HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Subspace Theory 101
Date: 8 Sep 92 16:15:09 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <8218@dirac.physics.purdue.edu> hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson) writes:
>
>First, let me remind everyone of how (normally) FTL travel emplies a
>violation of causality:

>Start with two observers traveling SLOWER than light relative to one another.
>THEN, give them the possibility of getting a signal to and from one another
>faster than light could get to and from them.  Normally, NO MATTER HOW YOU
>DO IT, you can create a causality problem.

>Now I will repeate myself from another message which tells how to get around
>this:
[Explanation trimmed]

Question: Why is causality violation a bad thing? Its screws
bigtime with our observations of the universe (relativity tends
to do that for most people anyway ;-) but does it cause any
spacetime shattering problems?

In SF I prefer just to ignore it and hope it goes away. But that
doesn't mean we can't try to explain it.

Joshua
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: runyan@cup.hp.com (Mark Runyan)
Subject: Re: The Federation and cloaking tech...
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 20:33:31 GMT
Organization: HP, Cupertino, CA, USA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley) writes:
>smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>>Cloaked ships can not be shielded, so a direct hit would cause serious
>>damage and probably render the cloaking system inactive (as in TUC).
>
>Whoa, who said that cloaked ships cannot simultaneously be shielded?

In ST:TNG, in "Redemption, ptII", two klingon craft were attacking a
third in orbit over the Klingon home world.  A fourth craft entered
the battle after one of the attackers was destroyed.  The surviving
attacker left the battle by cloaking.  There was one final hit on
the retreating survivor's shields while it was cloaked.  This is
canonical evidence that one can cloak and shield at the same time.

Mark Runyan
From: john@newave.newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Cloaking device and the Fed.
Date: 9 Sep 92 02:35:52 GMT
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

In article <1537@seqp4.sequoia.com> ajm@seqp4.sequoia.com (A.J.Madison) writes:
> In article <1992Sep3.152056.14571@news.unomaha.edu>, tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo) writes:
> > Also, the UFP is not a military organization, so there would
> > not be a logical need for a cloaking device if they are strictly an 
> > exploratory organization.

Actually, there seems to be no end to the usefullness of a cloaked ship.
If for no other reason, for observing new races/cultures without them knowing
that you are watching.  It is pretty hard to disquise a ship in orbit any
other way.

> b) The cloaking system, in order to work at reasonable levels of efficency
> requires large amounts of the element "Unobtainium" (Ux) built into the outer
> hulls of the vessel it is to cloak.  Unobtainium is extremely rare and
> expensive to purify.  Therefore, Star Fleet scouts and border monitors are
> equiped with the system, but typical ships of the line (eg. the Enterprise
> original, -A, et al.) are not.  Some arguments suggest that Star Fleet policy
> (leaving the typical commander out on the cold) on this technology is an
> attempt to convince the Romulans that the Feds/Star Fleet does not have a
> mastery of the technology.

I guess I don't buy this particular argument after Picard and Data took their
trip to visit Spock at the Romulian home planet.  Picard had to bargin
with the Klingons to get a cloaked ship.  If the federation had a cloaked
ship, wouldn't Picard have used it?

Then again, if the Federation had a cloaked ship, perhaps they didn't want
to show it off, so they used a Klingon ship.

-john-

-- 
==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
From: hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Relative to ?
Date: 7 Sep 92 21:40:04 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

sphillip01@cc.curtin.edu.au writes:
<Speed of light, ships back to back ... Would someone care to explain what LIGHT
<travels relative to ? The centre of the universe ? Earth :) ? Students of a 
<rival University ?
<
<
<Trevor Phillips
<sphillip01@cc.curtin.edu.au

Light travels at the same speed for ANY observer. (i.e. light doesn't travel
relative to any one thing, rather it travels at the same speed relative to
ALL observers.)  The way to explain this is through length contractions and
time dilations via special relativity.

-Jay
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: schlegel@cwis.unomaha.edu (Mark Schlegel)
Subject: Re: Vger: TMP
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:51:39 GMT

bbohac@nyx.cs.du.edu (bbohac) writes:

>In article <920911.062023@3Mail.3Com.COM> Anthony_Battles_-T@cso.3mail.3com.com writes:
>>
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>I was watching ST:TMP Last night and when the space station was 
>>encountering Vger. One of the commanders stated that Vgers Cloud radius 
>>is 84 au's.
>Yes.
>>Now from what I learned in astronomy, 1 Au (astronomical unit) is the 
>>distance from the earth to the sun.
>So far so good.
>>Correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure you will) If Vger's cloud is 84 
>>au's then it is larger than our solar system.
>Actually, I believe, Neptune is greater than 100 AUs from Sol, and, at the

        Not really, the planet pluto has the largest semi-major axis in the
        solar system of about 39.4 a.u., much less than 100 a.u..  Neptune 
        has a semi-major axis (you can think of this as being the average
        distance of the planet to the sun) of about 30 A.U.

>moment, is the farthest planet from Sol (until 1998 or something when
>Pluto once again passes outside Neptune's orbit).
>>In other words Vger's diameter is 7,812,000,000 miles in diameter.
>>
>But 84 AUs is slightly large (to exagerate just a tad).
>>My question is: How is something that size supposed to come home to 
>>                earth?
>This is an excelent question, indeed.  But, if I remember my ST:TMP correctly,
>the cloud dissipated or shrank, didn't it (I might be wrong)?

Maybe it's not a problem, remember that they called it a cloud-- the Earth is
submerged permanently in another sort of cloud, the solar wind, which flows 
past the Earth at about 400km per second.  The important thing is how dense
this cloud is (the solar wind is very tenuous), if it is thin enough no harm
would come to the Earth.

Mark

>Anthony
--
From: smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Tom Thatcher)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: star-streak
Date: 13 Sep 92 04:18:34 GMT
Reply-To: smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology

In article <95754@bu.edu>, quark@pabst.bu.edu (Paul Fu) writes:
>In article <swindley.716183551@s1.elec.uq.oz.au> swindley@elec.uq.oz.au (Robert Swindley) writes:
>>
>>I wish to know whether those streaks you see when the ship is travelling
>>are actually stars blurred by the speed, and if so why don't one of you smart
>>trekkies work out how fast they would have to be going in order for stars to
>>go past them at such a rate...
>
>I've spent a few bored afternoons pondering this... unless they pass it off
>as some side-effect of being in the warp field, the "passage" of the 
>starfield seems a glaring science error to me.  But then again, Trek tends
>to march all over current physics theory (flameshields up) or at least
>stretches plausability sometimes.  But then again, that's why we call them
>plot devices.
>
>Anyway, that doesn't explain the external views where the ship seems to be
>cruising through the stars... I still think that's rather loopy, as anyone
>that's seen the brief 20-minute piece called "Powers of Ten" can attest.
>(No, that's NOT a star trek episode.)
>
>Jarrod Norton
>WCLH-FM
>

They are not stars.
Warp 8, for example, is about 1000 times c, even at that speed the ship would
pass 1 star every few hours.
The only thing I can think of it that the sparklers are specks of dust that 
are accelerated by passing through the warp field of the ship as it advances
over them.
Pretty weak, eh?

Obviously, the sparklers are there to give us, the Loyal Viewer, the sense
of actually going somewhere.  Reminds me of the time that Data and Troi were
in a turbolift going from, I think, 10-forward to the bridge.  Well, they were
in the middle of a long chat and I counted 60-some floors go by.
Now, the TM says that the turbolift system has loops and sidings to allow 
multiple cars in the same tube, but they really took the scenic route.  
(wouldn;t bridge traffic receive priority routing?)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
^  "What must I do to convince you?"            ^  Tom Thatcher            ^
^  "Die."                                       ^  University of Rochester ^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Cloaking device and the Fed.
Date: 14 Sep 92 08:50:36 GMT
Organization: Aston University

dv@cc-mac.nbn.com (David Vezie) writes:
: In article <j=7yzn+@rpi.edu> petitc@rpi.edu writes:
: >In article <1089@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov>, jim@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Jagielski) writes:
: >|> evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:
: >
: >|> >The standard shields on a UFP ship can render the ship radar and optically 
: >|> >invisible.
: >|> 
: >|> To radar yes.
: >|> To optics no.
: >
: >  Why would it render it invisible to radar and NOT to optics? ...
: 
: Nothing strange there -- consider the stealth bomber.  It's invisible
: to radar because when radar strikes it, the radar is deflected off elsewhere,
: rather than being bounced back to the observer.  The E's shields would
: do the same thing.
: 
: And with optics, it's a matter of the object (the ship) not sending
: any light out, and also causing light from elsewhere to pass through
: unchallenged.  This, the standard shields do not do.

The original point was about a robot probe to observe a low technology
(up to contempory earth level) planet.
In the episode where the enterprise is transported back in time to the
1960's it is said that the enterprise can hide itself from the detection
equiptment of the day.

Anyone care to guess the brightness of a ship in orbit (optically)?
(as an experiment try looking for the space shuttle)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home)                     |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: petitc@nuge114.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Subspace Theory 101
Reply-To: petitc@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 18:40:48 GMT

 (Note:  The technical information was gotten from TNG:TM, and is written as
Wesley Crusher would hear it from his teachers at the Academy)

  Now, we all know that, in the relativistic universe, it is impossible to travel
faster than the speed of light.  However, as you're well aware, there is this
mysterious thing refered to, called "subspace" where this limit does not
apply, and you can approach an infinite velocity (or, more precisely, the warp
barrier).

  The first thing is to state where subspace came from.  Zefram Cochrane saw
the need for a superluminal drive approximately a century ago.  He developed
a method whereby one distorts the space-time continum in order to move the
spaceship.  This is similar to moving a ball along a bed by pressing down on
the mattress, rather than by rolling the ball.  In other words, from the
standpoint of an observer inside the warp field, space is "sliding by" but
the observer is not moving.

  Where does subspace fit into all of this?  Well, subspace is what the
starship actually "moves" through (See Diagram #1 below).  It has its own
constraints and also requires tremendous amounts of power to maintain a subspace
field.  Mass is reduced in subspace because of the fact that subspace is much
more "pliable" than ordinary space, permitting higher velocities.  In other
words, the increase in mass seen by Relativity is the "bunching up" of space
in the direction of travel, in front of the ship.

Diagram #1:

--------------\          /---------------  <- Real Space
               \________/    <- Sub-Space

  However, please note that when a ship is propelled by Warp drive (which
essentially pushes the ship through subspace), that the ship is _never at c_,
since it tunnels through the "c" barrier in less than Planck time.

  If you were wondering why it is so hard to "let" a ship go slower than light
with Warp drive, it should be clear.  Subspace, being so flexible, would require
much finer control over the warp field (similar to the difficulty in moving a
ball at .01 KPH in real space).  This reduces the driver coil efficiency
dramatically, in order to maintain such fine control.

  That's it for today class.  See me for any questions.

   (I hope you all enjoyed this little attempt to explain subspace "theory")


-- 
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)
From: brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: 'The Next Phase' Question
Date: 8 Sep 92 02:45:21 GMT
Reply-To: brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot)
Organization: Vidiot's Hangout

In article <e3PqqB1w164w@waffle.sns.com> hank@waffle.sns.com (hankdtank) writes:
<I am new to this news group, so this question probably has been answered 
<thousands of times... heck, I don't even care for an answer, but...
< 
<In TNG episode 'The Next Phase,' how come Geordi and Ro are able to pass 
<through everything, yet they can't go through floors?  You would think that 
<when Ro was running, the stomping of her feet would cause something to 
<happen.

Yes, it was a big hole and that can't be answered.  They were even able to
breath, something they shouldn't have been able to do either.  Ro was even
able to touch the control panel on the bridge.  Too many holes for this story,
technically.  Story wise it was fine.  Technically it was flawed.
-- 
      harvard\                          spool.cs.wisc.edu!astroatc!vidiot!brown
Vidiot  ucbvax!uwvax..........!astroatc!vidiot!brown
      rutgers/            INTERNET:vidiot!brown%astroatc.UUCP@spool.cs.wisc.edu
                                   brown@wi.extrel.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: rau@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Drau)
Subject: Re: Warp eleven mystery
Keywords:  Fnord Impossible
Organization: Fredonian Computer Net 
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:48:28 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.210217.23940@mits.mdata.fi> count@mits.mdata.fi (Bror Heinola) writes:
>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?

Obviously messed.  Warp 10 _is_ the !*_absolute_*! maximum velocity, as
stated by the Great Bird himself, representing infinite velocity.
'Tis hard to go faster than infinitely fast, unless you consider the
Aleph infinite velocity factor, superceded by a...

Tchyeah.

- Drau

IMVHO, Howard Weinstein is an excellent writer, but sometimes skimps on the
technical stuff.  

- Again.
From: 00rdharringt@bsu-ucs.uucp (Rob Harrington)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Borg Scout Ship
Date: 10 Sep 92 01:38:47 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.232554.14129@unislc.uucp>, zzekka@unislc.uucp (Zeke Zecca) writes:
> In the episode "I Borg", Data or some one at the helm said that the borg
> rescue ship that picked up Ehue/hugh/ U god dammit! was the same type of
> ship that had crashed on the planet. They also said it had a mass of 2.8
> million metric tons. Two questions:
> 
> 	- is "metric tons" a unit of mass? I don't believe so.

Yes it is.  I think it's 1000 Kilograms... they liked the term ton
so much they brought it to the metric system...

> 	- how could that little borg ship be that massive?

Remember a ton is only 2000lbs... How much does your car weigh?

>                                              
> 
> 								Zekers!
-- 
/---------------------------------------v-------------------------------------\
|  Rob Harrington                       |              Ball State University  |
|  Department of History                |               Muncie, Indiana, USA  |
|  Vax--00RDHARRINGT@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu  |       Unix--herring@bsu-cs.bsu.edu  |
>---------------------------------------^-------------------------------------<
|               Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah -- Shane MacGowan                |
|                       Aoibheann beatha an scol/aire!                        |
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------------/
Organization: Doctoral student, Physics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:16:29 -0400 
From: Robert Edward Timlin <rt16+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Cloaking device and the Fed.


     To quote James Doohan when asked about Federation ships cloaking:

          "We cloak. Don't you KNOW that we cloak?"

     :-)

     (From memory, but it's close)

                                           -Robb Timlin
                                            rt16@andrew.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,news.answers
From: chem8w@rosie.uh.edu (Norby)
Subject: Re: Cloaking device and the Fed.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 03:35:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.195000.8761@visus.com>, nash@visus.com writes...
>In article <92253.154317HCM100@psuvm.psu.edu> HCM100@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>> 
>> The Federation MUST have cloaking technology, based upon the old show where
>> Kirk stole the damned thing from the Romulans.  However, it is obvious
>> that the Ferderation doesn't use it.  Or do they?
>> 
>> In the Episode REUNIFICATION I and II they have close up photos of Spock on
>> the Romulnan homeworld.  They never mention WHERE they got these photos
>> from.  I can assume that the federation has suppressed cloaking technology
>> and use it for their secret reconnaisance.  How about a cloaked spy satelite
>> the size of a tennis ball orbiting the Romulan homeworld?  Hmmmm.
>
>--------====Stuff deleted====> 
> 
>What about the episode where the natives think that Picard is a god. The survey  
>team observeing the natives live in a 'cloaked' observatory on the side of the  
>cliff.
>
Well, in that episode (the one with the observation post) it wasn't actually
called 'cloaking'.  What they were doing was projecting a false mountain-side
in front of their window with holodeck-like technology; rather than making
anything invisible...(cloaking)

as for Reunification, they do sort of leave the explanation open:  The admiral
says to Picard (while preparing to view the picture of Spock), "Taken on
Romulus by long range scanners:"  I remember being impressed at the range 
'Long range scanners' must have to be able to pick out one person on a planet
how far away?

Daniel Ratzlaff  (Norby)
Chem8W@Jetson.UH.edu

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: rpascazi@engws9.ic.sunysb.edu (Robert R Pascazio)
Subject: Re: Warp eleven mystery
Keywords: Fnord Impossible
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 14:53:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep5.024828.6807@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> rau@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Drau) writes:
>In article <1992Sep3.210217.23940@mits.mdata.fi> count@mits.mdata.fi (Bror Heinola) writes:
>
>Obviously messed.  Warp 10 _is_ the !*_absolute_*! maximum velocity, as
>stated by the Great Bird himself, representing infinite velocity.
>'Tis hard to go faster than infinitely fast, unless you consider the
>Aleph infinite velocity factor, superceded by a...
>

Starship's are extremely computerized. As we all know computers are not
too creative. Starship technology probably uses subspace repeaters for
their triangulation of position and more importantly their speed. The
computer was reporting Warp 11 or in one  episode I remember something
ridiculous like warp 20. Perhaps these strange phenomena that accelerate
the Enterprise from season to season also reek havock on the sensing
equipment used for finding speed.

					-Rob-


-- 
_____________________________________________________________________________
_|____|____|____|____|     RPASCAZI@SBCCVM.BITNET  __|____|____|____|____|___
____|____|____|__     RPASCAZI@LIBFS1.IC.SUNYSB.EDU   ___|____|____|____|____
_|____|____|____|_        N.Y. State University at     ___|____|____|____|___
____|____|____|____|           Stony Brook            _|____|____|____|____|_
_|____|____|____|____|_ (516)632-3710  (914)754-7222 |____|____|____|____|___
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Tom Thatcher)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Cloaking device and the Fed.
Date: 13 Sep 92 03:53:04 GMT
Reply-To: smt1179@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology

Was that really a cloaked observatory, or was it a hologram of rock hiding
the window?
Besides the ethical reasons, the Federation probably doesn't use cloaking
devices becuase of the energy penalty.  In the movies, only Birds of Prey
have cloaks (warships with a high power/mass ratio)  Even if  the Feds
had cloaks, the Ent couldn't use them, its too big.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: rrogers@minnie.imd.nrc.ca
Subject: Re: Vger: TMP
Organization: NRC - Institute for Marine Dynamics
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 18:18:18 GMT

In article <920911.062023@3Mail.3Com.COM>, Anthony_Battles_-T@cso.3mail.3com.com writes:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I was watching ST:TMP Last night and when the space station was 
> encountering Vger. One of the commanders stated that Vgers Cloud radius 
> is 84 au's.
> Now from what I learned in astronomy, 1 Au (astronomical unit) is the 
> distance from the earth to the sun.
> Correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure you will) If Vger's cloud is 84 
> au's then it is larger than our solar system.
> In other words Vger's diameter is 7,812,000,000 miles in diameter.
> 
> My question is: How is something that size supposed to come home to 
>                 earth?

	I think (not sure) that as Vger approached the solar system, it 
decreased in speed and allowed its cloud to disperse.  The actual Vger vehicle
was supposedly smaller than the planet.  (This information comes from the
novel, not the film.)

						Rick

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: trw@spl1.spl.loral.com (Tim R Witort)
Subject: Re: relative speed
Organization: Loral Software Productivity Laboratory
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 00:37:40 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.234356.7906@marlin.jcu.edu.au>, eektl@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Kenneth T Leong) writes:
|> If two starships were back to back and then both raced off at warp 10,
|> would the speed of one starship relative to the other be double? If so,
|> could this relative speed be acheived as an actual speed by a single
|> starship?

   Warp 10 is infinite speed requiring infinite power - no can do.

|> eektl@marlin.jcu.edu.au 

-- Tim