HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mls@wuee1.wustl.edu (Michael L. Schirmer)
Subject: Re: 1701-D Saucer going warp speed
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:27:53 GMT

In article <z57n.24.726603568@unb.ca> z57n@unb.ca (MCKAY  N) writes:
>   ...          Presumeably, the saucer section's impulse engines would be 
>used to slow the ship down gradually, so as to keep the crew from being 
>flattened against the walls.
>

The Enterprise can accelerate and decelerate as fast as they would ever want
to.  Ships are equipped with Inertial Damping Fields (IDF) to prevent the
occupants from being turned into, as the Tech Manual says, "chunky salsa"
when using the engines.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Insert .sig here

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: Clayten_Hamacher@mindlink.bc.ca (Clayten Hamacher)
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 23:38:05 GMT

Umm, in DS9: Emissary, they say that the worm hole carried them either
7000 or *70,000* light years from Bajor.  SOmeone might check that,
because the latter is truly impossible to swallow.

Why would that be impossible? 7000ly would be enough to make it a trade spot
for that tiny part of the galaxy, 70,000ly would be anough to make it a
galazy wide tardding post.

--

Clayten_Hamacher@Mindlink.bc.ca                 Land of the rising snow.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: Clayten_Hamacher@mindlink.bc.ca (Clayten Hamacher)
Subject: Re: Warp Speed Info PLEASE!!!!!
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 01:59:44 GMT

>-In "Where no One Has Gone Before," Geordi says the Enterprise will need
> 300 years to travel 2.7 million light-years. This is supposedly warp 9+

2,700,000 / 300 = 9000..

warp 9 = 9000 times the speed of light

>-In "Q Who," the ship would have needed 2 years 7 months to travel from
> Borg space [7,000 light-years away] back to the Federation [at warp 6?].

Hmmm, this should have taken 9.3_ months at w9.. no idea why they'd use w6..
this implies that w9 is 3.3_ times faster than w6... Does this fit with what
the books say (about w6 * 3 = w9.. if so you can work out a speed for w6)

7000ly / 2.583_ (2 years 7 months) = 2709.67-ly...therefore w6 = 2709c

>-During the 1st and 3rd seasons of TNG, the ship visited distant "real"
> star systems, then returned to Earth later the same year. The episodes
> were "Encounter at Farpoint" and "Who Watches the Watchers", the star
> systems were Deneb (1,800ly. away) and Mintaka (2,500ly.), the ship
> returned home in "Conspiracy" and "Best of Both Worlds pt.II." This
> translates to a velocity of 2,500-3,000c - presumably warp 6 again.

1800 * 2 + 2500 * 2 = 8600

The enterprise probably didn't go directly there or back and might not have
been to Earth between both long trips so we aren't sure of the distance.
This doesn't work out because they use w3-6 for general travel, w8 and above
is emergency speed only.

If we assume w9 = 9000c then this traslates into warp 8.9 or some such.

Using these numbers you should be able to get a rough idea of the formula
unfortunately you don't have exact numbers but...

P.S. I heard x^3 and x^5 for speeds. the first is 729c at w9, the second is
59049c...x^4 (the one I haven't heard mentioned) would ALMOST work at 6561c..
This would assume they'd come back the 2.7 million lys at around w9.5...

This would put w6 at 1296c.. That wouldn't fit the trip back from Borg space.


Oh well, I'd use x^4..That's fits the best for these times/distances they
give us.


--

Clayten_Hamacher@Mindlink.bc.ca                 Land of the rising snow.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu (Colin J. Wynne)
Subject: Re: NCC-1701D vs. Death Star
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:44:13 GMT
Organization: Washington & Lee University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Kurt Roithinger (kfr@pro-freedom.cts.com) wrote:
: oh, please.
: 1701-D vs. stardestroyer = big, big problem for the empire.
: the SW movies frequently stated that their beam weapons are "lasers" or
: "turbolasers". well, lasers went out of service even before TOS. phasers
: are supposed to be almost 5 times more powerful. considering photon torps.
: put out even more power and the fact that imperial stardestroyer seem to
: have rather mediocre shield technology (two fighters blow out the shield
: generator in "jedi" and the superstardestroyer looses its bridge soon
: thereafter...)
: the only advantage a stardestroyer might have: size.
: they are about four times bigger then the enterprise - D.
: but then, they are likely to be four times less manouverable...

How about the fact that Star Wars ships cannot manoeuvre at warp speed? 
Any Trek ship would absolutely run rings around a Star Destroyer, and
should never -- ever! -- be so much as scratched.

Colin

--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  =====  Colin J. Wynne                     Washington & Lee University  =====
  =====  cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu              Lexington, Virginia      =====
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
From: se2ah@dmu.ac.uk (Wibble)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Holodeck (again)
Date: 5 Jan 93 15:13:27 GMT
Organization: De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

If the holodeck is so good that it can infact do all of these wonderful mind
bending stunts. Then why, in the first episode does riker through a rock at the
wall an it actually hits it.  Surely the computer could make it appear to go
off into the distance.

There are a few other strange things about the first episode like why do they walk all the way back to the place where riker came in, on a later episode all
they need to do is say exit and one appears next to them (this would be because
they haven't actually moved that far from the exit, the computer has just moved the scenery).

just a few thoughts.

Arron
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: sweet@ug.cs.dal.ca (garth r sweet)
Subject: Re: why transporters can't work
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 12:02:41 GMT

Dave Touretzky (dst+@cs.cmu.edu) wrote:
> 
> I guess I would view this as believable if we occasionally saw questions get
> asked during transport.  Example:
> 
>   Riker:  "Enterprise, one to beam up -- immediately!"
>   O'Brien:  "Do you want the doorknob to come with you, Sir?"
>   Riker:  "No, of course not."
>   O'Brien:  "Then let go of it please.  Sir."
>   Riker:  "Oh, sorry.  Energize."
>   O'Brien:  "Ah, just a minute, Sir.  What's that on your feet?"
>   Riker:  "Altarean bunny slippers."
>   O'Brien:  "Made from live bunnies?  Hmmm.  You want to bring the bunnies?"
>   Riker:  "No.  Leave 'em behind."
>   O'Brien:  "Aye, sir.  One to beam up, hold the bunnies."
> 

	I would pay BIG money to see this episode!!! :-)

+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
+ Name : Garth Sweet        + Hackers Motto:                               +
+ email: sweet@ug.cs.dal.ca +   "Getting there is ALL the fun!"            +
+ phone: 902-865-8987       +                                              +
+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: comptec92062@camins.camosun.bc.ca
Subject: NEED DATA'S CAPACITY??
Summary: What is Data Capacity?  What happens when it is met?
Organization: Camosun College
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:16:37 GMT



Could anyone out there tell me if Data has a memory storage capacity and if so
what is it.  What will happen when he reaches this limit?



M.R.
From: MLINDROOS@FINABO.ABO.FI (Marcus Lindroos INF)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Date: 6 Jan 93 12:23:42 GMT
Organization: Abo Akademi University, Finland
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <1993Jan5.205235.10596@mtxinu.COM> scherrer@mtxinu.COM writes:

> Recently we were making a 3-dimensional model of our galaxy to show
> kids where our solar system lies, and where a few of the commonly
> known stars and nebula are in relation to us.   Turns out that, with
> a model about 14" in diameter, most of what we see with the naked
> eye, and have heard of, is within about 1/2" of our solar system.   
> 
> It would be great fun to show the kids how far the Enterprise has
> claimed to have traveled.  Has anyone ever charted the various
> "voyages of the Starship Enterprise" to get a feel for where it's
> visited in our galaxy (other than the center of the galaxy in
> Star Trek V and an abortive attempt to get outside the galaxy in "Where
> No Man Has Gone Before)?   Are all the names of stars they use for real,
> or do they generate them just for the occasion?   Anybody collected a
> list of them?

The most distant "real" systems visited are Mintaka [don't remember its Greek
letter & constellation] (2600ly.), Deneb [=Alpha Cygni] 1800ly. and Rigel
[=Beta Orionis] 900 light-years away. In all, some 20 "real" stars have been
mentioned in STAR TREK movies/episodes. All but three are within 200
light-years of the Sun. About seven or eight are within 50ly. of the Solar
system  (hm...Alpha Centauri, Tau Ceti, Capella, Pollux, Altair, Arcturus...?).
Most important among the rest is Gamma Hydrae some 120 ly. from our Sun. If
STAR TREK II:THE WRATH OF KHAN is to be believed, the Klingon neutral zone is
in the vicinity of that star system.
---
Sounds like a great idea to use Star Trek as a tool for promoting astronomy
among kids! Incidentally, I am working on a computer program that will display
the same thing. I also have a database of the 3,500 known star systems within 
80 ly. of our Sun. Perhaps you and the kids could try to make a
three-dimensional map of the galactic neighborhood:-) You need a huge circular
surface to represent the X & Y-axes. The stars are pins of varying
length depending on the Z-coordinate of the star in question, attached to the 
XY-surface in its correct position. This way, one could display the locations 
of stars in the XYZ-plane.

MARCU$
> -- 
> Deborah Scherrer                                 scherrer@mtxinu.com
> Mt Xinu, Inc.                               ..!uunet!mtxinu!scherrer
> 2560 Ninth Street
> Berkeley, CA  94710                                     510-644-0146
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: kfr@pro-freedom.cts.com (Kurt Roithinger)
Subject: Re: Excelsior class ship that was blasted in DS9 (Spoilers)
Date: 11 Jan 93  1:23:07 GMT 
Organization: ProLine [pro-freedom] AppleVan (Apple UG of Vancouver, WA)

ugh!
as far as i know the saratoga is a miranda class starship.
there are some very good resons for it not being a soyuz class:
1. geordi says that soyuz class ships were phased out something like 60 to
80 years ago in that one episode were the sole soyuz class ship (the uss
bozeman) shows up.
2. a soyuz class has a extra piece of superstructure on which a top and
bottom turret is mounted. the saratoga had neither.
3. the DS9 saratoga presumably is the same starship (sans the rollbar with
the megaphasers and photon torpedo pod) seen in ST IV (the probe flies past
it and its lights go out....).

as for the ship you cannot identifie:
i think it is whats left of the excelsior class ship (the melbourne?) that
had its saucer section fried earlier.

ProLine:  kfr@pro-freedom
Internet: kfr@pro-freedom.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-freedom!kfr
==============================================================
From: tchua@soda.qmw.ac.uk (Terence Chua)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: More Holodeck
Date: 5 Jan 93 08:09:10
Organization: QMW Department of Laws
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: mart4678@mach1.wlu.ca's message of 5 Jan 93 15:17:53 GMT

Re: the Holodeck within a Holodeck idea.

Actually, the novel BOOGIEMEN dealt with that - kind of. The always-convenient
malfunction caused the crew to not be sure if they had left theHolodeck or not.
Eventually, they called all the "crew" together, and the Holodeck, unable to
handle over a 1000 crewmembers, shut down.

----------
Terence Chua
CO USS Wayfarer, NCC-2004
Starfleet Command Quadrant 2 (Singapore)
e-mail: T.Chua@qmw.ac.uk
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terence Chua, Dept of Laws, Queen Mary College, University of London
Snail Mail: 22 Courcy Road, London N8 0QH
Telephone: (044)081-888-1210
E-Mail: T.Chua@qmw.ac.uk or TL2010@qmw.ac.uk or tchua@soda.berkeley.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am not a free man, I am a lawyer!"
From: ko_mike@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Michael Y Ko)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Date: 13 Jan 1993 00:49:07 -0500
Organization: Homewood Academic Computing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu

A little small? 70,000 light years? The Milky Way Galaxy is only 100,000
light years across? Starfleet hasn't even mapped 1/5 of the galaxy. 70,000
light years is extremely far from here.
From: andrew.nipperess@f605.n712.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Andrew Nipperess)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: time travel 2
Organization: Fidonet. Gate admin is fido@socs.uts.edu.au
Date: 29 Dec 92 21:03:00 GMT

Original to: Robinson@Elux2.Cs.Umass.
-On the day of 12-03-92  23:15, Richard Robinson spoke unto All, 
                                                        and he did sayeth-
  [discussion concerning time, whole numbers, etc]

 Ro> Actually, physicists generally agree that time has a minimum
 Ro> measurable unit, which I believe is labelled 'Planck's time'. I don't
 Ro> know what the value is though. A pretty small amount, to be sure.
 Ro> --
 Ro> Dread                                 (Richard Robinson, 
 Ro> Univ of Mass, Amherst)
 Ro> robinson@elux3.cs.umass.edu           "There is no right, 
 Ro> there is only power!"
 Ro> dread@titan.ucc.umass.edu                    "Kill them, kill them
 Ro> all!"  
 Ro> -!- *IXgate.
 Ro>  ! Origin: The Realm of Dread (via IXgate 3:713/602)

  One Planck Time is about 10^-43 seconds long- the amount of time it takes 
  for light to cross the diameter of an electron. Planck's Mass and Planck's
  Distance (about 10^-27 m from memory) are also defined units, but I can't 
  remember their definitions.

  I have an article in an issue of _New Scientist_ from mid-1992 about time
  travel, saying that there are constant timespace eddies whose sizes are no
  bigger than Planck units. I'll have to dig it out sometime to throw a
little
  more darkness on the conversation.

                                Nipper


... The sexes are equal with their erogenous zones blown sky-high!
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.10

--- Maximus 2.01wb
 * Origin: THE WHITE LODGE (3:712/605)
From: CXMP@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CXMP000)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: time travel 2
Date: 7 Jan 93 14:29:05 GMT
Organization: McGill University

In article <3_712_605.02b410354@Kralizec.fido.zeta.org.au> andrew.nipperess@f605.n712.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Andrew Nipperess) writes:
>Original to: Robinson@Elux2.Cs.Umass.
>
> Ro> Actually, physicists generally agree that time has a minimum
> Ro> measurable unit, which I believe is labelled 'Planck's time'. I don't
> Ro> know what the value is though. A pretty small amount, to be sure.
> Ro> --
>
>  One Planck Time is about 10^-43 seconds long- the amount of time it takes
>  for light to cross the diameter of an electron. Planck's Mass and Planck's
>  Distance (about 10^-27 m from memory) are also defined units, but I can't
>  remember their definitions.
>
From: Mailer-Daemon@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Subject: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 2
>
Planck's mass is equal to the square root of hc/G where h is Planck's
constant, c is the speed of light and G is the gravitational constant.

Planck's time is h/Mc^2 == square root of hG/c^5.  It has NOTHING
apriori to do with electrons.  Really.

Planck's length is Tc == square root of hG/c^3.

There you go.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
!                               ! Address as above or use              !
! Martin Phipps (aka Deja Dude) ! LOULA@hep.physics.mcgill.ca or simply!
!                               ! MUHEP::LOULA if you're on a VAX      !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
!Read my stories on!Read what I have to say on!Not the Technical Manual!
!  alt.comics.lnh  !  rec.arts.comics.xbooks  ! rec.arts.startrek.tech !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Also look for _The Definitive STAR TREK Parody_ on r.a.startrek.misc
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dave@admiral.uucp (Dave Litchman)
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Organization: The Admiral's Unix System & The Grid BBS
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 08:24:58 GMT

In article <1993Jan9.040417.9652@liberty.uc.wlu.edu> cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu (Colin J. Wynne) writes:
>Umm, in DS9: Emissary, they say that the worm hole carried them either
>7000 or *70,000* light years from Bajor.  SOmeone might check that,
>because the latter is truly impossible to swallow.

And the former isn't? 7,000 ly and 70,000 are both astronomically huge
distances, what differenciates the impossible from the possible?

DSN is, after all, science FICTION, they can do whatever the hell they like...

And it was 70,000 ly...


-- 
"Dr. McCoy, would you do me the very great honor of eating my shorts?" -Spock
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ray, when somebody asks you if you're a god, you say YES!" -- Winston Zeddmore
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: wolfram@rbhp65.rbg.informatik.th-darmstadt.de ()
Subject: Re: Stardates
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 16:09:06 GMT
Organization: TU Darmstadt

In article <1993Jan1.225845.197@kenyon.edu>, mannerl@kenyon.edu writes:
>  This is just a dumb guess, but Stardates look just like Julian dates.
> 
>                                             J.H.M.
Nah!
Sorry, no bonus.

BTW, Julian dates count +1 each day and are *today* _much_
higher than 45000.
In the year 2200+ (or whenever) they'll be even higher.

--

+-----------------+-------+-----------------------------------------------+
| Wolfram Kresse  |  _ _  | E-Mail: wolfram@rbg.informatik.th-darmstadt.de|
+-----------------+       +-----------------------------------------------+
| I-)   Hi,Will!  | -O-O- |Last words of a driving instructor:"Now try it |
| :-{)} Hi,Geordi!|   >   |yourself!" / of a lift passenger:"Down,please."|
+-----------------+ _____ +-----------------------------------------------+
| CU l8r, LE g8r! |   U   |"Meeneemeeneemeenee" "Yes,that's right,Tweeky."|
+-----------------+-------------------------------------------------------+

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: stanford@leland.Stanford.EDU (Scott Stanford)
Subject: Re: Ship in DS9 (and ST4?)
Organization: none whatsoever
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 21:15:54 GMT

In article <1993Jan9.075426.2896@usl.edu> aea@cacs.usl.edu (Edwin Alexander) writes:

>: Wasn't the Saratoga the ship that got disabled by the whale seeker
>: in ST4?

>You are absolutely right.  The other disabled ship was the Yorktown, ironically
>the ship that became the Enterprise-A according to the Tech. Manual.  Odd,
>considering how they commented in the beginning of ST5 that "the ship must have
>been put together by a bunch of monkeys."  Who knows, maybe it needed a refit.

Actually, in all this discussion of "This ship name is this ship type"
that is happening in this and the "what Excelsior-class ship got nuked
in DS9" thread, keep in mind that several ships of different classes
can have the same name.  This is done for several reasons, even to
confuse the enemy in times of war.  For example, we know that
Yorktown, Saratoga, and Enterprise have been United States carriers,
Yorktown is currently an Aegis Cruiser (I believe) that was used in
the Middle East, all three are (were? arg) Constitution-class Heavy
Cruisers in TOS (according to the classic Tech manual - or at least
they were contracted to build), and as we know, Yorktown and Saratoga
are of the Avenger/Knox-types and Enterprise continues to evolve.
Note that today (1993) almost every navy on the planet has a ship
called "Dolphin" and possibly a couple in each.

Scott
-- 
Scott Stanford                 |)  Eenie meenie miney moe.
stanford@leland.stanford.edu  /|   Catch a tiger by the toe.
                             ((|,) If he hollers...yeah whatEVER.
"MORE Doctah Peppah!!"        ~|~  He's EATIN' your ass.  Run, you idiot.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cboerm48@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Boerma)
Subject: Re: AirForce/Army vs StarFleet
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:06:57 GMT

adamg@lemming.csd.sgi.com (Adam Ginsberg) writes:

>Would it be safe to assume that in the 23rd century, there
>would be no Army/AirForce equivalent of Star Fleet (Naval Model)

>Would you suppose there would still be a need for a Land Army
>and a planetary air-force ?

>If so, could you imagine the inter-service rivalry which could
>develop?

This post, along with another thread about Battleships vs. Carriers
brings up a point that I've often wondered: Why are there not fighters in 
Star Trek?

			CtB
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 09:27:57 EST
From: <TMS139@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Warp Speed Info PLEASE!!!!!

I thought that in "Q Who," Data said warp _8_ when stating how long (2 years,
7 months, ...) it would take to return to the Federation base.
Only relying on memory here.

Tim
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: mls@wuee1.wustl.edu (Michael L. Schirmer)
Subject: Re: Trill Symbiosis
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:53:26 GMT

In article <susser-110193133617@susser.apple.com> susser@apple.com (Joshua Susser) writes:
> [...]
>So the payoff for the rider is a mobile body and a fresh outlook on life to
>rejuvenate its psyche.  The payoff for the host is the knowlege and wisdom
>of the rider, and the eventual continuation of its personality when the
>rider moves on.
>

Makes sense, in as much as the Trill species does.  Image in emotional
problems associated with repeatedly changing genders and appearance.  Must be
incredibly hard for the rider to develop a gender identity when it can change.
And we thought puberty was hard...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't want no...  Don't need no...  Ain't got no .sig