Science of Star Trek

Where the world of science meets the imagination.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby worldmaker » Sep 17th, '09, 09:58

Nike2020 wrote:
worldmaker wrote:Forcefields, I've just been working on in the last couple of months.

In Enterprise they used to 'polarise the hull' whatever that meant... artificial gravity always a sci-fi problem but there could be simple answers such as grav boots...


The magnetic shield I propose is now on the SpringShip file.

As for artificial gravity. Now you've set me thinking on that one here's a question - is the artificial gravity generated on a floor-by-floor basis, with some form of emitter of gravity waves/particle/magic or is it generated and emitted from a source at the base of the vessel?

If we master the key science of gravity I image a generator under a block of floors, creating a vertical field up through the vessel, with several generators at key points about the ship. That leads to some interesting possibilities, like a reducing gravity field as you rise up through the ship, or a field projecting outside the ship beyond the top deck. Imagine all the "silly" episodes you can write on that subject.

Hmmmm.

8-)
Writer of free short story "Dragon's Vale" and designer (inventor?) of SpringShips... at worldmaker.org
User avatar
worldmaker
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Jul 29th, '09, 11:13
Location: Earth

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby Shadowwolf » Sep 17th, '09, 13:33

Treks generators work on the same basic physics as the tractor beam in creating a controlled stream of gravitons, to impart a sense of the natural planetside gravity of your standard M-Class world. The Enterprise - D had 1200 such generators spread throughout the ship; most likely beneath the decking to create a series of fields with some overlap. They were also tied into the inertial damping system but can only cope with so much, sudden slewing maneuvers and impacts can still be felt.

In Enterprise the technology being relatively new, there was a sweet spot in the ships gravity field were there was a kind of reverse effect; they never did much with it though.

Alas it is all highly unlikely at this point given that we know so little about how gravity works.
Hope is but the first step upon the road to disappointment.
User avatar
Shadowwolf
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 17:25
Location: Where I mean to be.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby M Paul Lloyd » Sep 17th, '09, 17:51

I seem to recall an episode where a Romulan ship (I think) was found to utilize an artificial singularity that created a gravity well into which the ship would continually freefall.

I'm not entirely sure it would be practical even if you could create and safely contain an 'artificial' singularity. :?
"If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life thinking it is stupid." Albert Einstein
User avatar
M Paul Lloyd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5889
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 11:26
Location: Northumberland.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby worldmaker » Sep 18th, '09, 17:01

Shadowwolf wrote:Treks generators work on the same basic physics as the tractor beam in creating a controlled stream of gravitons...


Strange, I thought they worked on the same physics as "make it up as you go along".
And don't forget those pesky little warp necelles, forever breaking, snapping, failing, dropping off.

8-)
Writer of free short story "Dragon's Vale" and designer (inventor?) of SpringShips... at worldmaker.org
User avatar
worldmaker
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Jul 29th, '09, 11:13
Location: Earth

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby Shadowwolf » Sep 18th, '09, 17:57

I seem to recall an episode where a Romulan ship (I think) was found to utilize an artificial singularity that created a gravity well into which the ship would continually freefall.


Came up in "Timescape" and "The Next Phase" I believe, though all I recall is that the singularity was the Romulans version of a matter / antimatter reactor; I think the warp drive worked on similar principles to any other.

Strange, I thought they worked on the same physics as "make it up as you go along".


Well yes that much is obvious, I was just explaining the principles of the devices workings in the context of Star Treks fictional world which was rather similar to your imagined generator at the base of a ship.

And don't forget those pesky little warp necelles, forever breaking, snapping, failing, dropping off.


Those Airfix model kits of the ships could have used some better designing thats for sure :mrgreen:
Hope is but the first step upon the road to disappointment.
User avatar
Shadowwolf
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 17:25
Location: Where I mean to be.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby M Paul Lloyd » Sep 18th, '09, 22:29

Um.... sorry about this but I have my geek hat on now....The licence for Star Trek construction kits was held (and still is as far as I know) by a company called ERTL.. not Airfix...... sorry. :ugeek:
"If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life thinking it is stupid." Albert Einstein
User avatar
M Paul Lloyd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5889
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 11:26
Location: Northumberland.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby nemisis39 » Sep 18th, '09, 22:56

Strange, I thought they worked on the same physics as "make it up as you go along".


errr "coughs" make it up as they go along err excuse me one minute

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Star-Tre ... 2690.shtml

From above site

So, the bottom line is: Star Trek science is an entertaining combination of real science, imaginary science gathered from lots of earlier stories, and stuff the writers made up week-by-week to give each new episode novelty. The real science is an effort to be faithful to humanity's greatest achievements, and the fanciful science is the playing field for a game that expands the mind as it entertains. The Star Trek series are the only science fiction series crafted with such respect for real science and intelligent writing. That's why it's the only science fiction series that many scientists watch regularly...


I Thankyou i rest my case :) ;) :lol:
In life you make mistakes, but that's life. As long as you learn by the mistakes you make, don't be afraid to make them.
User avatar
nemisis39
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 12:51
Location: warwick

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby worldmaker » Sep 19th, '09, 11:27

nemisis39 wrote:
Strange, I thought they worked on the same physics as "make it up as you go along".

errr "coughs" make it up as they go along err excuse me one minute
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Star-Tre ... 2690.shtml
....
I Thankyou i rest my case :) ;) :lol:

I hope you didn't rest it on the warp necelle, that's broke again and I cannae fix it Capt'n. :D
Writer of free short story "Dragon's Vale" and designer (inventor?) of SpringShips... at worldmaker.org
User avatar
worldmaker
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Jul 29th, '09, 11:13
Location: Earth

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby The Beige Avenger » Sep 19th, '09, 12:45

You guys are demonstrating an exceptional amount of nerditude. :D
Caveats apply as it is entirely possible that the information contained in the above post is either an attempt at a wind-up, an attempt at a joke or just plain wrong.
The Beige Avenger
 
Posts: 1438
Joined: Jul 29th, '09, 15:08

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby Shadowwolf » Sep 19th, '09, 14:43

Arrrrrrr that we be Avenger me hearty, now splice the main brace and run up the jolly roger, tis talk like a pirate day yarrrrrr! :mrgreen:

Ah ERTL, my mistake, still some shoddy design work around the nacelle mounting, we have gravity here it ain't space.
Hope is but the first step upon the road to disappointment.
User avatar
Shadowwolf
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 17:25
Location: Where I mean to be.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby M Paul Lloyd » Sep 19th, '09, 21:07

Indeed it be ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR me hearties Splice they gibbets and swaggle the futtocks.... or somesuch. :mrgreen:
Yes Mr. A degree of nerdiness I will admit to, but the important difference between a Treker (like me) and a Trekee is that I was always far more concerned about Uhura's thighs than which ear Spock stuffed hi bluetooth in. :mrgreen:
"If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life thinking it is stupid." Albert Einstein
User avatar
M Paul Lloyd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5889
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 11:26
Location: Northumberland.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby nemisis39 » Oct 11th, '09, 10:59

Yes Mr. A degree of nerdiness I will admit to, but the important difference between a Treker (like me) and a Trekee is that I was always far more concerned about Uhura's thighs than which ear Spock stuffed hi bluetooth in.


indeedy there are a fine pair of thighs particulary in ST V the dance sequence on the sand dune to distract the guards (hope they were her actual thighs and not some standin's) god forbid many a mortals dreams would be crushed if that was the case :shock: :lol: ;)
In life you make mistakes, but that's life. As long as you learn by the mistakes you make, don't be afraid to make them.
User avatar
nemisis39
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 12:51
Location: warwick

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby M Paul Lloyd » Oct 11th, '09, 14:38

Positively pivotal in the development of many a man's youth. ;)
"If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life thinking it is stupid." Albert Einstein
User avatar
M Paul Lloyd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5889
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 11:26
Location: Northumberland.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby Shadowwolf » Oct 12th, '09, 23:42

7, end of.
Hope is but the first step upon the road to disappointment.
User avatar
Shadowwolf
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 17:25
Location: Where I mean to be.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby nemisis39 » Oct 13th, '09, 19:51

arrgggg now 7 is a diffrent kettle of fish well actually no she isnt really just a next generation (well voyager :lol: ) for us to look upon as a role model for the up and coming young buck trekkies (and us old un's to :evil: :lol: ;)
In life you make mistakes, but that's life. As long as you learn by the mistakes you make, don't be afraid to make them.
User avatar
nemisis39
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 12:51
Location: warwick

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby M Paul Lloyd » Oct 13th, '09, 22:29

It's all just so much clever padding and a sassy walk you know. :(


Yeoman Rand on the other hand........


or Altaira 'Alta' Morbius from Forbidden Planet. :oops:
"If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life thinking it is stupid." Albert Einstein
User avatar
M Paul Lloyd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5889
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 11:26
Location: Northumberland.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby nemisis39 » Oct 14th, '09, 19:24

Yeoman Rand on the other hand........


alas yes from the 1st series a very stunning indvidual bt alas again time has not been kind
rand.jpg
before
rand.jpg (19 KiB) Viewed 1534 times


just as a reminder (not that i think he would need it :) ) for mpl and a new look for the young uns

glw.jpg
after
glw.jpg (11.62 KiB) Viewed 1516 times

although beauty is in the eye of the beholder ;)
In life you make mistakes, but that's life. As long as you learn by the mistakes you make, don't be afraid to make them.
User avatar
nemisis39
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 12:51
Location: warwick

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby M Paul Lloyd » Oct 14th, '09, 23:05

Ah yes but don't forget those two photo's are separated by some 40 odd years.... I mean even Joan Collins (who also made an appearance in an episode of Star Trek, 'All Our Yesterdays' I think?? ) is looking a bit craggy these days. ;)
"If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life thinking it is stupid." Albert Einstein
User avatar
M Paul Lloyd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5889
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 11:26
Location: Northumberland.

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby nemisis39 » Oct 15th, '09, 22:09

yes miss C did appear in St but it was in an episode called City on the Edge of Forever she got hit by a car and killed (same thing in dynsty wasn;t it but with a bigger budget ;) ) at the end to rectify the time line as Mc Coy had saved her life after being sent back in time due to an overdose or cortrazine and a rather mad rant and raveing before leaping through a living time machine called "The Guardian of Forever." all panned out though as spock and kick jumped in after him to save the day.

The one you were thinking of MPL was this one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Our_Ye ... (Star_Trek)

Easy to get confused with as a lot of time travel happened in ST over the years ( which im am researching at mo to answer a question i caused (if caused iis the right word :) )shadow to bring up in the other forum ))

and i don't think miss rand looks all that bad after 40 odd years and id hope she would say the same about me :lol: ;)
In life you make mistakes, but that's life. As long as you learn by the mistakes you make, don't be afraid to make them.
User avatar
nemisis39
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 12:51
Location: warwick

Re: Science of Star Trek

Postby M Paul Lloyd » Oct 15th, '09, 22:15

Yes, confusing my episodes so I am. ;)
"If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life thinking it is stupid." Albert Einstein
User avatar
M Paul Lloyd
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5889
Joined: Jul 28th, '09, 11:26
Location: Northumberland.

PreviousNext

Return to Science Fact Versus Science Fiction


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests