HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Carlos A. Pero)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Course Headings
Keywords: heading
Date: 8 Oct 92 23:29:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.Bvtt9E.3o6
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

hillel@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (hillel.e.markowitz) writes:

>The course would be defined in a plane relative to the center of
>the galaxy.  It is similar to a ship on earth whose captain gives a
>command to come to course 270 degrees, meaning head due west.  It
>is valid no matter what your orientation.  In this case, the
>horizontal plane is defined as the plane of the line from the
>center of the galaxy to to edge (treating the galaxy as viewed from
>"above" as circular.  The vertical axis would be perpendicular to
>that so would go from the center of the galaxy to the "bulge".

>Zero degrees and Zero mark  are arbitrary as is the direction of
>the polar coordinates.

>Hillel Markowitz        H_Markowitz@att.com


Based on this theory (or fact), I know that Earth is considered sector
(0,0) or something like that (Times Arrow I). Does the xxx MARK yyy begin
at this sector or like you said, the center of the galaxy? Where would the
center of the galaxy be?


-- 
______________________________________________________
 \   Carlos A. Pero  -  University of Illinois at U-C  \
  \   Email to: cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu               \
   \_____________________________________________________\
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dickenjd@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (DICKENJD)
Subject: Re: News question.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 07:05:00 GMT

In article <0vyzppa@rpi.edu>, liebea@rpi.edu writes...
>In article <1ba53tINN31d@moe.ksu.ksu.edu>, kzollman@phys.ksu.edu (Kevin Zollman) writes:
>|> Have you ever woundered how people get news?  In one episode they said that they
>|> didn't have TV so how do they get news?
>|> 
>|> --Kevin Zollman
>|> --
>|> +----------ME----------+A+-----Not-me------------+--------------------------+
>|> |   Kevin Zollman      |N|    Jonathan Williams  |  Imagination is more     |
>|> |kzollman@phys.ksu.edu |D| jonvw@matt.ksu.ksu.edu| important than knowledge |
>|> |  ^^^Beginning computer users consultants^^^    |            A. Einstein   |
> 
>     Obviously, all the necessary functions of TV have been taken up by newer
>technology.  News can be transmitted via subspace, collected by a computer,
>and accessed with a suitable newsreader:-).
	Somthing like this: "Computer! Please read newsgroup Starfleet
News Current." Then the computer gives you your news articles. Just             imagine what Usenet would be like if it spanned the entire 
Federation and all of it's ships/outposts/science stations/etc. and
included simultaneous text/audio/three dimensional video/file 
packets/etc. 'Twould be pretty nifty...;-)

J. David Dickens . . . dickenjd@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu 
> 
>                                 -Adam Lieberman
>                                  liebea@rpi.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo)
Subject: Re: Lights
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 13:12:47 GMT

william@cs.arizona.edu (William (Dragon) Hertling) writes:

>In article <tomcat.719167813@cwis> tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo) writes:
>>Again...I am posting this question...Does anyone out there know what the
>>lighs are that flash under the viewscreen aboard the original Enterprise,
>>the Enterprise-A and Enterprise D?  I have been plagued with wondering
>>about this!  SOmeone..please help!

>Extensive analysis on my part, of more than 100 hours of shows and movies
>has yielded the following conclusion:

>	Those lights under the viewscreen serve the same exact purpose
>	as the lights on the front of KITT from the TV series Knight
>	Rider.

>I hope this answers your question. :-)


So it is a sensor device...for what?  To keep the crew informed on the bride
that the sensors are still active?




--
|Jeffrey S. Jo                   |	         F-14D Tomcat                 |
|Computer Operations		 |             VF-142 Ghostriders             |
|University of Nebraska at Omaha |       United States Navy F-14 Tomcat       |
|tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu         |              Fighter Squadron              |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jfarmer@fraser.sfu.ca (Jason Michael Farmer)
Subject: Re: Transporters as Weapons- Why not?
Keywords: transporter, weapon
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 17:25:34 GMT

castillo@csgrad.cs.vt.edu (Arcel Castillo) writes:

>Well, I'm not sure this qualifies, but in the episode when Picard is
>vacationing on Risa (Captain's Holiday?) he destroyed an artifact called the
>tax-utat (sp?) using Transporter Code 33.  He ordered a 3 second delay,
>placed his communicator pin on the artifact, and we saw it go up in a small
>explosion.  Couldn't this technique be used on any desired target?

Possible, but remember that transporters cannot penetrate shields

Jason Farmer

-- 
Jason Farmer                 |  Daisemi'in rhhaensuriuu
jfarmer@fraser.sfu.ca        |      meillunsiateve
Simon Fraser University      |           Rh'e Mnhei'sahe yie ahr'en:
Burnaby, British Columbia    |  
Canada                       |   Mnahe afw'ein qiuu;
                             |      rh'e hweithnaef
                             |           mrht Heis'he ehl'ein qiuu.
From: labrg@emory.edu (Ryan Montieth Gill)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Eating within the Holodeck
Date: 12 Oct 92 16:53:19 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

: |> :    Now if a member of the crew was to _live_ on the
: |> : holodeck for an extended period, eating the food 
: |> : created by the holodeck, would the holodeck 
: |> : projection system claim back it's molecules???
: |> : 
: |> : chengster
: |> 
: |> 	Well I think that Riker would have Warf sent down with a fire hose
: |> or the 25 cen equivalent to wake the person in question up for
: |> duty...
: 
:      But a person (in the broad sense) the Enterprise is merely transporting may
: want to live on the holodeck to get an environment just like home.
:      I'm relieved to hear that holodeck food is real.  The idea of eating,
: digesting, and incorporating matter that may be reclaimed by the holodeck is
: really scary.  Consult Dr. Crusher.
:                                       -Adam Lieberman
:                                        liebea@rpi.edu
: P.S. How easy is it for a simulated holodeck person to eat real food?

	Well I would think it works like this. The computer creates
	actual physical objects that can be used by the person in the
	holodeck. If I were to make a program that required a computer
	like a mac or something it would check its memory for a
	macintosh plan or the specs or something and would actually
	create it. Alot of the tools, instuments and medical equipment
	on the enterprise is replicated. After it is replicated it can
	still be caontrolled by the enterprise computer core to some
	extent. (Remember when Max Headroom came on as the time
	historian and tried to take back equipmemt and the computer
	deactivated the objects) Thus the computer still has control
	over objects outside the holodeck. Objects that the user will
	not interface with can be produced just with the hologram
	projection systems. If they need to be palatble objects then
	the computer will use food replicator technology. But if
	information is insufficient then the computer will then tell
	you this. Everyone remember the problems picard was having
	with the Dixon Hill scenarios.

	hows this people?


		Ryan
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Tom Thatcher)
Subject: Re: Klingon Battle Cruisers
Reply-To: smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:00:18 GMT

yIn article <1atbg6INN72c@bigboote.WPI.EDU>, haywire@yaya.WPI.EDU (the Insane One) writes:
>
>I was watching STTMP just because I liked the beginning.
>And then I noticed something very weird:
>
>The Com station on the Klingon Battle Cruisers is at the front of all
>the other stations. Everything  and Everyone was BEHIND the commander!!!
>Now if I remember right, if I was a Klingon commander I would
>NOT want all my officers BEHIND ME!!! because the chain of command
>goes whoever is the strongest leads and I wouldnt want my back
>turned to these guys. It would make sense for them to be in a position
>where I could see what they were doing on any type of ship so the commander
>can get a look at everything and not be running from station to station.
>
>This really confused the hell out of me...
>
>Haywire
>  
Non-canon explanation: Basically, that was the first time we
 ever saw the inside of a Klingon
ship.  As Klingon culture has expanded in TNG, some things have been
"created" or "revealed" that don't quite mesh with previous shows,
etc.  Relax and go with the flow.

Canon explantion (attempt):  The command chair is in the middle in the
STIII BoP, is probably in front in the STVI BoP, and was in front in
the TNG episode where Riker served on a Klingon cruiser (name escapes me).
(1) Exposing one's back to a potential enemy is a sign of strength.
(2) No Klingon would attack from behind, unless he was without honor
	(in which case, I presume, the rest of the crew would tear him to
	shreds)


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^ Q:  "What must I do to convince you people?"  ^  Tom Thatcher
^ WORF:   "Die."                                ^  University of Rochester
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Carlos A. Pero)
Subject: Re: Course Headings
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 08:09:51 GMT
Keywords: heading

jasonp@scat4.prime.com (Jason Pascucci) writes:

>Sigh,

>Okay, okay...here's the scoop:

[stuff deleted]

>Also, it doesn't imply anything about attitude, so that
>if you go to 'naught mark 90', you are as equally likely to
>wind up simply going 'up' as pointed up, albeit the second
>is usually more likely. I forget what Kirk said when he
>was in battle with Kahn, and used that maneuver to get
>the drop (pun intended) on him. :)

>--
>Jason R. Pascucci
>jasonp@primerd.prime.com


The command that Kirk gave was "z minus 15000 feet" or some other
number. Easy to comprehend for the audience.

-- 
______________________________________________________
 \   Carlos A. Pero  -  University of Illinois at U-C  \
  \   Email to: cap36406@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu               \
   \_____________________________________________________\
From: petitc@nuge115.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Transporter Energy
Date: 14 Oct 92 12:36:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: rpi.451zr!m
Reply-To: petitc@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.

Something I was always wondering...

IF they DO convert the transportee into subspace, why can't they just:

(1) Convert the person into energy
(2) Transmit the energy through subspace (bypassing shields and the like)
(3) Reassemble the person

-- 
Trust:  A very precious social commodity, due both to high value and terrible
scarcity.
MATWDTM:  Mothers Against Teenagers Who Drink Too Much (failed name for MADD)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cosc1871@elroy.uh.edu (92F06787)
Subject: oftimatter
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 02:21:00 GMT


Before I get any mail for 'oftimatter' I meant 'antimatter' :)
And remember Happy! Happy! Joy! Joy!
From: santafe@watnxt03.ucr.edu (michael a parisi)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Toilet in STV:TFF???????
Date: 13 Oct 92 23:34:27 GMT


  
Look closely at the brig scene in STV when Kirk, Spock, and McCoy
are arguing.  Kirk says "I need to sit down" then he pushes a 
button and something comes out of the wall.   It looks like a 
"square" commode.  I noted a few things:
        1. Next to the button he pushes, there is something written:
             "Do not use while in spacedock"
           .....this is much like the (older) railroad trains that
                told you not to use the toilets while in station 
                because the contents would dump onto the tracks.
                (Why you can't use the thing while in spacedock
                 is beyond me).
        2. Note the thing (from the wall) itself.  Whatever it is
           it seems to have a lid on it.
        3. Why would a brig have seats coming out of the walls that
           are only big enough for one person to sit on?  I believe
           that somewhere in the brig scene later on you see some 
           benches or whatever in the background.  
        4. Furthermore, why the sign "Do not use while in spacedock"?
           If this is just a bench/seat, why can't you sit down on it
           if the damn Enterprise is parked somewhere?!?

I checked out the novel of the movie and it just mentioned "seat" or
something like that.
So everyone get out your films and check this out.  Is it or isn't it
the first john/can/crapper/commode/etc. we've seen in Star Trek??????
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: FAQ?
From: <GNR100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 19:46:09 EDT
Organization: Penn State University

     is there one?  Let me know.
      Gordon Rogers
        gnr100@psuvm.psu.edu
From: max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: "TerraWatt"
Date: 12 Oct 92 18:07:54 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

lidz@quads.uchicago.edu (adam lidz) writes:

> Out of curiosity, does anyone remeber the episode of TNG where they mention t
> it required a "TerraWatt" of power, which was too much for the Enterprise to
> produce?  Isn't there something wrong there?  A Terra-Watt is not too much, a
> if you consider how hard it should be to produce it in the 24th Cent, there i
> a problem.  It should be EASY to produce it on a ship the size of the Enterpr

No, a trillion watts aren't that hard to create, depending on what you're 
trying to do with it.

Incidentally, it's spelled _terawatt_.  The prefix _tera_ is unrelated to 
_terra_ or Earth.

----------
Erik Max Francis   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   |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley)
Subject: Re: Turbo lift question.
Date: 13 Oct 92 13:35:06 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

tkeiser@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Anthony L Keiser) writes:
>I wasn't aware that the old E even had 80 some decks the E-D only has
>42.  This has bothered me for some time.

Perhaps the deck numbering system for the CONSTITUTION class ships is
not sequential.  What I mean is that a deck labeled "78" might be
interpreted as "construction module 7, level 8" or some such notion.
They might be loosely sequential, but not contiguously so.

All the cues I've seen leave me with the strong impression that the
ENTERPRISE and ENTERPRISE-A can't possible have 80 normal sized decks.
I'd be more inclined to chalk it up to yet another reason why ST5 was
stupid.
--------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Jay Windley                     | jwindley@asylum.cs.utah.edu
Department of Computer Science  +---------------------------------------
Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City   | Error non est sed facilitas.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jarnis@mits.mdata.fi (Jarno Kokko)
Subject: Re: NTSC vs PAL
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 03:21:30 GMT

In article <g92n3258.43.719090378@giraffe.ru.ac.za> g92n3258@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR RL NICOL) writes:
>This hasn't got much to do with Star Trek technology, but more with 
>technology a little closer to home.
>
>I have about nine tapes which are PAL, but have American Star Trek episodes 
>on the tapes and therefore they only work on the NTSC machines.  Here in SA 
>we are using the PAL system and so I can't watch them.
>
>Does anyone know if there is a way to convert them CHEAPLY from NTSC to 
>PAL?  If not, does anyone know what the problem is and why one can't merely 
>tape-to-tape from one NTSC video machine to a PAL video machine (I tried to 
>get it to work for three hours today)?
>
>Thanks.
>Ryan.


You require quite DAMN expensive hardware to do the conversion, BUT
there are wide variety of VCRs which have 'NTSC playback on PAL TV' = you can
watch you NTSC tapes with normal PAL TV. VCRs like this cost about 500 USD
but if you want TRUE conversion, prepare to pay about 2000+ USD for the VCR
that can do the trick... Commercial services are also available to do
the conversion, but 1> they charge SKYHIGH prices 2> they won't convert
any TNG stuff without permission from Paramount, and I fear you won't
be able to get that... :-)

   ____________
 _| .signature |______________________________________________________
|                                                                     |
|  -------- Jarno Kokko --------  |  Borg: Prepare to be assimilated  |
|   --- jarnis@mits.mdata.fi --   |        by the Borg.               |
|    ---- Vantaa, Finland ----    |  Worf: Prepare to eat phasers.    |
|_____________________________________________________________________|

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dread@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Dread)
Subject: Re: Transporters as Weapons
Organization: The Realm of Dread
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 00:46:39 GMT

In article <geomHuq00iV304FHoE@andrew.cmu.edu> Michael Joseph Harris <mh6g+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
>     Two mistakes in that analysis:
>
>1) In that episode, it was also made clear that there were mistakes made
>during that kind of transport-- Which was what was killing the
>terrorists. Imagine beaming a bomb onto a bridge without the detonator

I don't think so. The mistake was a slight alteration of dna of the subject
from repeated usage. It was still an accurate delivery system, and it was
mentioned that the effect would not affect machines.

>
>2) Although I don't remember the technicallities of that type of
>transport, didn't the terrorists use a planetary source to power their
>transporter. ( ie: they couldn't generate the phase shifts by themselves
>)

The terrorists opponent's (the legitimate government) made some comment
about how easy the war would be if "they found themselves in possession
of some advanced federation weaponry..." I doubt those terrorists had
a better power source than the Enterprise's...

>
>Also, you can't use the transporter during warp transit ( unless you are
>traveling at the same speed as the ship you are transporting to.) Keep
>in mind that Gene promised us no more "transporter saves the day
>episodes," which would clearly deter this type of weaponry.

The dimension shift isn't a transporter, so the warp limitation doesn't
apply. Of course we all know it will never be implemented 'cause it
would make things too easy.
-- 
--
Dread				      (Richard Robinson, Univ of Mass, Amherst)
dread@titan.ucc.umass.edu	      "There is no right, there is only power!"
					     "Kill them, kill them all!" 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda)
Subject: Re: Within the Transporter Beam (Realm of Fear)
Keywords: wow, hand, me, another, beer
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:24:17 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.064615.5676@wuecl.wustl.edu> jhk1@cec1.wustl.edu (Jonathan Howard Krivitzky) writes:
|In article <1992Oct8.020144.24597@rtsg.mot.com> svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda) writes:
|
|>I would rather have seen sort of a fade to black, with a de-fade
|>at the new location.  Or even have the old location and the new
|>location just sort of smear together, as your eyes and senses
|>transfer bit-by-bit (groan:-) from one to the other.  But I guess
|>that wouldn't have made much of an episode.
|
|	That wouldn't refer to the technology.  According to TNG tech
|manual, when beamed, the body is broken down into the matter stream which
|is stored tempararily in the Pattern Buffer which is then beamed to the
|remote site (or vice versa) in the lay tearms, the body is not half here,
|half there, but it goes to a storage - 

Okay, I'll give you that...

|in storage the conciousness would
|probably percieve something similar to Barkly's perceptions- the fading
|made perfect sence in the episode.

But not that.  When you say "perception", are you talking about what he
sees?  Sight requires eyes, or some other receptor that one's 
consciousness interprets as sight.  I do not see how the concept
of "disintegration" and "buffering the pattern" implies the ability
for Brockley to see the little things swimming around in the energy
stream, or to see anything of the transporter room when he was
partially disintegrated.

At the risk of repeating myself, I also have a problem with him being
able to grimace while in the transporter, and being able to "grab"
someone else while in there.

All I am saying is that it is not implied by the technology.  But, of
course, if the writers say so...

	Dave Svoboda, Palatine, IL
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Klingon Battle Cruisers
Date: 15 Oct 92 22:09:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: ut-emx.81724
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <WEBER-071092143454@129.197.66.236> WEBER@JEDI.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM (Kevin Weber) writes:
=
=> >  
=> 	They are also very proud and hold tthe idea of bravery very high, 
=> maybe it would be a sign of cowardice?
=> 
=
=Besides, a Klingon would never stab someone in the back.
Tell that to Worf's brother. :)

Also, wasn't Duras acting very un-Klingon when he poisoned K'empec (sp?)
as well as setting that bomb, conspiring with the Romulans, etc.?
=
=kevin


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Chester            |"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep
wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein
Politically Incorrect      |"The meek shall inherit the earth. The rest of us
Future Lunar Colonist      |  are going to the stars." Anonymous
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: uril@yang.earlham.edu (Uri J. Lessing)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: For Crying out loud !
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:04:26 GMT
Organization: Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana

In article <1992Oct15.144759.620@dct.ac.uk>, mlsdb2gal@dct.ac.uk writes:
> To: All 
> Re: Gripes
> 
> Why doesn't everyone stop moaning and GET A LIFE.
> 
> Star Trek has helped shape my life, and I hold it in the highest regard.
> 
> I take the show VERY seriously.
> 
> BUT I cannot understand why people continually nit-pick over silly little
> facts (ie did Kirk wear a green or a yellow tunic at Ensign Smith's birthday
> party on July 13 2271) WHO CARES ?)
> 
> "In every revolution, there's ONE MAN with a vision": James T. Kirk
>                            The Mirror Universe - Stardate Unknown.

I can't believe that you would dare criticize are nitpicking.  If we are 
to escape from our own dull boring dateless lives we must have complete 
and utter detail.  By the way Kirk did wear a yellow tunic at Ensign 
Smith's birtday.  He turned 32 and had a small boil under his left shoulder.
-- 

Uri J. Lessing |  Earlham College |  Richmond, Indiana