced, this doesn't affect the
> size of the object -size is relative.

This is an interesting idea, but unfortunately, it doesn't work.  
Relativistic effects occur at the subatomic level, too.  (In fact, there 
much more visible there -- it's much easier to accelerate a subatomic 
particle to relativistic speeds than it is to accelerate a macroscopic 
particle.)

> Einstein, himself, said that for an object to go beyond the limit of c, it 
> would have to cease its existance in our physical plane; this brought about t

That is implied by his special theory, but I doubt he ever said those 
words.  (Well, made a statement that could be realistically _translated_ 
to those words.)


I think the answer that everyone's looking for just plain isn't there.  
It's just a science-fiction show, and it's not very hard science-fiction. 
There is no scientifically valid reason why the warp drive works.  It 
just does.  You take that as a given, and work from there.

- ----------
Max Pandaemonium   Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.  Coming soon:  UNIVERSE _ | _
USmail:  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1 San Jose CA 95117  ICBM:  37 20 N  121 53 W _>|<_
UUCP:  ..!apple!uuwest!max   Usenet:  max@west.darkside.com   464E4F5244   |

---------------------------

To: Rec.Arts.Startrek.Tech
From: max@west.darkside.com (Max Pandaemonium)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Warp Speed and Relativity?
Date: 8 Apr 92 07:51:06 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

v128nkej@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Boggles the MIND) writes:

> In article <92097.192416U53644@uicvm.uic.edu>, U53644@uicvm.uic.edu writes...
> 
> >Gents, I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but...............
> >
> >Sorry, but the smart money says that you can't even make it to "warp 1".
>
> 	I believe that what you say may be true- but I hope you're wrong.
> Once we begin to say what we cannot do- it is unlikely we will ever do it.

My contention on the subject is -- so what if we can't travel faster than 
light?  Relativistic effects such as time dialation make interstellar 
travel feasible.  Not easy, no, but feasible.

> 	Remember: You can't prove a negative.

More appropriately stated, you can't prove a theory.  That's true.  But 
we'd better find a damn good exception to get faster than light travel.

> People once thought that crossing the ocean was impossible- can't do it.
> People once thought that machines would never be better than man at any job-
> can't be done.
> People once thought breaking the sound barrier was impossible and that 
> we'd never land a man on the moon- can't be done.

These kinds of statements kind of irk me a little . . . there's a 
difference between a common public myth and a well-defined scientific 
theory.  Sure, people thought you couldn't break the sound barrier.  But 
they didn't have any reason to think this other than, "Oh, my, our planes 
start to rattle a lot as they get toward Mach 1."  That's different than 
having reams of paper showing that as a particle approaches the speed of 
light, its mass increases without bound.

That doesn't mean that FTL travel will never happen, but it means that 
we've got a much better reason to believe it than getting men to the 
moon, breaking the sound barrier, reaching the New World, or 
breakthroughs in robotics.

Note:  I'm not making judgements about Star Trek here; just talking about 
the lightspeed barrier.  As far as I'm concerned, the subject is a moot 
point when dealing with Star Trek.  In coming to the series, you're given 
that in the Star Trek universe FTL travel exists, and go on from there . 
. .

- ----------
Max Pandaemonium   Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.  Coming soon:  UNIVERSE _ | _
USmail:  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1 San Jose CA 95117  ICBM:  37 20 N  121 53 W _>|<_
UUCP:  ..!apple!uuwest!max   Usenet:  max@west.darkside.com   464E4F5244   |

---------------------------

To: Rec.Arts.Startrek.Tech
From: justin@lkba (Justin Blische)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Ent D vs Star Destroyer
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:57:55 GMT
Organization: LKB Associates, Inc.

In article <1992Apr4.180314.1@cstp.umkc.edu>  writes:
> 
> 
>   I would like to make a point about lasers vs. NCC1701D shields.
> 
>   Granted, the book says lasers don't doi diddly to the Enterprise's  
shields.
> Let's look at this reasonably.  Lasers are composed of coherent trains  
of
> photons.  > 
> Now, to the matter of photon torpedoes.  As many people have pointed  
out, the
> most damaging yield of a photon torpedo is the burst of gamma rays it  
puts out. 
> The gamma rays are responsible for most of the damage.
> 
>   But, Gamma rays are composed of photons of electromagnetic energy.


> 

 But a laser beam's waves are all on the same frequncy (sp).
The shields job is to protect the ship by maching that frequncy (sp).
Now the computer would have no problem maching a laser, but they may have  
a problem with the whole electromagnetic spectrum.And some of those gamma  
rays may get in.



                                            Justin

---------------------------

To: Rec.Arts.Startrek.Tech
From: dsturm@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: TOS Stardates taken in TNG mode (was Re: >>stardate conversion...
Date: 9 Apr 92 06:45:17 GMT

...and to shatter things even more...

A neat little retrofitting (aka back-continuity) works fairly well
if you establish a stardate cycle starting in 2264.

0000 = 2264
1000 = 2265
           Kirk's test run with Enterprise (E:t1Ad,StrSky,WNMHGB,early 1st 
           season)
2000 = 2266
           Kirk starts a full 5YM (mid 1st season)
3000 = 2267
           Kirk's first full year of 5YM (late 1st, early 2d season)
4000 = 2268
           Kirk's second full year of 5YM (end 2d season, few 3d)
5000 = 2269
           Kirk's third full year of 5YM (most of 3d season, some TAS)
6000 = 2270
           Kirk's fourth full year of 5YM (some TAS, novels)
7000 = 2271
           Kirk's fifth full year of 5YM (novels)
           Brings home Enterprise in good shape.
           Promoted to rank of Nogura's whore :-)
8000 = 2272
           Chief SFO
9000 = 2273
           Chief SFO
That stardate cycle included a scaling factor for distance from SFHQ...

Anyways, if you treat it like the TNG system 1 SD = 8 hours, it's not
horrendously bad.


Presumably the next stardate cycle was of the form
YYdd.d

7400 = 2274 TMP

7500 = 2275 etc.

New cycle established...

0000 = 2277

8000 = 2285 ST2-5

Return to the YYdd.d cycle...

8700 = 2287
:
:
9522.6 = 2295 August 15  ST6

Presumably only military intelligence ;-P can explain the switch between
the Ywww.h and YYdd.d systems.  (Maybe to keep the Roms guessing?)

Dave Sturm.

---------------------------

End of Rec.Arts.Startrek.Tech Digest
************************************
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.misc