JDW
------------------
The first time in Federation history that a Starfleet craft reached transwarp speeds was in Voyager. I forget the episode, but they had discovered a new form of dilithium that could tolerate the high stresses induced by transwarp speeds. The only problem was that any human that travelled at such velocities experienced some, ahem, evolutionary problems. Namely that this aspect was highly accelerated. We can assume that this was not the reason Starfleet abandoned the Excelsior project because otherwise, Janeway probably would have known about the aftereffects of the drive and never have put Tom, or herself, through that.
Why does it work for the Borg? Because they're better? Probably because they utilize a totally different drive system. You never hear anything akin to "fire on the cube's matter/antimatter core." And we know that they use something known as a "transwarp coil," presumably something Starfleet, with its pitifully small technology base, cannot replicate. Anyone else have anything to add? I'm not a TNG person, so I missed out on a lot of the development of the Borg and their technology.
In early TNG, the Borg's method of propulsion was unknown, but there didn't seem to be any sort of "drive" running the ship. IIRC, "Descent" was the first TNG ep to state that the Borg used transwarp corridors, although it seemed to imply that this technology was being used by Lore's Borg renegades only. By the time of Voyager, however, someone made the decision that an actual transwarp drive was the propulsion system that all Borg ships used.
So it's possible that one method of propulsion that Starfleet couldn't get to work right 70 years ago could have been perfected by the Borg fairly recently, thereby renewing Starfleet's interest in it.
------------------
Star Trek: Legacy
[This message has been edited by Dukhat (edited January 26, 2001).]
------------------
"One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget
Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant
Star Trek: Legacy
Read them, rate them, got money, film them....
------------------
My new year's resolution is the same as last year's: 1024x768.
And then money disappeared from UFP economy and put SF Accounting Division into utter chaos which wasn't sorted out before Voyager's time, so the second testbed never got built.
Timo Saloniemi
The transwarp they talked about in "Threshold" involved being everywhere at once. If the Borg used this kind of technology, no one would stand a chance. Instead, they use transwarp corridors. I don't know what this means, but I've always assumed that it limited their superspeed travel to specific entrance and exit points. They probably have to set up a corridor using normal speed before they can use it.
------------------
"A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx
Aban's Illustration www.alanfore.com
------------------
"That's your plan? Wile E. Coyote would come up with a better plan than that!"
- Crighton, Farscape.
[This message has been edited by Altair (edited January 26, 2001).]
------------------
"A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx
Aban's Illustration www.alanfore.com
"HERE y'go, Doctor...from one surgeon to another. I took them out of her main transwarp computer."
Oddly enough, they looked like spark plugs.
Do you REALLY think that Excelsior's ONLY test of the drive was its abortive chase of Enterprise? C'mon.
There was actually something quite interesting as to why transwarp failed from FASA...well, not failed--they embraced it originally, as did many of us. But it had something to do with nacelle size, integers, & all that shit. Star Station Aurora had a wonderful explanation of why it failed as well; I'll dig out my plans.
------------------
"You just push off....and the falling sort of happens on its own." ---Dave Titus
------------------
"One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget
Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant
Star Trek: Legacy
Read them, rate them, got money, film them....
------------------
Chickety china, the chinese chicken, you have?
*cough*
Going by what First said though, even if it was just a marginal speed increase, why'd they stop calling it "transwarp"? Can it only be called transwarp if it's, to use a technical term, "pretty bloody fast"?
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
Oh, you mean Fabrux!
------------------
[Bart's looking for his dog.]
Groundskeeper Willy: Yeah, I bought your mutt - and I 'ate 'im! [Bart gasps.] I 'ate 'is little face, I 'ate 'is guts, and I 'ate the way 'e's always barkin'! So I gave 'im to the church.
Bart: Ohhh, I see... you HATE him, so you gave him to the church.
Groundskeeper Willy: Aye. I also 'ate the mess he left on me rug. [Bart stares.] Ya heard me!
------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!
------------------
"Oh for fuck's sake, stop your moaning,
If you fancy a threesome at this time of night, you can't get start getting choosey about which particular three!
-Queer As Folk, UK
------------------
Here lies a toppled god,
His fall was not a small one.
We did but build his pedestal,
A narrow and a tall one.
-Tleilaxu Epigram
------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"
(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)
Mustang Class Starship Development Project
"in the future in all good things(warp 13)trans warp is faster than warp 10."
No, it isn't. Here's it simplfied as much as possible:
Current Warp 10 = Infinity.
Current Warp 9.999999 < Infinity.
Current Warp 1 = Speed Of Light (You seemingly forgot this)
Future Warp 13 <> Infinity.
Future Warp 13 <> Current Warp 10.
Therefore, Future Warp 13 is not faster than Current Warp 10, and is not transwarp.
Oh, and The359 made a perfectly good response. You didn't need to get stupid.
[This message has been edited by Ultra Magnus (edited February 09, 2001).]
------------------
"I rather strongly disagree, even if I share the love of Dick. Speaking of which, that would be the most embarrasing .sig quote ever, so never use it."
- Simon Sizer, 23/01/2001
------------------
Terry: "Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, ...."
Max: "And?"
Terry: "I forgot."
Max: "Come on, Clinton was the fun one, then came the boring one."
Terry: "They're all boring."
- Batman Beyond (aka: Batman of the Future)
Er, yes it is. According to, well, pretty much everyone who works in the Trek universe. Hell, I think even Brannon Braga knows that warp 1 = speed of light.
"it's impules just like warp 10, but in a warp feild"
Okaaaayyy. Are we using a different definition of impulse here? Most people use the following system.
Impulse = slower than light speed/normal stars
Warp = Light speed, or greater/streaky stars
Now, with the possible exception of (I think) Contagion (With the stupid "Increase to warp 6 Mr La Forge" "Aye sir, full impulse" line), every episode of Star Trek has followed this.
Warp 10 (theoretically) can not be reached, because it is infinite speed. And at infinite speed, you would be everywhere at the same time. And since in "Threshold" Paris didn't end up on Galifrey in the distant Flicktop galaxy, I'm going for the "he just went really close to warp 10. Warp 9.99999999999999999999etc" answer.
But, anyway, again:
Warp 1 = The speed of light, or c
Warp 9 = over a thousand times faster than c (I think. Rusty memory).
Warp 10 = infinite speed. You'd be there as you left.
Warp 13 = faster than infinite speed. How would that work? You arrive before you leave?
Therefore, the only answer is that the warp scale had been recalibrated, so that warp 10 was no longer infinite speed. Perhaps they went back to the TOS version?
Of course, the real world answer is that Moore and Braga were just screwing with us. Lots of sacred cows were sacrificed in All Good Things. The Enterprise having three warp engines (odd no of warp engines = bad, said Mr Roddenberry). The Enterprise cloaking (bad, said Mr Roddenberry). The fact that the shot of Cambridge was actually Oxford (bad, according to a mum of a mate of mine. She threw stuff at the screen. Maybe). And the fact that the episode agreed with most theories about the age of the Earth, and evolution (bad, according to, er, some people).
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
Though I don't think it works that way. AFAIK, what TNG:TM says is that the warp engines physically warp space to travel, no propulsion utilizing rocket-type thrust systems is involved. I'm not sure off the top of my head how subspace fits into all of this. I have to check up on that.
Yes, Warp 10 is infinity. The chart in the Encyclopedia uses the sideways 8, and I think we all know what that means.
As it's been said already, warp 13 is only mentioned in the episode All Good things, and I think we all assume it's a recalibration of the system. If you read the ST Encyplopedia or Chronology, that's what Okuda proposes.
p.s daniel i think paris made it to warp 10
Going by that, if you continued to use the same factor to increase the number of times the speed of light that you are travelling you can achieve warp 15 (or whatever) and set warp 20 (as a multiple of C) as infinite speed.
------------------
Re: Russia in WWII
"Hey, we butchered Poles! Thats OK."
- DT.
------------------
Here lies a toppled god,
His fall was not a small one.
We did but build his pedestal,
A narrow and a tall one.
-Tleilaxu Epigram
BTW, I did reread what you posted. And it still doesn't make sense. For example:
"and yes warp 13 is not faster than warp 10 but it will get you to a further distance quicker."
Soooo, you're saying that warp 13 is slower, or the same speed as warp 10. And yet it allows you to reach your destination quicker? Surely that means it's, well, faster? And if it's faster than warp 10, it's faster than infinity? Or, at the very least, the moment the Enterprise went to warp 13, it should have arrived at it's destination.
Unless you're proposing that some sort of time-dilation effect came into play, but the TNG manual states (I think) than time-dilation doesn't happen at warp speeds.
So, huh?
Regarding the recalibration of the warp scale. Thinking about it, the idea that they've gone back to the TOS scale isn't relaly satisfying either. Didn't the old Enterprise manage warp 13 in That Which Survives? Sure it was a couple of seconds away form breaking apart, but it still hit it. Going by that, Warp 13 wouldn't really be very fast for the Ent-D. Especially the future Ent-D.
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
[This message has been edited by PsyLiam (edited February 15, 2001).]
------------------
"I rather strongly disagree, even if I share the love of Dick. Speaking of which, that would be the most embarrasing .sig quote ever, so never use it."
- Simon Sizer, 23/01/2001
[sarcasm mode]
Recalibration of the warp scale makes sense. Why? So captains don't have to order "increase to warp 9.99999 Mr. Helmsdude" and name all the decimals. Starships get faster you know, so instead of having to name seven numbers behind the decimal point each time, some incredibly smart person named Bob proposed to the engineers "hey what if instead of warp 9.99999999999999 we call it warp 13 and place warp 999 as infinite speed??????"
[/sarcasm mode]
None of this "faster than infinity" nonsense.
------------------
"Cry havoc and let's slip the dogs of Evil"
Okay, several points. Who said that they reverted to the TOS scale? The TOS scale, I believe, places warp factors at the cube of the speed of light. What if they recalibrated the scale to make the current warp 10 warp 9 and made the rest fractional increases, such as the new warp 10 equating to the old 9.99, and warp 11 to 9.9999 and so on. I think someone mentioned this idea, above, but in terms of riducule.
This would work, too, since I believe the power use/velocity curve given is a reversed exponential graph. As you approach infinity, you get less bang for your buck, less speed for your power.
also, directly from TNG:TM -
"The propulsive effect is achieved by a number of factors working in concert. First, the field formation is controllable in a fore to aft direction. As the plasma injecros fire sequentially, the warp field layers build according to the pulse frequency in the plasma, and press upon each other as previously discussed. The cumulative field layer forces reduce the apparent mass of the vehicle and impart the required velocities. The critical transition point occurs when the spacecraft appears to an outside observer to be traveling faster than c. As the warp field energy reaches 1000 millicochranes, the ship appears driven across the c boundary in less than Planck time, 1.3times 10 to the negative 43 sec, warp physics insuring that the ship would never be precisely at c. The three forward coils of each nacelle operate with a slight frequency offset to reinforce the field ahead of the Bussard ramscoop and envelop the Saucer Module. This helps create the field asymmetry required to drive the ship forward."
There it is, in a nutshell. Letsalope was canonically correct. The ship does not ever exceed the speed of light. It *appears* to break the c barrier at 1000 millicochranes, but only to an outside observer. It will never reach 300,000 kps.
Comments?
The TNG warp formula is c=w^10/3 up until Warp 9. From Warp 9 to 10, it approaches infinity.
I would guess that the AGT scale continues the w^10/3 equation past Warp 9. It might asign a new Warp Factor as infinite, but I don't think AGT gave us any indication of this, besides the fact that Warp 10 is no longer infinte speed.
code:
AGT? (c=w^10/3)..........TNG (from ST enc)...
Warp 9= 1516c............Warp 9= 1516c.......
Warp 10= 2154c...........Warp 9.2= 1649c.....
Warp 11= 2960c...........Warp 9.6= 1909c.....
Warp 12= 3954c...........Warp 9.9= 3054c.....
Warp 13= 5166c ..........Warp 9.99= 7912c ...
Of course, this is all conjecture. AGT could have been using an entirely new Warp formula, like c=w^11/3, or even c=w^4.
-The SpaceBoy
Sorry, but I am sorely tempet to go "blah blah blah, blah blah blah, blah, BLAH!"
It doesn't go faster than the speed of light in it's own bubble, but to the rest of the universe, it's going 1000 c? Sorry, but it's going faster than the speed of light.
Look, I know Trek fandom is built around nitpicking, but stopping a tread on warp to say that warp drive is slower than the speed of light, is well, uber-anal.
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
Whole warp factors are, in the TNG scale, distinct threshholds where the power consumption drops suddenly down. That's the onscreen excuse for why captains order warp 7 all the time instead of warp 6.999. Whole numbers are just more efficient. So I figure at some point in the AGT timeline someone discovered some more threshold levels above warp 9 where power usages drop the samw way. And they simply named them warp 10, 11, 12, 13 etc. Infinite speed was then renamed to warp 14 or 15 or something.
I think that's better than assuming they developed a completely new scale or went back to the TOS scale.
-Devin
(longtime lurker)
That was why It was deemed a failure.
And no I don't remember the source (scott's guide?) but I heard it many years ago and it could be as good as some of the answers around here!
------------------
An Aussie Trek Narrator
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
PsyLiam, Einstein's theory of relativity is based on what you just threw out the window. Relative observations made by observers in positions relative to each other. So, are you saying that you would rather completely ignore the accepted laws of physics and relativity?
If the ship *was* going faster than light, than time dilation and apparent increase in mass would occur as in any object exceeding 300,000 kps. Therefore we must conclude that the vessel itself is in fact not breaking that barrier. If you can explain your way around this minor fact, please feel free to do so.
The explanation of warp drive given in the TNG:TM *fits* even if it doesn't make a whole lot of sense on the surface. To toss it aside rather than try to explain it is more ignorant than anal. I much prefer to be anal.
Meanwhile, I will diligently research Galilean and Einsteinien principles of relativity to see if I can explain this in a more reasonable context and with more detail or, in fact, prove myself wrong.
Everyone please feel free to comment.
P.S. The explanation of hull stress cutting a vessel's potential lifespan seems much more reasonable than some of the explanations I've heard. The simple fact that Scott pulled the chips out of the computer couldn't possibly be the reason why they halted the project.
BUT...I wasn't saying that their theories were "wrong" even in a Trek-universe sort of way. I was saying that pointing out that a ship going FTL is "tecnically" going slower than light in it's own bubble when it hasn't got anything to do with the conversation is at best anal, and at worst, a huge waste of time. Are we suppossed to put in qualifiers everytime we talk about warp speed?
Paris: "There's a Borg ship approaching. It's travelling slower than the speed of light, and it's 3 light years away."
Janeway: "Oh good. That gives us plenty of time to get away".
*Ship gets shot. Chakotay dies. Janeway is pissed. Everyone else cheers*
Janeway: "What happened?"
Paris: "Oh, it was going at warp 9.99999999billion. But it was "tecnically" travelling slower than the speed of light. So I'm right. BTW, we're about to die."
Janeway: "Duh".
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
The idea that "they" (whoever they may be) found further thresholds above warp 9 and below the (previous) warp 10 and reassigned warps 10-13+ to those thresholds while infinite speed was given a new number (if at all, maybe at the time of AGT, infinite speed was simply referred to as Eugene's Limit...) is the one that is the most internally consistent of the rationalizations surrounding Riker's line in AGT.
Okuda produced Tranwarp-compatible displays for the E-A in ST IV before the Great Bird decided transwarp hadn't worked. These displays are in fact reprinted in Mr. Scott's Guide, although Okuda initially denied it, saying they were doctored by Shane Johnson, before finally admitting it.
The whole cloaking thing was a result of the Great Bird declaring that our heroes shouldn't "sneak around". Between the stolen Romulan cloak and the Klingon (or Romulan, depending on how far one wants to reach) Bird-of-Prey they hauled up from the bottom of the Golden Gate, Starfleet engineers had plenty to work with. It's still uncertain whether the Treaty of Algeron was the treaty that ended the Romulan War or some treaty signed (or amended) just before or just after the Tomed Incident, but that that treaty stipulated the Federation eschewing cloaking technology is not uncertain. In the AGT future, they were at war with the Romulans (or at least exchanging harsh words), so it makes sense that the treaty would no longer be a consideration. And depending on when this treaty -- or more specifically, this stipulation -- had effect, there might have been developments in Federation cloaking tech between ST IV and 2311. And some branches of tech fandom follow that idea. I don't know if I do or not, but it's certainly a fun area to play around in...
And as for the GR rules of ship design, those are purely a result of the falling out between GR and Franz Joseph. The whole story there is available for perusal, but the end result was GR declaring that ships have even numbers of nacelles (invalidating the Hermes, Saladin, and Federation classes FJ created), nacelles should have at least 50% "crosstalk" space between them (invalidating the Ptolemy and Federation classes FJ created), the ramscoops should have at least 50% unobstructed forward view (invalidating the Hermes and Saladin classes FJ created)... you get the idea. These "rules" have been violated again since, so the current party line is that either the odd nacelle has two sets of coils inside (which I have a hard time swallowing), or that there are periodic experiments with odd numbers of nacelles when there is a significant enginery advance -- it works, it just doesn't work WELL...
And lastly, I don't know WHERE that "warp 1 = .75c and all warp factors after that are between .75c and c" comes from, but that ain't what's onscreen by a long shot. Ignoring for the moment the "fact" that a ship is sublight within its own warp envelope and dealing with apparant speeds... From the very beginning, warp 1 was c. Whichever scale and system was involved, everything higher than warp 1.0 was FTL, and we have the travel times to prove it. In the current era, warp 10 is the number assigned to the theoretical, and unattainable (the excrecable "Threshold" aside), infinite maximum -- which by definition means you are occupying all points in the universe simultaneously.
I'll stop there to give all parties a chance to respond...
--Jonah
------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
[This message has been edited by Peregrinus (edited February 25, 2001).]
PsyLiam, I see your point now that you've explained yourself a bit better. I was simply researching to confirm/deny what letsalope was saying, not trying to can the entire thread. And for those who don't know, I AM slightly anal-retentive, detail oriented, perfectionist, technically minded, etc.
HOWEVER, I would like to point out that your humorous example was more the quite a bit flawed where my explanation, (or rather Okuda's and Sternbach's) is concerned. I just hope you recognize that fact.
"evil lord. it is not the recalibration of the warp scale.at normal speed in a warp feild i think it is 3/4 of the speed of light, at maximum contracting of space at that time is 9.6 .between 9.6 and warp 10 is the speed between 3/4 of the speed of light speed and light speed,so it wouldn't be known as warp 13 so it is easier for captains not to say warp 9.9999......."
--Jonah
------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
I'll have to think on that one.
p.s yes if the borg were traveling at slower than light speed out of warp, they would have plenty of time to get away
------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!
letsalope: Are you actually saying that the ships in Star Trek don't travel faster than the speed of light, full stop? You ask where in the world did I get FLT drive in the Star Trek universe? I'd answer...just about everywhere ever.
The ships ARE travelling faster than the speed of light, in just about every sense. Or do you really think that there's YEARS between every episode as the ships crawl from place to place at slower than light-speed, er, speeds? (I should point out that Transporters are as equally against the laws of physics as FLT drive. And yet they seem to exist quite happily in Star Trek.)
Stephen Hawking wrote the physics of Star Trek? The wheelchair guy (to quote someone far funnier than I)? Wow.
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
[This message has been edited by PsyLiam (edited February 28, 2001).]
--jacob
------------------
"This is cooling, faster than I can..." Tori Amos "Cooling"
------------------
Wes Button � Wes1701E@hotmail.com
TechFX Studios � The United Federation Uplink �
------------------
Janeway: "Dimissed"
Neelix: [stands there dumbfounded] "b..but.."
Janeway: "That's Starfleet for get out"
JDW
transporters only travel at the speed of light.not faster!
Standard Federation transporters might move at lightspeed. Or then slightly faster or slower, depending on the physics applying to these weird "phased matter streams".
Timo Saloniemi
Oh my dear God, I feel like I'm arguing with Omega (joke). Okay, how many times do I have to say, YES THEY DO!
"remembering warp isn't a speed it's a factor."
Huh? I'm pretty sure it's a speed. I haven't actually got my tech manual next to me (sorry), but the warp factors ARE speeds. These are probably wrong, but ignore that little nitpicky detail. Warp 1 is the speed of light (or 1c). Warp 2 is (say) 8 times the speed of light, or 8c. It goes up to over 1000c at over warp 9 and a bit.
"(only between 9.6 and 10) is when ships do actually have a slight speed increase."
No, the ships get faster the higher the warp facter they go at. Are you saying that a ship travelling at warp 6 is going the same speed as one going at warp 4? That's just, well, wrong. And, if I remember, there's a HUGE difference in speed between 9.6 and, say, 9.9. Since warp factor speeds increase exponentially, the difference between 9.6 and 9.9 is far greater than the difference between warp factor 1 and 2.
"transporters only travel at the speed of light.not faster!"
Light-speed is just as impossible as faster than light speed, if I recall correctly. Er, unless you're made up of light.
And I meant that from a physics point of view, Transporters are just as impossible as FTL drive, because for a transporter to work, you'd need to know both the position and movement of individual atoms. Or something like that. It's to do with that Heisenburg guy. I hate physics.
Anyway, why am I arguing this? Me! I mean, arguing that ships travel faster than light in Star Trek is the second most pointless argument ever after "the show is set in the future".
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
and to psyliam,i'll put it to you in simple terms.
warp 2 is (say) 8 times the speed of light,no it's 8 times faster than light can travel(light speed).
and transporters do travel at the speed of light because they turn matter into energy,and energy has no mass, the same as light.
--jacob
[This message has been edited by EdipisReks (edited March 09, 2001).]
We can also say that starships travel faster than light. Starships travel faster than light.
------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!
------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!
------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!
--jacob
[This message has been edited by EdipisReks (edited March 09, 2001).]
------------------
Disclaimer:
"All references to vices and of the supernatural contained in this game are for entertainment purposes only. _Over_The_Edge_ does not promote satanisim, belief in magic, drug use, violence, sexual deviation, body piercing, cynical attitudes toward the government, freedom of expression, or any other action or belief not condoned by the authorities."
- `OverTheEdge'
No. "Heat" is just the motion of molecules. The faster they move and the more they collide, the hotter something is. Everything at a given temperature radiates a certain portion of the specturm. Stars, for instance, at thousands of degrees, radiate visible light.
The reason that using the infrared spectrum is sometimes called "heat vision" is because most things on Earth, at a few dozen degrees, radiate in the infrared portion of the spectrum, just outside of our eyesight.
Something really cold (interstellar dust, for instance) might radiate at radio wavelengths. Things that are really hot, such as the acretion disk just above a black hole's event horizon, radiate x-rays.
As an aside, everything actually emits photons at all wavelengths, just in varying proportions. When I say that the human body gives off infrared-level photons, that's just the wavelength it gives off most. I'm not sure what the emission rate is for a person's body, but it's not inconceivable that you give off a gamma ray or two every so often.
Simply: heat doesn't have a particle, it describes particle motion. Infra-red doesn't mean "hot," it just happens to be the photons associated with living things' temperatures.
-=Ryan McReynolds=-
[This message has been edited by Ryan McReynolds (edited March 10, 2001).]
OK, there might not have been enough storage in the shuttle's computer... but why just have info from nearby sectors... why not stuff from here and there... EVERYWHERE! 
Also. Maybe he DID reach Warp 10, but not Transwarp... at onestage there they were interchanging the two terms which I believe are mutally exclusive.
Andrew
------------------
"Yar, a lesbian? That girl had a sex drive! First, Data in Naked Now, then, in
Hide and Q, she hits on Picard! "Oh, if only you weren't the captain..." God! If
Denise Crosby hadn't left the series, she'd've slept with the entire senior staff by
now!" Jeff Kardde - March 7, 2001
[This message has been edited by AndrewR (edited March 10, 2001).]
--Jonah
------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
------------------
"Yar, a lesbian? That girl had a sex drive! First, Data in Naked Now, then, in
Hide and Q, she hits on Picard! "Oh, if only you weren't the captain..." God! If
Denise Crosby hadn't left the series, she'd've slept with the entire senior staff by
now!" Jeff Kardde - March 7, 2001
[This message has been edited by AndrewR (edited March 10, 2001).]
I think the problem Letsalope and PsyLiam are having is the concept of subspace and actual velocity versus perceived velocity. Letsalope is concentrating on the velocity of a starship within its subspace bubble, and PsyLiam on its velocity without. Again, inside the bubble, a ship doesn't travel faster than the speed of light. Outside, it does. Or seems to. Correct me if I'm wrong or being too pretentious.
To me, it seems transporters do transport at the speed of light, as someone said, because matter is converted into energy.
The computers aboard Federation starships also work faster that light, but don't ask me how. All I know is that the cores contain subspace field machinery to accomplish it.
Didn't Lord Kelvin have something to say about that?
------------------
Don't kill me, I'm charming!
No, that's fine. But that's not my problem. My problem is that's Letsalope is constantly saying that "ships do not travel faster than the speed of light. AT ALL". Wheras your explanation is that they don't in their own bubble, but to the rest of the universe, they are travelling faster than the speed of light. Which is why almost everyone says that "The ships in Star Trek travel faster than the speed of light".
It's like driving a car. If someone asks me how fast I'm going down the motorway, I don't say "well, actually I'm sitting still, so I'm not moving at all." While in comparison to other people in the car, i'd be sitting still, to the rest of the world, I'd be going at (say) 70mph. So I'd say "I'm doing 70mph."
And I'm slightly confused by sentences like:
"warp 2 is (say) 8 times the speed of light,no it's 8 times faster than light can travel(light speed)."
Because that looks suspiciously like:
Warp 2 isn't 8 times the speed of light, but it's 8 times faster than light speed. Sorry, I need more explanation.
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
and to daniel,i think it appears to the outside observer to warp travel that you are going faster than light,but infact you still are not,just traveling a greater distance.
You know, to make it less confusing.
------------------
"I WANT A POST VOY SERIES STAR TREK ORIGINAL MESSAGE WAS LOOKING FORWARD NOT LOOKING BACK."
-Darkstar
what the hell does that mean? i think that i am able to decipher it linguistically, but it makes no sense. buddy, if you are travelling a greater distance than another object in a certain amount of time, then you are going faster than that other object. just out of curiousity, have you seen an episode of star trek where they use the warp drive, letsalope? damn.
--jacob
------------------
what are we supposed to use, man, harsh language!?
About Lord Kelvin though. If this is the guy they named the Kelvin scale after, then perhaps he did have something to say on the subject, although I haven't a clue what it was.
In the Kelvin Scale, absolute zero, (the temperature at which all particle motion stops), is approximately 273.15 K. At this temperature, the electrons orbiting the nucleus of an atom would cease to do so, and fall into the nucleus. The would atom effectively collapse. If we are talking about this occuring on a large scale, say 10 grams of a substance, the theory is that matter would contract on itself until it created an intense gravity well and possibly a black hole.
That is why all particles HAVE to be in motion. Otherwise we'd be dead right now. Or a series of black holes.
This being the case, one wonders why scientists persist on trying to get another billionth of a degree closer to absolute zero.
------------------
Don't kill me, I'm charming!
Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that cooling things down to just a few shades of absolute zero is not going to destroy the universe. Of course, I've been wrong about that sort of thing before.
------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!
Anyway, isn't giving him credit for the KELVIN scale a bit much? All he did was find out what absolute zero was, and then adapt the Celsius scale. They are exactly the same, just 273.15 degrees apart.
------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
------------------
Not even a god can deny that I have squared the circle of a static Earth and cubed the Earth sphere by rotating it once to a dynamic Time or Life Cube.
--
Gene Ray
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet" Or don't. You know, whatever.
------------------
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, co-operate, act alone, solve equations, analyse a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, [and] die gallantly. Specialisation is for insects."
- Woodrow Wilson Smith
------------------
Not even a god can deny that I have squared the circle of a static Earth and cubed the Earth sphere by rotating it once to a dynamic Time or Life Cube.
--
Gene Ray
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet" Or don't. You know, whatever.
--Jonah
------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH