Stardates, Phasers, and Photon Torpedoes
Steven D. Smith
the position of the Enterprise in the Galaxy. For further info read
*The making of Star Trek* by Gene Roddenberry.
Photon torpedoes are an interesting feature. In Trimbles Star Trek Concordance photon torpedoes were explained as having been developed by the Romulans and
later duplicated by the Federation. The first appearance of Photon torpedoes
was the weapon used by the Romulans in Balance of Terror.
In *The Making of Star Trek* photon torps are described as ball of
matter and antimatter held in and separated by a force field until impact
with the target. In the movies the force field was replaced by a metallic
shell like the one used for Spocks body. As to why the phasers looked like
photon torps in Balance of Terror, this was the first appearance of any of
the Enterprise's weapons.(The Menagerie doesn't count because that was in
flashback) The writers and producers probably had not decided what the
visual effect of phasers would be. Then when photon torps were added to
the armament the phasers took on a different look.
For a better explanation read the books I have sited above.
Steven D. Smith
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If everything is going well, you obviously don't know what is going on.
root@xenixsp
>
>
> In *The Making of Star Trek* photon torps are described as ball of
>matter and antimatter held in and separated by a force field until impact
>with the target. In the movies the force field was replaced by a metallic
>shell like the one used for Spocks body. As to why the phasers looked like
interface? seems like that might go boom, or is there a metal that is netural
to antimatter?
>photon torps in Balance of Terror, this was the first appearance of any of
>the Enterprise's weapons.(The Menagerie doesn't count because that was in
>flashback) The writers and producers probably had not decided what the
>visual effect of phasers would be. Then when photon torps were added to
>the armament the phasers took on a different look.
>
ihnp4!sys1-----\
trsvax!techsup!-|--xenixsp!doug
hub!-----------/
soma!---------/
rscus1!------/
Stanley Friesen
>>
>> In *The Making of Star Trek* photon torps are described as ball of
>>matter and antimatter held in and separated by a force field until impact
>>with the target. In the movies the force field was replaced by a metallic
>>shell like the one used for Spocks body. As to why the phasers looked like
>^^^^^ That sounds a little fishy..... Metallic insulation of a matter/antimatter
>interface? seems like that might go boom, or is there a metal that is netural
>to antimatter?
>
force field generator on and providing a method for handling the thing
in the ship. Then the anti-matter would still be force-contained, but
yhe visible external shell would be metal.
--
Sarima (Stanley Friesen)
UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!fri...@rand-unix.arpa
p...@wucec2.uucp
>>matter and antimatter held in and separated by a force field until impact
>>with the target. In the movies the force field was replaced by a metallic
>>shell like the one used for Spocks body.
>interface? seems like that might go boom, or is there a metal that is netural
>to antimatter?
What I assumed was that the force field containing the
antimatter was in turn contained in the metal shell. Was that
so hard?
--pH
/*
* "No! Let me finish!"
*/
John F. Wardale
their theory as to how the Big E can fire these (possibly metal cased)
matter/anti-matter bombs, energy-partical bundles, lasers, phasers,
or any other weopon while they're going at warp speed? (ie FTL?)
....ok, so if you can do ftl, you can do anything you want to do...
--
John W
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Name: John F. Wardale
UUCP: ... {seismo | harvard | ihnp4} !uwvax!astroatc!johnw
arpa: astroatc!jo...@rsch.wisc.edu
snail: 5800 Cottage Gr. Rd. ;;; Madison WI 53716
audio: 608-221-9001 eXt 110
To err is human, to really foul up world news requires the net!
Nathaniel Polish
So it seems the weapon speeds are finite but very fast (ftl).
sorry--I am a physics type.
M...@psuvma.bitnet
In article <3...@astroatc.UUCP>, jo...@astroatc.UUCP (John F. Wardale) says:
>Does any non-physics type out there want to take a crack at explaining
>their theory as to how the Big E can fire these (possibly metal cased)
>matter/anti-matter bombs, energy-partical bundles, lasers, phasers,
>or any other weopon while they're going at warp speed? (ie FTL?)
>
As far as the actual scientific reasons, I won't attempt any guesses.
However, if there's technology to move a whole ship at warp speed, it seems
reasonable to assume that a small metal canister could be moved FTL just as
easily. The simple fact of FTL ships implies matching weapons; in fact,
such weapons were probably developed BEFORE the ships. (I may be wrong on this
as far as the official chonologies, but consider the fact that any weapon MUST
be faster than its potential target to be effective.)
There's probably someone out there with the Starfleet Tech Manual or some
other source that can supply a good semi-scientific explanation for starship
weaponry; he/she can take it from here.
-------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| | |
| James D. Maloy | THIS SPACE |
| The Pennsylvania State University | FOR RENT |
| | |
| UUCP Path: ihnp4!psuvax1!m...@psuvma.bitnet | Call 555-6821 |
| | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am pleased to see we have differences. May we together become
greater than the sum of both of us."
-- Surak of Vulcan
Michael N. Washington
I believe Nomad fired it's torps at warp 15, so the big E could not outrun
them.
"Live Long and Prosper!"
Michael N. Washington
TRW E&DS Redondo Beach, Ca. 90278
{ucbvax,decvax,hplabs}!trwrb!trwrba!mnw
Chris Ambler
Stardates: A measurement of spacial positioning vs. time. Example:
stardate xxxx.xx means that ship XX is in Quad. Y at Galactic time Z.
The stardate is a function of all these facts. From the date you can tell
when and where.
Phasers vs. Torps: The way we (trekkers @ my club site) explained the anomality
is that the phasers appear to impact like torpedoes because of the distance
involved. When the phaser berrage hit, the reflected light energy *APPEARED*
to be blasts.
Torps: They are a shell of metal, with a magnetic bottle mechanism inside. The
magnetic bottle contains the antimatter. When the targetting mech. triggers,
the mag bottle is (simply) turned off. BOOM. (explained at TIMECON '84)
Thanks, Replies welcome (I can smell the flames...)
-Spock! (Christopher J. Ambler, University of California, Riverside)
-"Captain, I see no reason to bother Starfleet..."
Mike Sullivan
*** REPLACE LAST LINE WITH NEXT MESSAGE ***
All this is fine and dandy, but how can
you try to explain the inconsistency of
one episode with the others?
Of course, you may decide that the actual
episodes, since they do not last for the
actual length of the adventure, are just
star fleet tapes of missions, with unimportant
sections edited out. Perhaps a mishap
(undetected) with the transporter caused
a malfunction in one tape, causing the
inconsistency.
Merlin
"I have to admit that it may be worse than
even I had at first been imagining."
buch...@agrigene.uucp
> Does any non-physics type out there want to take a crack at explaining
> their theory as to how the Big E can fire these (possibly metal cased)
> matter/anti-matter bombs, energy-partical bundles, lasers, phasers,
> or any other weopon while they're going at warp speed? (ie FTL?)
If a starship can travel at warp speed and still interact with
the sub-light-speed universe, why question how a photon torpedo can be
fired?
Other questions:
If a photon torpedo travels faster than the speed of light, why
is it a PHOTON torpedo?
If a photon torpedo is a matter/antimatter bomb, why call it a
photon torpedo? Rather call it a mass-anihilation bomb or antimatter
torpedo.
Since most everything in the galaxy is made of matter, why
include matter in antimatter bombs?
--
Barry Buchbinder (608)221-5000
Agrigenetics Corporation; 5649 East Buckeye Road; Madison WI 53716 USA
{{harvard|topaz|seismo}!uwvax!|decvax|ihnp4}!nicmad!agrigene!buchbind
Ken Arromdee
>include matter in antimatter bombs?
Deflector shields, etc... aren't made of matter (or antimatter). You want
the torpedo to explode without having to physically contact the ship it's
aimed at.
--
Kenneth Arromdee | |
BITNET: G46I4701 at JHUVM, INS_AKAA at JHUVMS -|------|-
CSNET: ins_...@jhunix.CSNET -|------|-
ARPA: ins_akaa%jhu...@hopkins.ARPA -|------|-
UUCP: {allegra!hopkins, seismo!umcp-cs, ihnp4!whuxcc} -|------|-
!jhunix!ins_akaa | |
M...@psuvma.bitnet
> Since most everything in the galaxy is made of matter, why
>include matter in antimatter bombs?
a decent amount of the antimatter to react with (i.e., not a big enough boom).
Even if the bomb struck the ship itself (which would only happen if the shields
were completely gone), there would still be a pretty small concentration of
the stuff making contact with the surface of the ship.
-------
------------------
James D. Maloy | THIS SPACE |
The Pennsylvania State University | FOR RENT |
Tainter
> their theory as to how the Big E can fire these (possibly metal cased)
> matter/anti-matter bombs, energy-partical bundles, lasers, phasers,
> or any other weopon while they're going at warp speed? (ie FTL?)
Projectiles are no problem. They are already travelling FTL accelerating
a tiny bit faster than yourself is easy. Energy weaopns not on the
projectile level have a more serious problem. I not only cannot justify
weapons of this type, I can't even justify using energy at these speeds.
How do you see anything when you travel faster than the light?
--j.a.tainter
Once upon a time in a starship far far away there was a five year mission..
M...@psuvm.bitnet
> Since most everything in the galaxy is made of matter, why
>include matter in antimatter bombs?
of the same thing. Like, matter-x will only explode when it comes
in contact with anti-matter-x. Anti-matter-y and matter-x can romp
around forever. At least, this is how I understand it. I could be
wrong. Then again, maybe not.
-------
"I always lie ... and I'm always right."
-J.R. "Bob" Dobbs, The Church of the SubGenius
Michael S. Weiss
The Pennsylvania State University
M...@PSUVM.BITNET
<* The opinions expressed by me do not reflect those held *>
<* by my school nor those of my employer. (If I had one.) *>
KW Heuer
>In article <3...@agrigene.UUCP>, buch...@agrigene.UUCP says:
>>Since most everything in the galaxy is made of matter, why
>>include matter in antimatter bombs?
>
>Ok, for matter/anti-matter to explode they must be opposite "images"
>of the same thing. Like, matter-x will only explode when it comes
>in contact with anti-matter-x. Anti-matter-y and matter-x can romp
>around forever. At least, this is how I understand it. I could be
>wrong. Then again, maybe not.
I believe this is hogwash as far as real physics is concerned, and I
think ST normally handles antimatter physics correctly. (Didn't they
use pure antimatter against the giant amoeba in _The Immunity Syndrome_?)
But in _The Alternative Factor_, I think they used the "opposite image"
idea -- one of the Lazari was antimatter, but but could exist in our
matter universe as long as he never met his couterpart.
Of course, one might note that the universe didn't collapse when his
first breathful of matter-air contacted the residual antimatter-air at
the bottom of his lungs...
Norman Pritchett
>> Since most everything in the galaxy is made of matter, why
>>include matter in antimatter bombs?
>
>Deflector shields, etc... aren't made of matter (or antimatter). You want
>the torpedo to explode without having to physically contact the ship it's
>aimed at.
>--
>Kenneth Arromdee | |
Additionally, if the torpedo misses you won't want a lot of antimatter
floating free waiting for the next unsuspecting ship to happen across.
--
Norm Pritchett, The Ohio State University
BITNET: TS1703 at OHSTVMA Bellnet: (614) 422-0885
UUCP: cbosgd!osu-eddie!pritch CSNET: pritch@ohio-state
ARPANET: NPRITCHETT%osu-20@ohio-state (or) pritch@ohio-state
buch...@agrigene.uucp
> consider the fact that any weapon MUST
> be faster than its potential target to be effective.
It's also generally useful for a projectile to travel faster than the
weapons platform that carries it.
Chris Ambler
> the sub-light-speed universe, why question how a photon torpedo can be
> fired?
A starship in warp speed can only interact with the sub-light universe through
radio (subspace, etc.). THAT'S *IT*
> Other questions:
> If a photon torpedo travels faster than the speed of light, why
> is it a PHOTON torpedo?
It is a Photon torpedo because it uses a Photon guidance system.
> If a photon torpedo is a matter/antimatter bomb, why call it a
> photon torpedo? Rather call it a mass-anihilation bomb or antimatter
> torpedo.
ABOVE...
> Since most everything in the galaxy is made of matter, why
> include matter in antimatter bombs?
Because space is big, and a few hydrogen atoms per kilometre don't make for
a very big boom.
Andy Toy
>Ok, for matter/anti-matter to explode they must be opposite "images"
>of the same thing. Like, matter-x will only explode when it comes
>in contact with anti-matter-x. Anti-matter-y and matter-x can romp
>around forever. At least, this is how I understand it. I could be
>wrong. Then again, maybe not.
>
For a matter/anti-matter explosion to occur, there must be matter and
anti-matter present. Equal amounts of each will be the most efficient
way to do it since all the matter and all the anti-matter will be
annihilated and converted into energy (ie. *BIG* bang). You don't need
an identical anti-matter image of the matter to get a bang. You could
have a rock of matter and a sponge of anti-matter and it would still
work because the rock will have atoms with protons, electrons,
neutrons, etc... and the sponge will have atoms with anti-protons,
positrons, anti-neutrons, etc... and these would wipe each other out
of existence (ka-bleweee...!#?*&).
--
Andy Toy, Mapping Analysis and Design Group (MAD),
Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA N2L 3G1 (519) 885-1211 x6592
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
| UUCP: ...!watmath!watdcsu!atoy BITNET: atoy at watdcsu |
# CSNET: atoy%wat...@waterloo.csnet CDN: at...@dcsu.waterloo.cdn #
| ARPA: atoy%watdcsu%waterlo...@csnet-relay.arpa |
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Spinner
>> is it a PHOTON torpedo?
>It is a Photon torpedo because it uses a Photon guidance system.
>> If a photon torpedo is a matter/antimatter bomb, why call it a
>> photon torpedo? Rather call it a mass-anihilation bomb or antimatter
>> torpedo.
As I understand it, a matter/antimatter reaction gives off most of its energy
in gamma radiation (i.e. high energy photons of light). Hence the name
photon torpedo...
Ron Spinner (Spi...@caip.rutgers.edu)
M Schare
the subject. In this episode, only if the +Lazurus and the -Lazurus met
outside the corridor would the universe explode. The -Lazurus met lots
of times with the +Kirk and nothing happens... Nothing
like consistency...
Marc.
--
Netnews is MORE FUN then Human Beings should be allowed to have!
Marc Schare (pyuxd!marc)