Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Increasing ship performance and adhering to the Warp 10 barrier

This is topic Increasing ship performance and adhering to the Warp 10 barrier in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/2228.html

Posted by Triton (Member # 1043) on :

-------------------------------------------------
This thread also appeared on the SCN forums, I was hoping to get some other solutions or ideas about this problem
------------------------------------------------

I am running into a problem of creating higher performing Federation fanfiction starships and running into the Warp 10 barrier.

I understand why the producers of TNG and Gene Roddenberry adopted "Eugene's Law" stating that Warp 10 was the maximum speed period for Federation starships. It prevented authors from submitting scripts in which our heroes instantaneously travel from one side of the galaxy to the other during the course of an episode, have inter-galaxy travel (let's spend the day checking out what's in the Andromeda galaxy), or have stories in which the U.S.S. Enterprise responding to an emergency signal increases its speed to Warp factor 1000.

Where I am running into difficulty is how as an author do you increase the performance of Federation starships in the Star Trek universe, to explore more of the galaxy, and adhere to the Warp 10 barrier?

The problem that the producers have painted themselves, and us, into is not only have they revised the Cochrane or Warp factor unit from TOS, the Revised Cochrane Warp Factor unit, but they have allowed Federation starships to routinely have maximum velocities extremely close to the Warp 10 limit. For example, doesn't the Voyager and Intrepid-class have an emergency dash-warp capability of Warp 9.75 for 6 to 8 hours and a normal operational cruise velocity of Warp 7 or 8 something?

Also adding to the confusion, is that the series TNG, DS9, and Voyager routinely show alien vehicles that are traveling at significantly faster velocities than any vehicle that has yet been produced by the Federation. Ludicrous speed in some instances.

To muddy the waters even more, they produce the Voyager episode "Threshold" that suggests that the Warp 10 barrier is not a limitation of traditional M/A warp technology, but a physical law in the universe. Thou shall not pass the velocity that Warp 10 represents, you will cause de-evolution or other physical harm to your crew, and this physical law applies to other techniques and technologies of FTL travel that have been mentioned over the years in Trek-- specifically transwarp drive and quantum slipstream.

(Is it time to add more marks to our measurement scale and throw out warp factors as a measurement of starship performance? Like we moved from degrees Celsius to degrees Kelvin in chemistry because matter can never have no or negative temperature?)

So in order to create a faster starship to explore more of the galaxy and move my story away from the traditional aliens, it seems like I am forced to keep track of the quadrillionth decimal place on the Warp factor scale. For example, if I wanted to have a starship on an exploration mission deeper into the Alpha quadrant, I would need to create a starship capable of traveling at Warp factor 9.9999999999999999999999999999999, a god intervenes plot device such as The Caretaker, wormhole, or alien transwarp network, create a multi-generational starship in which several lifetimes begin and end while the ship is traveling to its destination, or adding the crew is in stasis or cryogenic freeze plot device to move my starship into unexplored, unvisited, unseen or unmapped space.

My discussion of course is assuming that transwarp and quantum slipstream velocities are also measured in the Revised Cochrane unit or Warp factor. Is there a Warp factor 9 something with a vehicle powered by quantum slipstream? Has anyone seen a good explanation of how this technology works and how it compares with traditional warp drive?

Can I just get around this problem by saying that "Threshold" was just a nightmare of Paris or Janeway, or they were on drugs or some other psychoactive substance?

So I was asking if anything has appeared that anyone has seen in "Star Trek: The Magazine", or interviews with Sternbach or Okuda, that explains transwarp and quantum slipstream and gives me a leg to stand on if I want to produce a faster starship? My attempts in the past to do this have been vehemently shot down by friends. They dismiss the ship by saying your crew is now salamanders.

Bernd Schneider suggested that I just introduce transwarp factor 1 (Warp 11), but I don't know if I like that solution either.

Any one else have any ideas?

Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :

Increasing the efficiency of warp could possibly be done with better materials and engineering. Make denser or purer warp coils (or find a better substitute than Verterium Cortenide), find a better way to regulate matter/antimatter reactions with more efficient crystals, etc.

Remember that the warp 10 thing is the upper end of the scale and need not be broken. Paris showed it can be reached, but not exceeded, and evidently at great cost.

That notwithstanding, you just need to push to get a little more out of your engines. Here's some speeds we know:

Voyager max warp: 9.975
Subspace comm signals: 9.9997
Q entities: 9.9999+
Traveler accident: 9.9999999996

What likely happened in "All Good Things..." was that they redrew the warp scale because of uprated performance and set the new 'top' at maybe warp 15. In reality, the warp 13 that the future Enterprise-D reached did not exceed the old warp 10, but rather was warp 9.something with more decimal places. Saying 13 was easier for the crew to relate to.

So you can create all sorts of ways to get ships a little faster and still adhere to the warp 10 maximum. Hope some of this has helped.

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

I agree with the idea that in AGT... that they just rescaled the warp-factors and called warp 9.99999 or something warp 13.

I don't believe Paris and Janeway made warp 10. Considering he only was witness to things in the sector and not everything in the universe.

I reckon that what happened in threshold was Paris dipped into a deeper subspace domain. The warp scale is an asymptotic curve that never reaches 10. The only thing I could think of is that if they did get to warp 10 - then they had to 'break out of the curve' and jump across to the y-axis.

The Q might be able to exist in warp 10 space as space and time have no meaning for them.

Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :

If you don't like all those nines, you could just convert to open-ended scale using multiples of light speed (perhaps with a log scale) and not worry about warp factors and any damn limit.

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

I have to admit that my eyes started to glaze over a little about halfway through, but, I don't think you're characterizing warp 10 correctly. It isn't a speed "limit" in any traditional sense. It's infinite speed. As to why it was decided to rework the warp factors in such a manner, the decision was aesthetic, and had nothing to do with preventing ships from traveling really fast when required. You can still travel at whatever arbitrary speed the story requires. It's just that, the way the scale now operates, warp 10 = infinity. It's...one of those fancy mathematical terms. You know...logarithmic, or whatever.

Posted by leuckinc (Member # 729) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sol System:
I have to admit that my eyes started to glaze over a little about halfway through, but, I don't think you're characterizing warp 10 correctly. It isn't a speed "limit" in any traditional sense. It's infinite speed. As to why it was decided to rework the warp factors in such a manner, the decision was aesthetic, and had nothing to do with preventing ships from traveling really fast when required. You can still travel at whatever arbitrary speed the story requires. It's just that, the way the scale now operates, warp 10 = infinity. It's...one of those fancy mathematical terms. You know...logarithmic, or whatever.

Math? Oh I am getting out of this topic...

Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :

What's all this talk about Paris reaching Warp 10?

I don't remember any such thing happening.

You must all be mad.

Although I am glad nothing like that ever happened, because it sounds like a very poor plot idea.

Now if you'll excuse me I need to go and meditate away "Spock's Brain".

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

Spock's Brain, Shades of Grey and Rivals were all better episodes than Threshold.

Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :

quote:
Originally posted by AndrewR:
I don't believe Paris and Janeway made warp 10. Considering he only was witness to things in the sector and not everything in the universe.

Not quite correct. Paris did mention seeing Earth. He would've been everywhere simultaneously, but his 'limited' brain could probably only comprehend the familiar, which explains the area around Voyager's location and Earth.

Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SoundEffect:
Increasing the efficiency of warp could possibly be done with better materials and engineering. Make denser or purer warp coils (or find a better substitute than Verterium Cortenide), find a better way to regulate matter/antimatter reactions with more efficient crystals, etc.

Exactly. And what did Voyager found at the beginning of the Threshold? They found "Premium-quality dilithium", to quote Jim Wright.
And (at least to me), it makes sense. Dilithium crystals are the weakest link in the whole warp drive assembly - if you can get better crystals, you can achieve higher warp speeds.

To further defend vigorously flogged Threshold, let me ask you one question:
How exactly do you know what happens at extremely high warp speeds?
For all we know, achieving warp 9.(many nines here) creates a artificial temporal wormhole (as supported by TMP accident) or something.

... But this horse is long dead, I realize that. I could defend the whole episode (I actually thought up answers to all points of Bernd Schneider list (which I believe sums trekkies problems with Threshold in best way)), but I like you guys too much to force you to argue once again about that episode. [Big Grin]

I just like Voyager despite its flaws and weaknesses. [Smile]

Posted by Dr. Jonas Bashir (Member # 481) on :

The modern warp sacale has a limitation of warp 10, which in mathematical terms is described as a vertical asintote. It's an imaginary line (described as an equation of the form x=10, for example) that stops a function to reach the assigned value. Anyone which has seen limits and differential calculus knows about this. You can easily see it in functions of the shape y=1/x and similar.

In this case, the curve for warp speeds has an exponential shape until warp 9, and then seems to be defined as the portion of a tangential function with an asintote in x=10. I tried to map the partial equations for the function once and failed miserably. [Razz]

So, yeah, you have the obvious solutions: make a new scale where you can map speeds differently, like Bernd suggested, or the theoretical AGT scale where warp 13 could be equal to modern warp 9.98.

The log scale of c multipliers is a very beautiful solution... if you know how to make a log scale (I assume a base-10 log).

Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :

Another way is better warp field manipulation, which is what I believe the Traveler is capable of doing. The sciences behind subspace and warp travel are still evolving in ST, and they're like the modern day aerodynamics. The flight characteristics from the physical shape of the aircraft and the airflow around it, rather than just the amount of power can engine can provide, dictates the performance of the aircraft. Coming up with a better shape to build a ship in, and a better warp field to wrap around it, would improve the warp performance without neccessarily requiring a more powerful engine.

Posted by J (Member # 608) on :

transwarp 1 isn't warp 11 on the scale... transwarp 1 would be a highly 9.99 warp. On the TNG scale, warp 10 is placed as Warp 10 infinite... there is nothing above it.

In AGT the scale has obviously been change. More than likely the name Warp 10 no longer applies to infinite as it does in TNG. More than likely Warps 10-13 in AGTs, plus any others there may be, are transwarps and people don't like saying transwarp yadda, but warp yadda works for them.

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Asymptote, actually. To be nitpicky.

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

Wasn't this all covered in a SWDAO?

Like 'transwarp' it basically means 'across warp' but we've seen it successfully used by the Voth and the Borg where-as Paris and Janeway - presumably didn't enter 'transwarp'.

Maybe warp is really a truncated word... 'warp like 'net. So before transwarp there was version of somethingwarp and after the movies transwarp was agin truncated to plain old 'warp?

Posted by Cartmaniac (Member # 256) on :

"I tried to map the partial equations for the function once and failed miserably."

The full equation goes something like (brace yourself):

code:

v = WF * exp(10/3 + 10/3 * (0.20467 * exp( -0.0058*(log10(1e4*(10-W)))^5)) * (1 + (1/3)*(2*cos(10*pi*log10(8/(10*(10-W))))-1) * exp(-49.369*(log10(8/(10*(10-W))))^4)) * (1 + (1.88269/pi)*(pi/2 - arctan((10^W)*log10(2000*(10-W)))))

Imagine differentiating that sucker...

Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :

What I'm wondering about is the reason why everyone's assumed that the Transwarp and Slipstream methods automatically must adhere to the same "Warp 10" scale as normal warp-driven vessels. After all, these are very different methods of transportation, right? Or at least very well refined (in the case of the quantum slipstream drive).

Besides, the very nature of an asymptote means that it keeps rising to infinity on the Y-axis (in this case), increasing in ever-larger increments, while increasing across the X-axis in ever-SMALLER increments. The "Warp 10" limit is completely artificial. If anyone wanted to, they could simply redefine "infinite speed" as Warp 20 instead, and the only thing that would change is the definitions of the "warp factor" for various multiples of the speed of light.

For "Renaissance," we ran into the same problem for our slipstream drive... I ended up using the designation "TSL," which is just an acronym for "Times the Seed of Light." I'm not sure if that's an entirely satisfactory solution -- especially because you're talking about speeds of "120,000 TSL" or higher -- but it's workable for the short run. We may end up coming up with a new scale of our own for slipstream after all...

Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Cartmaniac:
"I tried to map the partial equations for the function once and failed miserably."

The full equation goes something like (brace yourself):
code:
v = WF * exp(10/3 + 10/3 * (0.20467 * exp( -0.0058*(log10(1e4*(10-W)))^5)) * (1 + (1/3)*(2*cos(10*pi*log10(8/(10*(10-W))))-1) * exp(-49.369*(log10(8/(10*(10-W))))^4)) * (1 + (1.88269/pi)*(pi/2 - arctan((10^W)*log10(2000*(10-W)))))
Imagine differentiating that sucker...

Wow. Is that the computation for the TNG warp scale??

I used a considerably shorter equation and it gives almost the same numbers as the Tech Manual warp factors. I made a warp calculator downloadable at the bottom of the page here:

http://members.fortunecity.com/msfm/stephen_l.htm

Posted by J (Member # 608) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MinutiaeMan:
What I'm wondering about is the reason why everyone's assumed that the Transwarp and Slipstream methods automatically must adhere to the same "Warp 10" scale as normal warp-driven vessels. After all, these are very different methods of transportation, right? Or at least very well refined (in the case of the quantum slipstream drive).

The warp scale does depend on the warp drive in that it takes the efficiency points of that drive [each warp factor] and makes them the whole number at each increment. Thus at each efficient point you get a new warp factor. However, with Warp Drive you reach a limit on efficiency where there are no more accessible efficiency points, thus the reason why you get Warp 9.975 and Warp 10 is arbitrarily set as Infinite.

quote:
Besides, the very nature of an asymptote means that it keeps rising to infinity on the Y-axis (in this case), increasing in ever-larger increments, while increasing across the X-axis in ever-SMALLER increments. The "Warp 10" limit is completely artificial. If anyone wanted to, they could simply redefine "infinite speed" as Warp 20 instead, and the only thing that would change is the definitions of the "warp factor" for various multiples of the speed of light.

A reoccuring infinite sounds silly to me anyway. Besides... it's always been shown that the E-D or Voyager could catch up to the Borg if they had more power, this indicates that there are much higher speeds that are efficiency points but that warp drive isn't capable of getting to them, Transwarp is.

quote:
For "Renaissance," we ran into the same problem for our slipstream drive... I ended up using the designation "TSL," which is just an acronym for "Times the Seed of Light." I'm not sure if that's an entirely satisfactory solution -- especially because you're talking about speeds of "120,000 TSL" or higher -- but it's workable for the short run. We may end up coming up with a new scale of our own for slipstream after all...

As for Slipstream... I think that it shouldn't matter to put it on the warp scale, unless we assume that Slipstream from Voyager is similar to the slipstream phenomena described in the TNG book "Reunion." In this case Slipstream is a set speed and can work in unison with other propulsion systems to reach even greater speeds. If this is true then Slipstream can be placed on the Warp Scale eventually... if it is not true then Slipstream can only be placed on the scale as a reference point compared to Tranwarp, which I feel can be placed on the scale--- make Warp 10 the first transwarp point, moving infinite to Warp 11. Etc, etc...