HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: uhs@jab.tucson.az.us (Rob Macomber)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Beyond Infinity
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 19:05:54 PDT
Organization: Just Another Bbs. Tucson, AZ

murphy@gibbs.physics.purdue.edu (William J. Murphy) writes:

> stuff about warp 10 being the maximum....
> 
> I have been reading the book Probe which gives the events immediatley followi
> "The Voyage Home".  In it, the Probe takes the Enterprise and the Romulan shi
> Galtizh on a trip to its home world at warp 30.  So what is it?  is the autho
> nuts?  Are the warp tables wrong?  How did Q transport them to the Borg secto
> nearly instantaneously? Didn't the Borg move faster than warp 10?

According to the TNG tech manual, the warp scale was recalibrated by Gene 
Roddenberry. Apparently, they were still on the ^3 scale for _Probe_.
       
                        Rob Macomber
                         (uhs@jab.tucson.az.us)
From: count@mits.mdata.fi (Bror Heinola)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Warp eleven mystery
Keywords: Impossible
Date: 3 Sep 92 21:02:17 GMT
Organization: ImproVision Entertainment UnLtd.

Hello net.world.

This is propably an old one but it doesn't hurt to ask, right?

Yesterday I read TNG book #6, "Power Hungry" by Howard Weinstein.
I quote from page 11 of that book;

	Data scanned his console. "Retreating at ... warp eleven." 
	His eyebrows rose in surprise at the speed - faster than
	the Enterprise could manage.

I've always thought that Warp 10 was *the* limit for speed for all ships
in the StarTrek universe, not just Federation ships. Those warp eleven
ships were Nuaran, so I guess they have very impressive warp technology, eh?

-- 
Bror 'Count' Heinola	# Count in IRC		# 
Mannerheimintie 47 B 25	# count@mits.mdata.fi	# "I've got a bad feeling
00250  HELSINKI		# count@fline.pp.fi	# about this."
Tel: +358-0-477-2662	# Colombo in MUDs	#
From: wesiegel@cie.uoregon.edu (William Siegel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Enterprises's Shields (TNG) are Worthless
Date: 29 Aug 92 02:16:56 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange

In article <1992Aug26.165415.22496@hellgate.utah.edu> jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley) writes:
>In article <_kpyh-a@rpi.edu> petitc@rpi.edu writes:
>> They really are.  Think about this little scenario:
>
>Technically this makes sense.  But consider that what is explained
>technically may not be visually appealing for the viewer.  Phrased
>another way, if the shields were impervious to visible EM frequencies,
>then when the ship's shields went up you'd just see the shields
>(probably something resembling a mirrored egg) and not the ship
>inside.  That's not very exciting to look at.  It might be neat for a
>gimmick, but not for everyday viewing.
>
>That's also (ostensibly) the reason why the ENTERPRISE doesn't have a
>cloaking device.  What would the viewer be looking at while the
>ENTERPRISE is cloaked?  Not much.
>
>If the visual aspect of Star Trek accurately reflected the technical
>aspect, it just wouldn't be a fun show to watch.  Space battles are
>much more exciting when we can see the ships slugging it out at close
>quarters, although technically they would be better represented as
>thousands of kilometers apart.  The problem of permeable shields is
>similar.
>
>Visual drama employs these kinds of omnipotentencies all the time.  We
>violate real world constraints all the time, we're just used to most
>of them.  So while the shields are obviously impermeable to lasers (I
>think this is canon) of whatever wavelength, we, the omnipotent
>viewer, can see through them.
>--------------------------------+---------------------------------------
>Jay Windley                     | jwindley@asylum.cs.utah.edu
>Department of Computer Science  +---------------------------------------
>Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City   | <insert snappy quote here>

In "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise" the shields were described as a 
kind of transporter related technology which projected a transparent 
molecular layer of trititanium into space around the ship with some 
sophisticated energies which acted as feedback to the computer's to step
up generation of the shields at a greater rate.  When the rate of generation is 
exceeded does the weapon's energies get to the ship.  Apparently these 
sophisticated energies are localised to specific shield paramaters, like plates
of armor, and are why one can't use transporters to beam into and out of a ship
but that the Entereprise 1701-A was  able to beam out personnel if necessary bec
because it could lower the shields on any of its tranporter transmiters.

I hope this is a help.  It has been a long time since I have read "Mr. Scott's
Guide to the Enterprise" and may have some incorrect information.  I also
realize that "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise" may not be considered canon.

Thank you.
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:26:07 -0400 
From: "Michael B. Miller" <mmcg+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Seatbelts

I have just a tiny question, one which a friend of mine keeps
complaining about...why is it that nobody in the bridge, even when they
know they are going to get blasted, ever wears a seatbelt?????????


Thank you ever so much for your help!!!   :)
From: rfd@po.CWRU.Edu (Richard F. Drushel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: what is the significance of 11001001 in "11001001"
Date: 2 Sep 1992 20:25:51 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: rfd@po.CWRU.Edu (Richard F. Drushel)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, GLETTY@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu ("Bruce E. Gletty") says:

>In article <181jprINNe2@agate.berkeley.edu>
>ph111-bx@violet.berkeley.edu (;;;;7202) writes:
> 
>>In article <92Sep02.031401.26433@acs.ucalgary.ca> jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca
>>(Joshua Bell) writes:
>>}Unless I'm mistaken, 11001001 is 'I' in ASCII. Surely the most
>>}important word in the universe. :)
>>
>>You're mistaken.  01001001 is 'I' in ASCII.
> 
>Yup, hex C9 is I in EBCDIC - 11001001

	I always thought of it as the four possible combinations of
bits taken 2 at a time:

	11
	00
	10
	01

Of course, 201 decimal (C9 hex) is a RET instruction for the Z80 :)
-- 
Rich Drushel ** rfd@po.CWRU.edu *** Biology Ph.D. Student ** Cleveland FreeNet
Co-Sysop, Coleco ADAM Forum --- Assistant Sysop, Science Fiction & Fantasy SIG
"Solda pung apfashat ro des-marno, / Marn ladir o armag noth yeni arno. / Hell
miryat it, / Jambo iat it, / Os lasse wei ticip kati baldo." / Old Ennish poem
From: mcclaine@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Casey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: A theory on whizzing stars...
Date: 27 Aug 92 00:44:31 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Aug25.112925.1@bronco.fnal.gov> colombo@bronco.fnal.gov writes:
>Why does the E (in the opening credits) disappear in a flash of light?
>Later, you can *see* it cruising at FTL speed, with a little blue
>(I think?) shifting at the back even though its coming towards you?
>The flash when going to FTL speed kinda reminds me of SW, but they
>never tried to show you what it looked like at FTL speed.
>
>I don't by the streaking stars either, for one thing, they are red
>AND blue shifted all the time (at FTL speed). The big E may have warp
>coils, but the starts don't, so how can you even see them when you
>are travelling FTL?  Doesn't the Einstein thought experiment (the
>subway train) explain that it would be dark all around you and that
>the only light would be coming from a point in front of you?
>

	Boy, you guys sure ask the tricky questions!  I am not sure
	if I can even come up with a reasonable excuse for these occurrences.
	I am not even sure the SFX guys thought about it much.

	The light flash could be due to a phenomenon similar to a sonic boom,
	only this time instead of a sonic explosion, we have a photonic one
	as the starship crosses the light speed barrier.

	As for the blue and red shifting, this may not necessarily happen
	if the warp field encloses a portion of time-space that moves
	with the ship, just as a car with the windows rolled up carries
	its atmosphere with it.  Therefore, the stretched ("smeared")
	light of the star radiates off of the transparent layer of the 
	warp field and passes to the ship with little shifting because, for
	the most part, the starship is not moving at a very high velocity with
	respect to a majority of the components of the warp field.  You
	do see a slight color shift, but only a minor amount.  However, 
	it may be possible that the starship would see a point of no light
	directly aft, since the light is trying to chase the ships direction
	of travel.


	So, HA!      :)      



	_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/   	Troi:  "Worf, what exactly is that band
	_/     _/  _/       _/     _/   that you wear on your uniform?"
	_/     _/  _/       _/              
	_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/   _/            
	_/   _/    _/       _/          Worf:  "It's a Klingon flea collar." 
	_/    _/   _/       _/     _/      
	_/     _/  _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/      
	Robert E. Casey  (mcclaine@milton.u.washington.edu)
From: pdg@crosfield.co.uk (paul goffin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Seatbelts
Date: 28 Aug 92 10:52:21 GMT
Organization: Crosfield Electronics, Hemel Hempstead, United Kingdom.

In article <17jehiINNp3v@agate.berkeley.edu> ph111-bx@violet.berkeley.edu (;;;;7202) writes:
#In article <cebFszy00WBK84e19z@andrew.cmu.edu> "Michael B. Miller"
#<mmcg+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
#>I have just a tiny question, one which a friend of mine keeps
#>complaining about...why is it that nobody in the bridge, even when they
#>know they are going to get blasted, ever wears a seatbelt?????????

#I think the short answer is the inertial dampening system is supposed
#to absorb all the jolts and keep the ride smoother than a buick's.

Of course, in ST:TMP, they DID.

Well actually, the chairs had those built in restrainers.

Paul


-- 
+-------------+-------------------------------------------------------+
+ Paul Goffin +  Crosfield Electronics Ltd. U.K.  +44 442 230000x3357 +
+             +  Opinions expressed are mine! (Yours for a small fee) +
+-------------+-------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou)
Subject: Re: Twin paradox 
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:42:12 GMT



Here's a tough one for all you relativistic geniuses:


Suppose we have two twins A and B each in a spacechip, and they both start
from the Earth, like this:


t = 0                        AEB
t = 1                      A  E  B
t = 2                 A       E       B
...
t = X-1     A   ...           E            ...     B
t = X     A   ...             E          ...         B
t = X+1     A   ...           E             ...    B
...
t = 2X-2              A       E       B
t = 2X-1                   A  E  B
t = 2X                       AEB

So, they both accelerate and feel and acceleration, of course.

The question is: Will they have aged the same way?


Me, I'd think yes since their movement is perfectly simmetrical.


Pak.
--
/---------------------------\
| Patrick "Paradak" Rannou. |
| Rannou@info.polymtl.ca    |
\---------------------------/
From: hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Beyond Infinity
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:44:20 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

melvin@alien.enet.dec.com writes:
>
<hinson@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson) writes...
<> 
<>BEYOND warp 10 would imply time travel.  You would have to get there 
<>even FASTER -- meaing you get to point B BEFORE you leave point A.
<> 
<
<What about the travel through the worm hole, by Geordi and Data?  What was the
<speed there (distance/time)?
<
<What about Q when he took the Enterprise to its first meeting with the Borg 
<ship?
<
<What about Barclay taking the Enterprise 30,000 light years in a small amount
<of time?
<
<What about The Traveler taking the Enterprise where "NO one has gone before"?
<
<
<The numbers you gave would fit WARP technology, but given other techniques,
<those numbers might not be applicable.
<
<-Joe

In each of those cases you can discribe thier speed as some warp factor
between warp 9 and warp 10 (if we knew what the actual warp equation was).
So what's your point?

-Jay
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: artn@bert.eecs.uic.edu (Ellyn Sandor)
Subject: Re: Seatbelts
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 22:18:41 GMT

	I have the tech manual, but don't remember if this is addressed
there...  Maybe the 250 ms delay on the IDF is to prevent injury.  In
other words, there is a force on the ship to the left (sorry, port).
The IDF has to expert an equal force to the right.  Perhaps the quarter
second is to make absolutely-"I tell you 300 times" sure that it's not
an error in sensors?  Or perhaps to make sure that the force in
question stays happening - averaging out fluctuations or something...

		sbm
-- 
--
Stephan Meyers | artn@uicbert.eecs.uic.edu
(Art)^n Laboratories, inventors of the Stealth Negative PHSCologram
(312) 567-3762
From: chrstie@ccu.umanitoba.ca (William John M. Christie)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: A theory on whizzing stars...
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:18:08 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

Using a Mac shareware program called Orion in order for me to observe stars
moving I need to travel at a few light-years per second.  Far faster than
the warp drive actually moved things (or am I wrong, we're looking at a huge
number here and even warp 9, with the nine cubed to indicate the speed
relative to c not even close).
I thought Orion was a relatively accurate example of moving through 3-D
space but of course it doesn't take into account the warpage of space-time
when approaching speeds near c (let alone those way over).
For a visualization of that I suggest those of you interested in that try
hunting around for the 'updated' Cosmos episodes.  The one which deals with
relatively has an addendum at the end showing what it looks like moving 
through a lattice at vel<<c and vel<=c.  This type of action could provide for
the effect of stars whizzing by in lines.
-- 
==========================================================================
  Any opinions expressed above are usually made with some thought which   
  is my own and is not intended to represent the University in any way.
==========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Beyond Infinity
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 04:45:39 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <8160@dirac.physics.purdue.edu> murphy@gibbs.physics.purdue.edu (William J. Murphy) writes:
>stuff about warp 10 being the maximum....
>
>I have been reading the book Probe which gives the events immediatley following
>"The Voyage Home".  In it, the Probe takes the Enterprise and the Romulan ship
>Galtizh on a trip to its home world at warp 30.  So what is it?  is the author
>nuts?  Are the warp tables wrong?  How did Q transport them to the Borg sector
>nearly instantaneously? Didn't the Borg move faster than warp 10?

I think that'd follow the TOS/TAS/TFS warp definition -
velocity = c * warp^3 (is that right? Its something simple)

For TNG, where the 'maximum of warm 10' things come from, the
relationship isn't simple - someone plotted a formula for it.
Velocity increases hyperbolicly (sp?) as warp -> 10. The TNG
definition of Warp 10 is rather like the relativistic definition
of c - infinite amount of energy to get there. Hmmm... :)

I'd imagine that whenever the Enterprise gets 'bonked' and goes
spinning off with warp-stars its going 9.999.... etc, but when it
gets 'flashed' somewhere (has the Q ever done that?) or Barkley
moves it through subspace it doesn't even touch warp field
dynamics, so TNG holds itself together (wow!) WRT internal
consistancy.

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 +
From: ph111-bx@violet.berkeley.edu (;;;;7202)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: what is the significance of 11001001 in "11001001"
Date: 2 Sep 1992 05:34:51 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.berkeley.edu

In article <92Sep02.031401.26433@acs.ucalgary.ca> jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca
(Joshua Bell) writes:
}Unless I'm mistaken, 11001001 is 'I' in ASCII. Surely the most
}important word in the universe. :)

You're mistaken.  01001001 is 'I' in ASCII.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Holodeck Tech
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 21:22:38 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <17je9nINNp2r@agate.berkeley.edu> ph111-bx@violet.berkeley.edu (;;;;7202) writes:
>In article <1992Aug27.142501.2049@wkuvx1.bitnet> kinnema@wkuvx1.bitnet
>(Mark Kinney, Attorney at Chaos) writes:
>>In article <92Aug25.154127.19248@acs.ucalgary.ca>, jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca
>(Joshua Bell) writes:
>>> In my so-called memory, they're relaxing in the environment deck
>>> when something goes wrong and the nice summer day is replaced by
>>> driving snow and (of course) they can't get out.
>>> 
>>> I suspect I was (1) too young during the first repeats I saw to
>>> notice much, (2) mistook the episode where Chekov and crew are
>>> stuck on the ice-planet while Kirk's split in two for the e.
>>> deck

You quoters nipped (3) and (4) - 4 turned out to be right (thanks
to whomever it was that sent me mail!), there was an environment
deck on the TAS, and in one episode McCoy & co got trapped in
there when the computer went nuts, and they get hit with a
snowstorm. I guess it was so long ago my mind tried to convince
itself I hadn't seen it. :)

>>You might be thinking about the episode where some of the crew gets
>>shanghaied by an alien evacuating the planets population into the past
>>before the star goes nova.

>Nope.  He's thinking of the first season episode "The Enemy Within"
>with the Freudian Id/Super-Ego Kirks (we actually watched this one
>in a high school psychology class).  The crew on the ice-planet didn't
>include Chekov since he didn't appear 'til the second season.

Thats the one I was thinking of. Was it Sulu trapped down there,
Scotty? I know it was 1 of the seven.

And I recall reading that they didn't send a shuttlecraft down to
save them as they didn't have enough $$ to build a shuttlecraft
at that point. :)

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
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Subject: Re: Enterprises's Shields (TNG) are Worthless
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 23:27:59 GMT
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco

In article <_kpyh-a@rpi.edu> petitc@rpi.edu writes:
> A ship approaches the E., and fires lasers (visible ones).  Since we CAN see
>the ship, wouldn't it make sense that a visible laser would just ignore the
>shield and cut the E. into little chunks of metal?

Nope.  Shields interrupt and disperse high-energy beams hitting the
ship.  Low-energy waves, such as normal visible light, pass through
unaltered, meaning that it would be entirely possible to hit the
Enterprise with a beam from a flashlight, but it wouldn't do much
good. ;)

Phasers are partially effective against shields, but the raw energy of
lasers is a trivial matter for the shields to deal with.

     << Brian >>

-- 
_/_/_/       Brian Kendig  Macintosh Jedi           Live never to be ashamed
 _/_/   Starfleet Captain  Oracle Employee         if anything you do or say
  _/  Intrepid Adventurer  Saturn SL2 Owner    is published around the world
      bskendig@netcom.com  Twin Peaks Junkie    -- even if what is published
    Princeton '92! BSE/CS  Writer/Actor/Singer                   is not true.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: lipscomb@lonestar.utsa.edu (David S. Lipscomb)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Moving during transport
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:29:40 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <james.3.715528057@library.nrl.navy.mil> james@library.nrl.navy.mil (James King) writes:
>I thought that in the ST:TNG Tech Manual, it stated that the confinement
>field restricted movement to collect the pattern.  But, I noticed the same
>thing that you did, THEY MOVE!  Is this a oversight on the part of Paramount?

Remember that the tech manual can be contradicted at any moment by the show.
the show is canon not the manual.
>
>James King
>Naval Research Lab
>Washington, DC
From: KELSEY@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (KELSEY, Michael H.)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Twin paradox
Date: 26 Aug 92 07:03:04 GMT
 <714630047snx@keris.demon.co.uk> <RANNOU.92Aug25044212@zuse.info.polymtl.ca>
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

In article <RANNOU.92Aug25044212@zuse.info.polymtl.ca>, Rannou@info.polymtl.ca
(Patrick Rannou) says:
>
>Here's a tough one for all you relativistic geniuses:
>
>
>Suppose we have two twins A and B each in a spacechip, and they both start
>from the Earth, like this:
>
>
[ Diagram deleted.  A & B travel in opposite directions at the same speed
for the same amount of time, turn around and come back. ]
>
>So, they both accelerate and feel and acceleration, of course.
>
>The question is: Will they have aged the same way?
>
>
>Me, I'd think yes since their movement is perfectly simmetrical.
>
You're right.  Draw the space time diagram using the single space coordinate
R for distance from Earth, since space is spherically symmetric (there is
no preferred coordinate system).  Then A and B follow identical world lines,
and hence must have the same internal experiences, such as time passage.
Not tough at all, just applying the SR postulates.

                                                     -- Mike Kelsey

[  My opinions are not endorsed by SLAC, Caltech, or the US government  ]
What is your _name_?    "kelsey@slacvm.slac.stanford.edu"
What is your _quest_?   "To get a Ph.D. in high-energy physics"
When will you _finish_? "I don't know.   Waaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh..."
From: hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Beyond Infinity
Date: 1 Sep 92 23:09:34 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

In article <180m5pINN8d9@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> worth@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Jason Worthington) writes:
>Wasn't there an episode of TOS where the Enterprise exceeded Warp 10?  I can't
>remember the name.  I can't remember the plot, but I do remember something about
>a safety device becoming fused, causing the Enterprise engines to run wild.
>
>Jason Worthington
>Kansas State University, Manhattan KS
>worth@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

As I said, perhaps this should be a quickFAQ list put up every other day or 
so:

The warp speeds in TOS are not the same as in TNG.
In TOS, the speed was warp^3 * c.
In TNG, the exponent is no longer simply 3. It starts as 10/3 = 3.333333333
for Warp factor = 0.  However, it changes as you go up the warp scale.
It increases gradually at first, and then sharply as you approach warp 10.
At Warp 10, the exponent and the speed are infinite.

So, if you are traveling from point A to point B going warp 10, then
you would get to point B at the same time you left point A.

Another way of saying this is that you occupy all space in your direction
of travel simultaniously.

BEYOND warp 10 would imply time travel.  You would have to get there
even FASTER -- meaing you get to point B BEFORE you leave point A.

Hope this helps:

-Jay
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech