HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: petitc@nuge111.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: Holodecks
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:09:56 GMT

mcelroy@bu.edu (Carl Mackin) writes:

>I would tend to doubt that the holodeck would allow a woman to get pregnant
>by a person produced by the holodeck because of the holodeck safeguards
>would not allow this.  This will also answer the other question as to how
>one could get hurt.  This can occur because of the malfuctioning of the
>safeguards.  The matter is is not just a hologram, but uses the technology
>of the transporter and sheilds to make the matter "real".

 But wouldn't a woman who wanted to get pregnant override that particular
safeguard?  However, I don't think she could get pregnant for one simple
reason:

 A viable sperm would need to be constructed with almost quantum-level
resolution to be alive and have the DNA sequences work properly enough for
conception.  And since it's impossible to replicate quantum level info, the
mother wouldn't be getting viable sperm.

-- 
Now on sale, in Aisle 5 of the Divine Supermarket---Lives, and Clues.  Buy
yours now and avoid the rush!  They make great Christmas gifts!
Cynicism is only realism projected into the future.
If your fondest wish is to fly, don't draw up plans for flippers.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: cboerm48@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Boerma)
Subject: Re: Transporters & replicators
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 14:33:15 GMT

freier@mail.physics.utah.edu (rodney james freier) writes:

>  One of the things I don't like too much about Star Trek is that
>no one seems to want to explore the logical conclusions their
>technology should come to.   They should be able to make an
>exact duplicate of anyone who's been transported simply by
>using the trace and giving it the appropriate amount of energy.
>(Note that I'm ignoring the idea that transporters only look at
>your DNA pattern; it would be completely impossible to reconstruct
>someone based on their DNA alone.)

	This idea has been debated to death here many times. The
explanations I've heard are less than satisfing but, such
is life, we can't have everything we want.

			CtB
From: ckt0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (CHARLES KEITH TESSLER)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:50:30 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <102736@netnews.upenn.edu>, kkepkep@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (DragonClaw)
 writes:
>
>
>  Hi. I just watched the new episode. I was wondering why Picard, Worf and
> Crusher were climbing down the cliff using ropes. I am sure they have
> some equipment like anti-grav belts or simple mechanical gadgets to aid
> the climbers in the 24th century. Any ideas why they used conventionel
> methods?
>
 They should have used a newer version of the boots spock used in the fith
 movie when Cierk was climbing the wall.
-- 

                                  Keith Tessler
                                  Id: CKT0@LEHIGH.EDU
                                  Tel # (215) 758-1364
From: dunae@mala.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: StarDate Answers
Date: 26 Dec 92 17:30:10 -0700
Organization: Malaspina College

StarDate Answers
In the TNG technical manual it says that StarDates are used to keep
the captain's personnal log entries in order.   The StarDate is changed
every day (ex: Monday=Stardate 1, Tuesday=StarDate 2, ect.).   The
fraction at the end of the StarDate indicates the time of day, acording
to a 24 hour clock ((ex: Monday 1 a.m.=StarDate 1.1, Tuesday 1 p.m.=
StarDate 2.13).-- 

***********************************************************************
Patrick A. Dunae
History Department                    Phone:  (604) 753-3245 (loc 2130)
Malaspina University College          FAX:    (604) 741-2667
Nanaimo, B.C., Canada V9R 5S5         INTERNET:  dunae@mala.bc.ca 
From: Rita.Mckinney@f300.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Rita Mckinney)
Sender: Jpunix@urchin.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: pe
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 01:42:00 -0500

Hope All you sysops and BBS'ers have a happy, safe, and prosperous new year! 
Very best regards to all, Rita Mc
From: max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Accellerating Spaceship (yet another bird in a plane)
Date: 23 Dec 92 08:06:29 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner) writes:

> >  Actually Dirac said that mathmaticly Anti-matter looks exactly
> >  like regular matter but going backwards in time.  Unfortunatly this
> >  would also imply that it IS moving faster than light as well.
> 
> I thought Feynman said this.  Anyway this doesn't mean it's going
> faster than light.

No, Dirac solved the wave equations describing this phenomena (or 
interpretation) first.

> Antimatter has positive mass; I can't remember if the 
> experiments to test antimatter's gravitational acceleration by the 
> Earth have yet succeeded, but if it had negative inertia it would
> (for example) curve the other way than expected in a bubble chamber
> in a magnetic field, not to mention that conservation of energy
> and momentum in particle reactions would be totally different.

You're absolutely right.  Antimatter has positive mass, and reacts to 
gravitational fields exactly the way that matter does.  A recent 
experiment confirmed this; antimatter falls at the same rate that matter 
does to within a great deal of accuracy.

> I'm sure this is a nice article and contains none of the misinformation 
> above.  Sorry to be rude, but if you don't really know what you are
> talking about please don't spread the ignorance around.

:-)


  ____  Erik Max Francis -- ..!apple!uuwest!max -- max@west.darkside.com   __
  \  /  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1  San Jose, CA  95117  37 20 N 121 53 W  ACGT  /  \
   \/   Like strategic interstellar conquest games?  Ask about UNIVERSE!  \__/
        Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.   All things that are, are lights.
From: FELSON_ADJ@CCSUA.CTSTATEU.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Glow in the dark
Date: 21 Dec 1992 01:35:43 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

I was amused by last week's episode that while picard/warf/crusher
were crawling through various tunnels, they were never in the
dark.  Were these walls self luminous?
From: det@phlan.sw.stratus.com (David Toland)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Date: 21 Dec 1992 14:23:26 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: phlan.sw.stratus.com


*possible minor SPOILERS*



In article <1h3jtvINNcik@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bm560@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas D. Salyers) writes:
>   Picard and company used ropes because sometimes the simple
>solutions are better than the high-tech ones.  A hundred meters or
>so of the type of rope they would be able to make in the 24th 
>century would weight *much* less than any set of anti-grav boots
>and be a whole lot less likely to break down...=)

Also, a couple of other reasons come to mind:

1.  Grav boots or the like are easier to detect than ropes.  This is not
    a contradiction with the use of a phaser to cut an opening in the rock.
    In each case, the least detectable method was probably used (phasers
    rather than explosives, ropes rather than grav boots or jet packs).

2.  Grav boots may require considerably more training than ropes and
    pitons to use safely.  Kind of like roller skating on a high wire.



-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
All opinions are MINE MINE MINE, and not necessarily anyone else's.
det@phlan.sw.stratus.com   |  "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
                           |  that doon with."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: emagnus@hfglobe.intel.com (Eric Magnusson)
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Organization: Intel Corporation
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 20:47:33 GMT

In article <232@newave.newave.mn.org> john@newave.newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:
>In <1992Dec21.092516.28352@u.washington.edu> rene@hardy.u.washington.edu:
>> Didnt anybody else consider it rather remarkable how little rope they
>> appeared to be carrying, particularly in light of the fact that Picard
>> mentions the descent is 1500 feet... ?
>
>Yes...and they seemed to have just exactly the right amount of rope (it looked
>like there was 6 inches of extra rope laying on the ground at the bottom).  If
>the cliff had been 503 meters rather than 500 meters, they would have been in
>big trouble.  The whole rope thing seemed a bit bogus to begin with.
>

I'm sure we missed seeing the little replicators at the ends of the rope which
made them just the right size! :-)

-Eric
-- 
Eric Magnusson                           emagnuss@pcocd2.intel.com
Intel Corporation, FM2-66
1900 Prairie City Rd, Folsom, CA 95630   (916) 356-2986
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: det@phlan.sw.stratus.com (David Toland)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Date: 21 Dec 1992 14:16:40 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: phlan.sw.stratus.com


Concerning Worf's apparent discomfort around bats.  I know this thread
really doesn't belong in this group, but since it started here as an offshoot
of a tech topic, what the hell...

In article <zar2cqr@rpi.edu> petitc@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:
> Remember that Indiana Jones was afraid of snakes, and why (e.g. he fell into
>a thing filled with snakes).  So, maybe Worf had something similar happen
>(e.g. getting trapped in a cave filled with bats).  Or maybe Klingon bats are
>just more bloodthirsty than our native Earth varieties.  :&)

Or perhaps it isn't bats at all that Worf is apprehensive about.  Something
that flaps overhead in dark places on the Klingon homeworld could be *much*
nastier than any bat!

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
All opinions are MINE MINE MINE, and not necessarily anyone else's.
det@phlan.sw.stratus.com   |  "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
                           |  that doon with."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: David_Woodsworth@mindlink.bc.ca (David Woodsworth)
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 10:45:07 GMT

Perhaps they took ropes instead of jet packs is that ropes are more
versatile.  A rope can be used for many, many things besides rappelling,
while jet-boots are generally less usefull in confined underground spaces.
They weren't sure what they might encounter, so they had to pick the most
versatile equipment they could, meaning ropes.

David

--
Time is an illusion.  Lunchtime doubly so.

                        david_woodsworth@mindlink.bc.ca

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: Clayten_Hamacher@mindlink.bc.ca (Clayten Hamacher)
Subject: Re: Survey disapearances on ship
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:41:55 GMT

>I think it must be really trivial to write a low priority program that each
>second account for all the people that should be on bord and yell
>immadiately when somebody is missing.
>I m sure that data have the necessary privileges and skill to do it.

Yah, they should also have a homing signal/comminicator implanted under the
skin behind their ears.. This would fix the problem of someone's communicator
getting stolen and the crew having to scan everyone on the planet to find
them.
(It would also provide better sound quality and a 'stealth' function where
you could send the away team a message without risking someone else being
within earshot.

They should also have that program you mention monitoring people's locations
every few seconds and making a log of what person was where at what time.. If
they have storage space for a molecule by molecule 'picture' of everyone who
has transported then storing all this information would be trivial.

They could also expand it to monitor vital signs and report if someone was
being killed (in a few episodes crewmembers have died and not been discovered
until someone stumbles over the body)

There are a ton of programs they SHOULD have running... If this was all real
the Enterprise crew would be wasted by the first marauding alien that would
come along because of all the mistakes they make that even WE wouldn't make.

--

Clayten_Hamacher@Mindlink.bc.ca                 Land of the rising snow.
From: brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: StarDate Answers
Date: 27 Dec 92 18:22:44 GMT
Reply-To: brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot)
Organization: Vidiot's Hangout

In article <1992Dec26.173010.1152@mala.bc.ca> dunae@mala.bc.ca writes:
<StarDate Answers
<In the TNG technical manual it says that StarDates are used to keep
<the captain's personnal log entries in order.   The StarDate is changed
<every day (ex: Monday=Stardate 1, Tuesday=StarDate 2, ect.).   The
<fraction at the end of the StarDate indicates the time of day, acording
<to a 24 hour clock ((ex: Monday 1 a.m.=StarDate 1.1, Tuesday 1 p.m.=
<StarDate 2.13).-- 

Page number please.  I couldn't find it in my copy of the book.  What you
say just does not makes sense, especially the way the numbers are used.
There are 1000 stardates in a year.  The start of a season begins near 000
and the end of the season ends near 999.  Look at all of the numbers again,
everything fits the 1000 stardate scheme.
-- 
      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
Subject: Stardates
From: mannerl@kenyon.edu
Date: 1 Jan 93 22:58:45 -0500
Organization: Kenyon College

 This is just a dumb guess, but Stardates look just like Julian dates.

                                            J.H.M.
From: mcelroy@bu.edu (Carl Mackin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Holodecks
Date: 21 Dec 92 15:59:25 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Greg Tapolow (gtapolow@nyx.cs.du.edu) wrote:
: In article <_-n2p9n@rpi.edu> petitc@vccsouth04.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:
: >John_Bafford%Laughing_Dragon@uu0570.foggybottom.com writes:
: >
: >>How can someone get hurt within the holodecks? I thought it was all holograms
: >>and stuff.
: >
: > Because any objects that might be touched/felt are made solid so that the
: >illusion of reality is complete.  Also, if you ask to do something really
: >straining (e.g. go spinning around in a tornado), the forces you experience
: >will be simulated, but you can get bruises from any program---remember the
: >part in the TNG episode where the crew loses its memory where a girl got a
: >sprained ankle from doing some cloud diving?
: >
: >
: My guess is that the H-deck also generates small force fields to act as
: the physical areas the person comes in contact with. It can generate
: different fields of intensity to simulate water (Wesley falls in during
: season 1 {I think}), mud baths (Lwaxana & Alexander), and the 1701's
: bridge chairs (Relics).
: 
: Since the Holodeck works with Visual Holograms coupled with force field
: generation and possibly a little kick from the replicators and
: transporters, my Fooble has asked a question. Please do not flame either
: of us on the material of the question, it is asked in all seriousness. If
: a woman were to be involved in sexual relations while on the H-deck with a
: Hologram(ic person). Everything would be reproduced. Since the man's
: ejaculation can cause the fertilization of the egg. Would this occur?
: Would the egg stay fertile if the crewperson left the H-deck?
: 
: We've just looking for general discussion, if the question seems strange
: or misplaced, just let the thread die here and don't worry.
: 
: Thanx
: 	Greg
: --
: Fingering a plan tells you so much about a person!
: --
: Begining my quest for the ultimate (working)    Greg A. Tapolow
: sig						gtapolow@nyx.cs.du.edu
: all rights turned left				probably at albequerque



I would tend to doubt that the holodeck would allow a woman to get pregnant
by a person produced by the holodeck because of the holodeck safeguards
would not allow this.  This will also answer the other question as to how
one could get hurt.  This can occur because of the malfuctioning of the
safeguards.  The matter is is not just a hologram, but uses the technology
of the transporter and sheilds to make the matter "real".
mcelroy@acs.bu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: harris@scorch.apana.org.au (Michael Brown)
Subject: Re: Relativity and FTL Travel
Organization: Craggenmoore public Unix system , Newcastle , Oz
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 14:01:39 GMT

hinson@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Jason W. Hinson) writes:



| 
|                        Relativity and FTL Travel
| 

  
   That was a very interesting article. I was  allways  curious  about
   relativistic concepts.
-- 
 .-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
 |             Michael  Brown  at Craggenmoore Public Access Unix          |
 |     harris@scorch.apana.org.au             Good Luck on your mission.   |
 |"Mother please, is it just a disease, that has them breaking all my laws.|
 |    Check if you can disconnect the effect and i'll go after the cause. "|
 `--------------------------------------------- Peter Gabriel -------------'
From: shiva@pro-smof.cts.com (System Smof)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Transporters & replicators
Date: 1 Jan 93 06:00:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: pro-smof.1993Jan1.000048.6901
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]

So transporters are 3-D JPEG instead of 3-D GIF, right? :-)
 ____________________________________________________________________
/                                |                            |      \
|SMOF-BBS 512-467-7317 PCP=TXAUS |"The World's First Online   | __|__ |
|    Proline:  shiva@pro-smof    | Science Fiction Convention"| \_|_/ |
|    Internet: wixer!pro-lep!pro-smof!shiva@cs.utexas.edu     |   |   |
\________________________________|____________________________|______/

==============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Enterprise Hotel Idea
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 92 18:21:04 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <e7y0VB4w165w@scilab.lonestar.org> chuck@scilab.lonestar.org (Chuck Knight) writes:
>OK, with all this talk about a scale model of the Enterprise as a hotel 
>at Disney, has anyone decided to make the pitch?  I mean, it sounds like 
>a viable idea, and potentially VERY profitable.  Perhaps, also, a 
>Starfleet Academy hotel, for the younger visitors, like high-school and 
>college kids, would be possible.  So, to whom do we make the pitch?

Unfortunately, Paramount owns Star Trek. Universal Studios is the
theme-park owned by the same parent corporation, so it would be
in direct competition with Disney.

Now, having been to Walt Disney World and Universal Studios
Florida this summer, I would not want to see an enterprise hotel
run in the style of the Universal studios theme part. Compared to
the slick style of Disney, US is sloppy. 

Lets just hope for a corporate takeover. :)

Joshua
From: jcharpak@acs.bu.edu (Joseph Charpak)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Summary: Picard as spy
Keywords: spy, Picard
Date: 22 Dec 92 22:48:56 GMT
Followup-To: Ropes in TNG?
Organization: Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

About Chain of Command I, did anyone think Picard is on a *really*
secret mission and knew all along that there were no chemical/
biological weapons.  He knew he would be caught and made it
so he would be (i.e. where Kirk gets "caught" in the Neutral
Zone so he and Spock can get a Cloaking Device from the Romulans
And you may ask what is the new technology that Picard is to steal?
Very simple....the stable wormhole of DS9 (or DSN, depending on
who you ask.)  Just thinking...


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
no .sig so shoot me (Shields up...Red Alert)
Darnit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a clown.  What?  Oh I'm that too...
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell)
Subject: Re: Transporters & replicators
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 07:19:56 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1993Jan1.000048.6901@pro-smof.cts.com> shiva@pro-smof.cts.com (System Smof) writes:
>So transporters are 3-D JPEG instead of 3-D GIF, right? :-)

Well, I'd wager that replicators are similar to 3-D JPEG -
storing all relevant data (16.3 million colors, by analogy),
with lossy compression.

Transporters would be some funky 32-bit lossless uncompressed
scheme, likely a 3-D TIFF file data stream, with patterns (the
tags) telling the transporter which bits of data to put where.

A 3-D GIF file would be only 8 bits, perhaps a massive 75% signal
loss. Don't wanna be beamed through that. :)

Joshua
|         A shimmering net undulating like an infinite borealis.             |
|                                                  - Chapterhouse: Dune      |
|                                                                            |
| jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca  Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: rlbell@babbage.uwaterloo.ca (Richard Bell)
Subject: Re: ropes in TNG?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:14:37 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.092516.28352@u.washington.edu> rene@hardy.u.washington.edu (Rene Magritte) writes:
> 
>  RE:  Ropes in COC 
> 
> 	Didnt anybody else consider it rather remarkable how little
>rope they appeared to be carrying, particularly in light of the fact
>that Picard mentions the descent is 1500 feet... ?
>
>
>

What we see is conventional rope,  what was probably used was monofilament
cable with appropriate grippers, and cutters.  It is easily possible to
carry kilometers of the stuff, but it only shows up in well lit close-ups,
and Props would be hard pressed to supply it; although, theatrical cable-
flying wire would be about right.
From: mark@legend.akron.oh.us (Mark E Daniel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re:  Transporters & replicators
Distribution: world
Date: 3 Jan 93 03:41:25 EST
Organization: The Legend BBS Public Access (216)825-2747

This might be a dumb question, but here goes: in "Relics" Scotty is kept
alive via a Transporter buffer and then remerterlized.

In a previous season, in an episode which I don't remember the title
of, Dr. Polaski is on a Planet where the Children have been geneticly 
enginered (actually it might have been the entire colony) and the adults
have a disease/virus which speeds the aging process and thius brings
death more quickly.  Dr. Polaski is stricken by the disease and is
on the brink of death from old-age when here transporter pattern
is taken, and she is meteralized good as new.

I guess my question is this, which is probably an FAQ.
How much of a person does the transporter save?  What's
to stop a deeply greiving transporter chief who has
lost a loved one to go back and pull the transporter
pattern and bring the dead loved one back to life?
--
Mark E Daniel (Keeper of legend) Data/Fax (v.32bis/G3) +1 (216) 825-2747
Internet: mark@legend.akron.oh.us   UUCP: Yes, why? "I know someday you'll have 
a beautiful life/I know You'll be the sun in somebody else's sky..." - Pearl Jam
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech