posted
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...
-------------------- “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
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:
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...
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
