posted
Okay, so I know this is a very debatable topic that has been effectively run into the ground over the last five or ten years... but I'm working on a bit of a project, and I'd really like to be able to provide some useful results.
I've tried doing a general search (both here and via Google), but I haven't found very much at all that provides a truly accurate formula for the calculation of starship velocities beyond Warp 9 on the TNG scale.
The closest I've found is this JavaScript-based calculator, but though the equations look like they're exactly what I need, they break down at around Warp 9.8 or so -- they're not increasing towards infinity.
I also tried implementing Graham Kennedy's formula, but even though it's a lot more complex, it didn't seem to do the job either.
So, I know we've got several people here who have strong degrees in math. Does anyone know of a way that I could get a reasonably decent formula? Even if I have to break it up into sub-formulae for various parts of the continuum between WF9 and WF10. But I don't recall nearly enough of my math classes to figure out what I need.
The only requirement that I have is that I need the final equation to be implementable via JavaScript.
Anyone who can give me significant help in finding a useful solution gets a mention on my upcoming Warp Speed Calculator Dashboard widget.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, I've found this one on my hard drive that I found somewhere on the Internet many years ago. It's quite complicated, but I seem to recall that it worked pretty well.
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: The closest I've found is this JavaScript-based calculator, but though the equations look like they're exactly what I need, they break down at around Warp 9.8 or so -- they're not increasing towards infinity.
That one is mine. If you play with the Convert-O-Matic you should find that it does trend to infinity as the WF trends to 10. How steeply this occurs varies from equation to equation.
Are you having issues with the Convert-O-Matic's results, or you implementation of the equation? If the latter, you may be mis-interpreting the equation (e.g. using the wrong log function) or how the step function works. Try looking at the source for the page, which includes the JavaScript implementation which should provide guidance.
posted
Er...can someone post the comparitive diffrences between the TOS and TNG warp scales?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
TOS was only WF��c, and they didn't have an upper end (in-universe, it wasn't until the 2260s that ships started going fast enough to hint it may not be a straight progression after all). TNG's scale you can see above. *heh*
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "Brave men are vertebrates: they have their softness on the outside, and their toughness in the middle" -Lewis Carrol
Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
TSN: I'm trying to implement those functions you posted as a JavaScript calculation, but I've got a question... do you know if the "log10" used in the equations is supposed to be the log-base-10 function (where the 10 should normally be in subscript), or is it the natural log of 10? I'm going to do some trial and error, but I figured I might as well ask, too.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Those (8 / (100 - 10W)) subexpressions look like they are arguments to the log function, so I'd say it's supposed to represent base 10.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Huzzah! This formula is 100% correct for every single canonical speed per given warp factor above WF9. It's perfect! Except...
I then took a few minutes to plot the equation into OS X's graphing calculator app, and I discovered a rather unfortunate problem:
(The lower graph is the TOS scale.)
I think what I'll try to do now is to blend the various equations somehow, and use TSN's formula for the higher end area where the speeds approach infinity, but try to find something that fluctuates a bit less wildly on the lower side of things.
Cartman: I realized after I asked that question how stupid it actually was, because the log-base-10 of 10 is... 1! (I never thought I'd actually have even a somewhat-reasonable use for my higher algebra, trig, and calculus classes! )
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
That's FUNNY. The graph I mean. I mean not that you are or what you've done is funny. Just that the upper end of Warp speed fluctuates so wildly from episode to episode and series to series. Cool.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
That chart is from the equations provided by TSN? If so, I think something's amiss. I've taken the time to punch those into Microsoft Works Spreadsheet several times over the years, and they tend to create a nice smooth curve.
Well, not perfectly smooth. If you zoom in (and I mean really zoom in) at whatever point corresponds to subspace communications (I forget the numbers for it right now), there's a discontinuity there. But it's not really noticable unless you really look for it.
-------------------- "Kirito? I killed a thing and now it says I have XPs! Is that bad? Am I dying?"
-Asuna, Episode 2, Sword Art Online Abridged
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Maybe I've inadvertently discovered the chart for the Relativity's hyperwarp drive capabilities?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Okay, on second thought, I found my problem: When I was combining the three components of the equation for the final result, I forgot to use parentheses to separate those various components. No wonder it was screwed up!
Here's the fixed product, with the wacky one in the background:
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Okay, so, next issue to resolve: I now need to find the INVERSE of this complicated warp factor equation. And although I can do a bit of math, my algebra classes are a bit too far behind me to remember how to invert all of these formulae... and distributing a variable was always one of my least favorite tasks.
Any takers?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
