posted
A lot of people seem to have difficulties in distinguishing power and energy for which the following applies:
P=dE/dt
meaning that power is the derivation of energy, or, if the power consumption is constant, energy per time:
P=E/t
The two terms are also confused in the warp factor diagram in the TNGTM, where the "power usage" is given in megajoules (energy unit). I have been pondering whether energy or power would be correct in the diagram.
In a Newtonian propulsion a certain amount of energy is required to achieve a certain speed. The power is irrelevant in that the same speed can be achieved with a weaker engine, it will only take a longer time. Warp propulsion, however, is different. Once the warp field disapppears, the starship drops out of warp. To maintain the warp field, a continuous power output is necessary. The question is only where this energy (=accumulated power) is exactly going to, once the ship has been accelerated to its final speed. Jason Hinson suggests something like part of the energy flowing back from the subspace (what about the rest, will it eventually heat up subspace?), and, although he doesn't explicitly mention it, I think he means this energy replenishes the warp plasma in the nacelles, and this is what the horizontal slot in most nacelles is mainly about.
Anyway, I have recently changed megajoules to megawatts in the TNGTM diagram, assuming at least the factor 10^6 is "correct".
Another question is why the power is given in mega**** per cochrane. This implies that this value has to be multiplied by the warp factor (=cochrane value) to obtain the actual power consumption. One guess: The mega****/cochrane would be the power for one warp field layer, but Warp 2, for instance, would require two of them (again Hinson's theory).
------------------ "No, thanks. I've had enough. One more cup and I'll jump to warp." (Janeway, asked if she would like some coffee in "Once upon a Time") www.uni-siegen.de/~ihe/bs/startrek/
posted
I don't know the Captain's Chair, but the TNGTM doesn't depict exactly what I think is meant by warp field layers. In my opinion the TNGTM chart shows a "snapshot" of a warp field that actually changes spatially with time, as stated in the text. Still, the mere modulation doesn't imply different layers, because it has to be done for the propulsion anyway, also at Warp 1 where there's only one layer.
In my opinion the layers are more like different fields that reach further into subspace the higher their number is. This implies that the fields are separate to some degree, meaning that they don't yield a single field by simple superposition, in which case the creation of different fields would be useless. The separate nature of the fields may explain the discontinuity of the power vs. warp factor diagram. Every time a new layer is initiated there is a threshold to cross. This would not be the case if just a single field were changed to cross the Warp x barrier.
If you, however, know of a different, probably more complicated depiction of the warp field, I would like to know.
posted
For all the flaws in Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise, it does have a diagram depicting the warp fields of a Constitution class starship. Although, the diagram is mislabeled 'transwarp', one of it's biggest flaws. I don't have a scanner, but maybe someone else with the book does. I'll try and find some time to grab a screenshot of Captain's Chair warp field, and send it to you, if you'd like.
------------------ "Angels and Ministers of Grace, defend us" -Hamlet, Act I, Scene IV
posted
I would be interested to see either these diagrams. Maybe this could clarify a lot, maybe it concurs with the famous Hinson theory.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
