Warp Drive vs. Jump Gates
Roberto Castillo
Les...@cris.com (Lockheed WsmrSmts) wrote:
>
> Jump gates and Warp drive are virtually identical:
>
>1) Neither are real.
>2) Both were invented for a TV series.
>3) Being fictitious, they get you nowhere.
>
Thank you for reminding us of that but it would make for a pretty boring
discussion if we paid attention to you, so I hope you are not offended if we
take a few shots at finding technobabble solutions to make this stuff work.
Btw, I'm crossposting this message to r.a.s.tech. That newsgroup seems
appropriate for it and the subject is pretty self-explanitory.
Now on with the discussion.
Jump Gates let you go faster than light by letting you take a short-cut
through hyperspace. Hyperspace as detailed in Stephen Hawking's "A Brief
History of Time," consists of higher dimensions that exist beyond our usual
four. The classic example is to imagine the surface of an apple. The apple
itself is three-dimensional but its surface is two-dimensional. A worm
trying to go from point A to B on this apple must take a long trip across
the surface of the apple if point B is very far away from point A. Or, if
it's smart and has the ability to do so, the worm can burrow through the
interior of the apple at point A and emerge at point B, thus saving a lot of
time.
The reason for this is pretty straightforward. The surface of the apple is
curved and any straight line path on the apple's surface is also curved but
burrowing through the interior of the apple allows the worm to take a true
straight line path from point A to point B. That's why they're called
wormholes.
It seems to me that Jump Gates are basically artificial wormholes. There are
three problems with this both of which are documented in Hawking's book. It
takes a tremendous amount of pressure, and thus a tremendous amount of
energy, to compress matter into a black hole (wormholes are a subclass of
black holes). Also, wormholes tend to be unstable, often collapsing and
ceasing to exist making them unreliable forms of transportation. Finally, if
these higher dimensions that constitute hyperspace do exist, they would have
to all curled up like the skin of an orange or else we could see them, so
you'd need a microscopic-sized ship or a way of enlarging them to get
through. You would need a way to create an enormous number of gravitons (the
hypothetical particle which carries gravity). This would create a temporary
artificial wormhole and explains why only fixed jump gates and big ships are
capable of generating them.
Subspace is an entirely different animal. It is also more difficult to
explain. Essentially subspace is a set of higher dimensions in space which
can slide alongside of normal space like the skin of an onion. Since it is
space and not matter, normal laws of physics do not apply (i.e. it can move
at a faster speed than light just as certain inflationary versions of the
Big Bang imply that at on time the universe itself may have been expanding
faster than the speed of light. Presumably, the higher the dimension, the
faster it move with respect to normal space.
So warp drive would allow a ship to slip inside of a moving pocket of
subspace and simply "surf" along the subspace waves until it reached its
destination where it would then "drop out of warp." This explains why ST's
ships all have the same basic shapes. According to the TNG Technical Manual,
the faster you go the more energy you must expend until at warp 10 you must
expend infinite energy (the upside, or downside perhaps, is that quantum
effects start taking over and you exist everywhere in space at the same
time). Presumably this is because higher warp factors correspond to higher
dimensions and these dimensions require more energy to be reached.
The problem with warp is that it requires a whole new type of physics before
we can even begin to figure out how to accomplish it. The principles are
probably not to different from that of hyperspace but until Zephrem Cochrane
gets to work on the problem, we won't know how to develop them. :-)
Well, there you have it, my explanation for Warp Drive and Jump Gate
Technology. You may pick apart at will. :-)
--
"I am First Omet'iklan, and I am dead. As of this moment, we are all
dead. We go into battle to reclaim our lives. This we do gladly, for
we are Jem'Hadar. Remember, victory is life."
-- Omet'iklan
"I am Chief Miles Edward O'Brien. I'm very much alive, and I intend
to *stay* that way."
-- O'Brien
"I'm worried about Bart. Today, he's sucking people's blood,
tommorrow he might be smoking."
-Marge Simpson
Roberto Castillo
University of Illinois at Chicago
E-Mail: rca...@uic.edu
Gavin Lambert
In article <3240efb8...@news.cc.uic.edu>, rca...@uic.edu says...
>
>Jump Gates let you go faster than light by letting you take a short-cut
>through hyperspace. Hyperspace as detailed in Stephen Hawking's "A Brief
>History of Time," consists of higher dimensions that exist beyond our usual
>four. The classic example is to imagine the surface of an apple. The apple
>
>Subspace is an entirely different animal. It is also more difficult to
>explain. Essentially subspace is a set of higher dimensions in space which
>can slide alongside of normal space like the skin of an onion. Since it is
>
I like your definition, and I'd agree that you're pretty close to the mark, if
not bang on it.
One thing I was thinking about though, is that perhaps subspace and hyperspace
are as you described above, but subspace is _in_the_other_direction_. What I
mean is that hyperspace is a set of higher dimensions (hyper- usually meaning
greater than or above), and subspace is a set of lower dimensions (sub- being
below or less than), leaving normal space in the middle.
That would make, for example, normal space at dimensions -2 through 2 (x,y,z,t,
& probability), hyperspace at, say, dimensions 10 through 15 (or maybe
closer... after all, time in hyperspace appears to be roughly similar to that
in normal space), and subspace at, say, dimensions -10 through -15.
So both technologies can theoretically exist in the same universe, but they've
been thinking along opposite lines to each other (ST & B5), so they don't
discover it... although the DS9 artificial wormhole sounds a bit like a
jumpgate...
Anyway, this is all mostly supposition (nah, I've got working proof! see you at
Alpha Centauri! :-) ) so feel free to launch ballistic missiles at it. :)
---
Gavin Lambert (uec...@geocities.com)
SomeWhere, SomeTime, SomeHow. We Think. Maybe.
Dave
My 2 cents:
Actually, the way B5 has ended up using the Jumpgate/hyperspace
concept, it is little different from warp drive...you use a
jump gate/jump point to enter hyperspace, fly around in
hyperspace, and use another jump point to exit hyperspace, hopefully
very far away from where you started. Similarly, in ST, you
use warp engines to enter subspace (loosely speaking), fly around
in subspace, and then exit subspace, very far away from where you
started. I know the correspondence is not perfect in the details,
but my point is that the B5 jumpgate is not really analagous at all to
the ST "wormhole" concept, as was aluded to in earlier posts.
When B5 first started, I sort of thought that jump gates were
simply the DS9 wormhole or the Buck Rogers stargate revisited.
But as they fleshed out the concept, we can see that this is not so.
For example, in B5 if you change your mind
and want to go somewhere else while in Hyper, you can. You just
change directions. But in DS9, once you enter the wormhole, your
destination is hard-coded, you can't change your mind.
For those who care, the B5 hyperspace conception is very much
along the lines of David Weber's "Honor Harrington" series, but
using the jumpgate/jumppoint to "translate into Hyper", and B5
doesn't seem to care if you enter Hyper while within a solar system...
--
```
(o o)
**************oOO**(_)**OOo**********************************************
"That's ASYMPTOTICALLY Kazinsky, not ASYMPTOMATICALLY, you moron!"
"Mommy, why does that Starfleet Officer have a Fram Air Filter on his
face?"
Dave Lee
Ph.D. Student -- Department of Engineering Physics
2950 P Street
Dayton, OH 45433-77765
dl...@afit.af.mil
"Remember, if you can't Fourier Transform it, it doesn't exist."
"The opinions expressed here are not the opinions of the employer."
*************************************************************************
sla...@magi.com
-=> Quoting Dl...@afit.af.mil to Unknown <=-
Dl> Actually, the way B5 has ended up using the Jumpgate/hyperspace
Dl> concept, it is little different from warp drive...you use a
Dl> jump gate/jump point to enter hyperspace, fly around in
Dl> hyperspace, and use another jump point to exit hyperspace, hopefully
Dl> very far away from where you started. Similarly, in ST, you
Dl> use warp engines to enter subspace (loosely speaking), fly around
Dl> in subspace, and then exit subspace, very far away from where you
Dl> started. I know the correspondence is not perfect in the details,
Dl> but my point is that the B5 jumpgate is not really analagous at all to
Dl> the ST "wormhole" concept, as was aluded to in earlier posts.
Greetings...
Errr, the trick with Warp Drive is that the effect is limited, and you
don't really leave normal space...Well, err, kinda, but not really.
You warp a small area of space, and that area moves (with you) real fast
from then on...
The B5 Jumpgates,(or engines) you're here, POOF, you're _there_...
Different place. Then you travel _there_ for a while and repeat...
The wormhole is a hole between A and B with about no distance whatsoever
between A and B... Basically a tunnel shorting the distance.
Slarty
... Explore the galaxy, meet new alien races, blow them up!
---
ş Blue Wave/QWK v2.11 ş
>> Slipstream Jet - The QWK solution for Usenets #UNREGISTERED
Kage no Gundan
Dave wrote:
>
> My 2 cents:
>
> For those who care, the B5 hyperspace conception is very much
> along the lines of David Weber's "Honor Harrington" series, but
> using the jumpgate/jumppoint to "translate into Hyper", and B5
> doesn't seem to care if you enter Hyper while within a solar system...
>
>
> Dave Lee
> Ph.D. Student -- Department of Engineering Physics
> 2950 P Street
> Dayton, OH 45433-77765
> dl...@afit.af.mil
>
I'll see your 2 cents and raise you 5!!
Allow me to define the terms here. We all are in real space. It is curved and very
massive. Try to imagine real space as a peice of paper, grashopper. if you bend it into a u
shape, that would be real space, the area inside the "U" would be called HYPERSPACE ..space
...space (echo). A jumpgate is an arteficial wormhole that traverses the universe from one
point to another by having entry and exit gates. The Stargate ring was an example of that
technology. Jumpgates do not have to be limited to space. In B5, the hyperspace ramp merely
opens hyperspace up for ships that do not have them or are too small to generate a
hyperspace opening. Obviously, we have seen larger ships open up holes in the universe,
albeit wit some degree of difficulty. Having a gate to go in or out of, makes for a
convenient travel.
Once inside, and with EXTREME difficulty and a lot of danger, ships in B5 ARE able
to navigate in hyperspace. This technolgy is similar to the one shown in Star Wars as the
Millenium Falcon must calculate coodrinates before initiating a hyperspace jump. Drawback
aside from the blind navigating technique is that as shoen in the cliffhanger of 2 years
back, B5 ships CANNOT navigate except in right angles, or they become lost. Only Shadow
ships have that ability. Which means that the only technolgy that can come close to Star
Trek technology belong to the shadows.
Finally, Subspace is a pocket or a bubble or a segment of real space inside
hyperspace. Picture a wormhole to be 2 whirlpools on either side of the "U" shaped paper
joined in hyperspace. If an event forces the 2 whirlpools to break apart, parts in the
middle may break apart and be independent of any connection to real space but is definitely
not part of hyperspace. It is now sub-space.
...if you cant swallow that, goto Barnes and Noble and read the book
about Star Trek Technology, you'll find several of them. Who knows? you might even read
mine.
adrian b penalo
: Les...@cris.com (Lockheed WsmrSmts) wrote:
: >
: > Jump gates and Warp drive are virtually identical:
: >
: >1) Neither are real.
: >2) Both were invented for a TV series.
: >3) Being fictitious, they get you nowhere.
I bet you already read all the other replyer wrote, and I agree with him.
You, me, and him know about those three things you wrote above, but in the
first place ST (TNG, DS9, VOY) and B5 are just a TV show, you don't have
to remind us that. But they proyect our dreams of the future. Besides,
if you analyze Sci-Fi features that way, you shouldn't watch them, even
more, you shouldn't be posting in this Newsgroup!
--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\ /
/ Adrian Penalo (CYBORG) Florida International University (FIU) \
\ /
/ WWW -> http://www.fiu.edu/~apenal01 College of Engineering and Design \
\ E-Mail -> apen...@servax.fiu.edu Computer Engineering /
/ apen...@fiu.edu \
\ Miami, Florida (USA) /
/ \
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
a900...@unet.univie.ac.at
: > Jump gates and Warp drive are virtually identical:
: >
: >1) Neither are real.
So? What does real mean?
Do you say they don't work? Nobody has built them yet? Or what?
: >2) Both were invented for a TV series.
: >3) Being fictitious, they get you nowhere.
So Godzilla and Roger Rabbit are identical. Come on!
: I bet you already read all the other replyer wrote, and I agree with him.
: You, me, and him know about those three things you wrote above
Do you? Are they not real? And do they get you nowhere? (If getting
somewhere is not only meant as physically getting from point A to point B!)
: Besides,
: if you analyze Sci-Fi features that way, you shouldn't watch them, even
: more, you shouldn't be posting in this Newsgroup!
Definitly yes!
And if against all odds, it was just a joke, it wasn't funny!
Lockheed WsmrSmts
a900...@unet.univie.ac.at wrote:
: : > Jump gates and Warp drive are virtually identical:
: : >
: : >1) Neither are real.
:
: So? What does real mean?
:
You can tell you're in trouble when someone says "What does real mean?"
: Do you say they don't work? Nobody has built them yet?
Yes and ... Yes.
:
: : >2) Both were invented for a TV series.
: : >3) Being fictitious, they get you nowhere.
:
: So Godzilla and Roger Rabbit are identical. Come on!
Actually neither of those characters was invented for a TV series.
: Do you? Are they not real? And do they get you nowhere? (If getting
: somewhere is not only meant as physically getting from point A to point B!)
Maybe you should post _after_ the drugs wear off....
:
: And if against all odds, it was just a joke, it wasn't funny!
:
So? What does funny mean?
NIC...@news.delphi.com
I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside from the
business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is the very obvious
fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When Londo and Morden break off,
their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY. This was reiterated in the most recent
episode, And the Rock..., when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
In most other ways, Star Trek is far more high tech. Transporters, scanners,
replicators and medical tech bear this out. But if Voyager had jump engines,
they'd be home.
Of course, Lore invented something like jump drive in that episode where he
takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
-Nicias
Timo S Saloniemi
In article <54hvg7$n...@news2.delphi.com> NIC...@news.delphi.com (NIC...@DELPHI.COM) writes:
>
>
>I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside from the
>business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is the very obvious
>fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When Londo and Morden break off,
>their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY. This was reiterated in the most recent
>episode, And the Rock..., when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
Still, the Humans seem to have stayed in a relatively small area of space,
with the station only 25 ly or so from Earth, and close to the Centauri
homeworld as well. Apparently, the galactic dimension is utilized only
by the Vorlons, Shadows and Minbari...
>In most other ways, Star Trek is far more high tech. Transporters, scanners,
>replicators and medical tech bear this out. But if Voyager had jump engines,
>they'd be home.
The Sikarian transporter was even better. But there's no hope of
anybody onboard Voyager ever inventing or aquiring a way home unless
Paramount gets sick and tired of the series - there would be no raison d'etre
for the show if the Delta quad angle was lost.
>Of course, Lore invented something like jump drive in that episode where he
>takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
>other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
>use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
Provided that they could get access to it. Apparently, only the Borg
(and perhaps only the Lorified Borg) can create these transwarp conduits,
and the Feds have hard time even finding a readymade one. If these
conduits degrade rapidly, there's no hope for the Feds using them for
transportation.
Timo Saloniemi
Steve Sloan
NIC...@DELPHI.COM wrote:
>
> I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside
> from the business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is
> the very obvious fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When
> Londo and Morden break off, their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY.
> This was reiterated in the most recent episode, And the Rock...,
> when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
In "And the Rock...", they also showed that it took G'Kar less than a
day to get from B5 to Narn. Another example of how fast jumpgates are...
--
*********************************************************************
"Take my Worf... please!" Data, from "Star Trek: The Next Generation"
"The thing about aliens is... they're ALIEN." Gregory Benford
_____________________________________________________________________
Steve Sloan E-mail: sl...@geosim.msfc.nasa.gov
Senior in Computer Science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville
VaporTrail
In "Messages of Earth", didn't Sheridan say that it would take 4 days to
complete jump to Earth (about 25 ly) from Babylon 5 aboard the White
Star. If so, wouldn't this make jump gates slower than Warp Speed? Of
course, it does depend on the Warp factor.
CAIRNS
NIC...@DELPHI.COM (NIC...@news.delphi.com) wrote:
:
:
: I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside from the
: business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is the very obvious
: fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When Londo and Morden break off,
: their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY. This was reiterated in the most recent
: episode, And the Rock..., when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
:
: replicators and medical tech bear this out. But if Voyager had jump engines,
: they'd be home.
: Of course, Lore invented something like jump drive in that episode where he
: takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
: other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
: use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
: -Nicias
:
Someone correct me if I am wrong but don't you have to have a jump gate
in your begining point and your destination. Warp engienes take you
anywhere like a 4x4 where jump gates act like a tunel through a mountain.
You don't have that much control.
--
"Who Knows What Evil Lurks In The Hearts Of Men?- The Shadow Knows"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHACHARLESAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...@S-CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Johan Wevers
Steve Sloan <sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>In "And the Rock...", they also showed that it took G'Kar less than a
>day to get from B5 to Narn. Another example of how fast jumpgates are...
That is only an indication if you know the distance between Narn and Earth.
It is mentioned in "By Any Means Necessary", I believe it was about 10
light years. In Star Trek, warp 8 (reasonably fast) is 17640c, so this
distance would take 17900 sec = 0.2 days at warp 8. So warp drives can be
much faster.
--
ir. J.C.A. Wevers (*) For Physics and science fiction information:
joh...@vulcan.xs4all.nl (*) http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/index.html
Finger joh...@xs4all.nl for my PGP public key. PGP-KeyID: 0xD42F80B1
Stephen
Johan Wevers wrote:
> That is only an indication if you know the distance between Narn and Earth.
> It is mentioned in "By Any Means Necessary", I believe it was about 10
> light years. In Star Trek, warp 8 (reasonably fast) is 17640c, so this
> distance would take 17900 sec = 0.2 days at warp 8. So warp drives can be
> much faster.
The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
that journey.
Phillip Thorne
Babylon-5 jumpgates are unlike -both- Trek warpdrive and Trek wormholes.
[1] Trek wormhole (based on real theory): a two-way "tunnel"
connecting exactly two points in realspace.
[2] Trek warpdrive: generates a "propulsive subspace field" around
the ship which allows it to travel at FTL velocities through
realspace. The ship can still crash into things. (This explanation,
from the _TNG Technical Manual_, supersedes all prior theories
of warp drive.)
[3] B5 jumpgates: A jumpgate is a fixed device which opens a "hole"
into hyperspace. Hyperspace is just like realspace, except it's
red, has mysterious gravitic tides, and is empty. A ship
enters hyperspace, gets a fix on the "in" and "out" jumpgate
beacons, travels through hyperspace to the "out" gate, and exits.
There's a correspondence between points in real and hyperspace,
but it's not constant or straightforward; it might even vary
over time. It seems that the correspondence is "foamlike", so that
some routes in hyperspace that lead to the far side of the galaxy
may be shorter than ones that lead to a system only a few
Ly away. Evidence (such as freighters moving through realspace
nowhere near a planet) implies that some routes are -shorter-
in realspace, and/or practical routes are not available between
all jump gates in the network.
A "jump point" is a temporary hole created by the "jump engines"
of a large vessel, identical to a hole created by a fixed
jumpgate. Any vessel may use a jumpgate or a jump point;
it doesn't need jump engines of its own. Once in hyperspace,
conventional reaction engines take over.
(Based on observed travel times and distances on the
show, the use of full galactic maps, statements by JMS, and
fan speculation.)
[4] Star Wars hyperspace: similar to B5 hyperspace. Ships use
a "hyperdrive motivator" to enter and travel through hyperspace;
various hyperspace velocities are possible. (The _Falcon_ is
fast and the _Death Star_ is slow.)
Navigation through hyperspace is a challenge, because
you can crash into "gravitic shadows" of realspace masses,
even small ones like asteroids.
(There's weak evidence that Star Wars also has a non-hyperspace
FTL drive, given that in TESB the _Falcon_ got from the Hoth
to Bespin systems despite a broken hyperdrive.)
Summary:
Special engine
Points? Space used? Obstacles? needed?
------- ----------- ---------- --------------
Trek wormhole 2 tunnel no no
Trek warp unlim'd realspace yes yes
B5 hyperspace unlim'd* hyperspace no no**
SW hyperspace unlim'd hyperspace yes yes
* If you have a jump engine. Otherwise you're limited to the
available network of gates.
** If you have a nearby gate.
--
/~~ Phillip...@marcam.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\
| RPI 1997, Computer Science "It's the boundary |
| Co-op software developer, Marcam Corp. conditions that get you" |
\__ Lead conceptual artist, Vicarious Visions Inc. __________________________/
Adrian B. Penalo
Stephen wrote:
> The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
> quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
> while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
> that journey.
Who said the B5 Universe covers all the Galaxy (Milky Way)??
Stephen
Adrian B. Penalo wrote:
>
> Stephen wrote:
> > The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
> > quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
> > while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
> > that journey.
>
> Who said the B5 Universe covers all the Galaxy (Milky Way)??
Londo and Morden divied up the milky way in a hollow treaty (the shadows
lied, go figure), and Sheridan was looking at a map of the galaxy and
looking at shadow attacks all over the map. Exploratory ships probe the
galactic rim, building jumpgates and occasionally sighting shadow ships.
Jumpgates give a powerful strategic advantage over warp drives, while
warp drives give ST ships a huge tactical advantage, if only fed captians
would use it.
James Grady Ward
In article <326E1A...@psu.edu>, Stephen <sec...@psu.edu> writes:
>Johan Wevers wrote:
>
>> That is only an indication if you know the distance between Narn and Earth.
>> It is mentioned in "By Any Means Necessary", I believe it was about 10
>> light years. In Star Trek, warp 8 (reasonably fast) is 17640c, so this
>> distance would take 17900 sec = 0.2 days at warp 8. So warp drives can be
>> much faster.
>
>The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
>quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
>while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
>that journey.
has any of the ships in b5 ever been mentioned to have crossed such
a distance? i cant think of any unless you include the vorlons and
the other ancient races. none of the numan ships mentioned have.
also when they were showing the location of shadow attacks on the
galaxtic map, did no one else notice that all the attacks they
showed were in one cube that was completly around one of the
spiral arms. so either b5 has no information from the rest of
the galaxy or the shadow war is taking place in a real small
area.
more than likely the humans at least are only capable of traveling
in the near by area of a few hundred light years.
--
buckysan: does anyone else like ani-mayhem?
http://www4.ncsu.edu/eos/users/j/jgward/WWW/animay.html
annapuma and unapumma in 96'
" the realization that the pursuit of knowledge can be an
end unto itself is the beginning and highest form of wisdom"
James Grady Ward
In article <326D9F...@worldnet.att.net>, VaporTrail <VaporTr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>Steve Sloan wrote:
>>
>> NIC...@DELPHI.COM wrote:
>> >
>> > I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside
>> > from the business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is
>> > the very obvious fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When
>> > Londo and Morden break off, their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY.
>> > This was reiterated in the most recent episode, And the Rock...,
>> > when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
>>
>> In "And the Rock...", they also showed that it took G'Kar less than a
>> day to get from B5 to Narn. Another example of how fast jumpgates are...
>In "Messages of Earth", didn't Sheridan say that it would take 4 days to
>complete jump to Earth (about 25 ly) from Babylon 5 aboard the White
>Star. If so, wouldn't this make jump gates slower than Warp Speed? Of
>course, it does depend on the Warp factor.
actually i think they said the round trip would be 4 days, but otherwise
you are right i think.
James Grady Ward
In article <326D0E...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>, Steve Sloan <sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>NIC...@DELPHI.COM wrote:
>>
>> I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside
>> from the business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is
>> the very obvious fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When
>> Londo and Morden break off, their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY.
>> This was reiterated in the most recent episode, And the Rock...,
>> when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
>
>In "And the Rock...", they also showed that it took G'Kar less than a
>day to get from B5 to Narn. Another example of how fast jumpgates are...
>
small question, just how far away is narn from B5? just knowing
g'kar got there in a day does not mean much without that information.
even in trek they seem to always be able to get to any planet in
at most a day or so.
Timo S Saloniemi
In article <326E1A...@psu.edu> Stephen <sec...@psu.edu> writes:
>Johan Wevers wrote:
>
>> That is only an indication if you know the distance between Narn and Earth.
>> It is mentioned in "By Any Means Necessary", I believe it was about 10
>> light years. In Star Trek, warp 8 (reasonably fast) is 17640c, so this
>> distance would take 17900 sec = 0.2 days at warp 8. So warp drives can be
>> much faster.
>
>The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
>quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
>while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
>that journey.
Actually, galaxy-sized maps only appeared with Morden and his Shadows,
and with the Minbari-Vorlon-backed Alliance of Light. The Earth
Alliance seemed rather small, as did the Narn and Centauri holdings.
The non-aligned folks seem pretty much scattered out, but not large by
themselves, almost by definition.
Presumably, the Shadows and the Vorlons possess the secret of truly
galactic drive, and can think in galactic scale. Morden may well have
been talking about everyday practical details when dividing the galaxy in
half, but Londo seems to have been doing the same thing Spain and Portugal
did in the 1500s - "let's divide the known universe into two halves -
I'll take this one, you can keep the other, no matter that we really
don't know what lies out there and how to get there".
Even the galactic map in the War Room seems to display events in a
relativley restricted area - galactic scale is allowed since Vorlons and
Minbari are backing up the war effort, but the other players seem to limit
themselves to a smaller playground (which still seems larger than
what I'd imagine the UFP or the Klingon holdings would be).
Given the current explanations on hyperspace navigation in B5, it
would seem that even advance explorers do not loiter far away from
mapped space and its hyperspace equivalent, or they risk getting
forever lost between stars. Getting lost between Earth and Narn
is just as bad as getting lost between Earth and Andromeda - the
ships can't fly home through realspace even across a couple of lightyears,
and navigation in hyperspace relies on established reference beacons
(either jumpgates or free-floating buoys) and can't be done by blind
reckoning. Even the independent explorers have to keep laying buoys
or they get lost and can't find back ("The Distant Star").
Such a system is fundamentally different from the Trek warp drive, where
you are just as aware of your whereabouts when between Earth and the galactic
core as you are between Earth and Moon. Navigation is no limit, the drive
performance is. Ergo, Voyager CAN get home, while a B5 Earthforce ship
would be forever lost even if it had unlimited supplies and a really fast
hyperspace drive.
Timo Saloniemi
.sigless and proud of it!
Robert Hubby
NIC...@DELPHI.COM (NIC...@news.delphi.com) wrote:
: I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside from the
: business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is the very obvious
: fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When Londo and Morden break off,
: their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY. This was reiterated in the most recent
: episode, And the Rock..., when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
Jump gates function on the Hyperspace theory...that there might be another
dimension, where space is compressed so that places that are far apart in
real space are much closer in hyperspace, or in which the maximum speed is
greater than light. Warp drives simply bend space to create the "Illusion"
that the ship is moving faster than light, when it is really not moving at
all (This is strange, but the theory is sound, and it explains why when the
warp drive breaks down, the ship stops moving instead of continuing on at
warp whatever forever.)
: In most other ways, Star Trek is far more high tech. Transporters, scanners,
: replicators and medical tech bear this out. But if Voyager had jump engines,
: they'd be home.
:
: Of course, Lore invented something like jump drive in that episode where he
: takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
: other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
: use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
Actually, I think that was a natural phenomenon, not an artificial one,
similar to a wormhole, but faster.
R.A.H. Elf of the redwoods, Sonoma Valley, Breakfast Cereal Country.
__*__ "There are worlds out there where the sky is burning.
|--|--| Where the seas sleep, and the rivers dream.
|##|##| People made of smoke, and cities made of song.
| I|I | Somewhere there's danger.
|##|##| Somewhere there's injustice.
|##|##| Somewhere else the tea is getting cold.
------- C'mon Ace, we've got work to do!" - The Doctor.
Robert Hubby
Stephen (sec...@psu.edu) wrote:
: Londo and Morden divied up the milky way in a hollow treaty (the shadows
: looking at shadow attacks all over the map. Exploratory ships probe the
: galactic rim, building jumpgates and occasionally sighting shadow ships.
:
: Jumpgates give a powerful strategic advantage over warp drives, while
: warp drives give ST ships a huge tactical advantage, if only fed captians
: would use it.
Case in point, the "Picard Maneuver", and the "Kaufman Retrogade" from the
Star Fleet Battles game.
Robert Hubby
James Grady Ward (jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
: In article <326E1A...@psu.edu>, Stephen <sec...@psu.edu> writes:
: >Johan Wevers wrote:
: >> That is only an indication if you know the distance between Narn and Earth.
: >> It is mentioned in "By Any Means Necessary", I believe it was about 10
: >> light years. In Star Trek, warp 8 (reasonably fast) is 17640c, so this
: >> distance would take 17900 sec = 0.2 days at warp 8. So warp drives can be
: >> much faster.
: >The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
: >quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
: >while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
: >that journey.
: a distance? i cant think of any unless you include the vorlons and
: the other ancient races. none of the numan ships mentioned have.
:
: also when they were showing the location of shadow attacks on the
: galaxtic map, did no one else notice that all the attacks they
: showed were in one cube that was completly around one of the
: spiral arms. so either b5 has no information from the rest of
: the galaxy or the shadow war is taking place in a real small
: area.
:
: more than likely the humans at least are only capable of traveling
: in the near by area of a few hundred light years.
"This part of the Galaxy is yours." was what our nasty shadow agent said,
and the line that appeared on the map covered about a third of the outer
edge of the galaxy. If the Centauri could realisticly expect to hold that
much territory, then Hyperspace travel in the B5 universe HAS to be faster
than Trek's Warp drive.
Another big difference is that a ship with jump capability can bypass any
blockade or border with ease.
R.A.H. Elf of the redwoods, Sonoma Valley, Breakfast Cereal Country.
"What do you want from us...WE'RE EVIL!" - Dr. Clayton Forester (& Frank)
Stephen
Robert Hubby wrote:
> : Jumpgates give a powerful strategic advantage over warp drives, while
> : warp drives give ST ships a huge tactical advantage, if only fed captians
> : would use it.
>
> Case in point, the "Picard Maneuver", and the "Kaufman Retrogade" from the
> Star Fleet Battles game.
I wish the writers of Star Fleet Battles were consulted before every fight in trek.
I would love to see warp speed combat, with transporter bombs and drones used by
both sides. We are stuck with watching fed tactics such as "Park ourselves at
point blank range and sit absolutely still!" and other assorted sillyness.
Robert Hubby
CAIRNS (cca...@s-cwis.unomaha.edu) wrote:
: Someone correct me if I am wrong but don't you have to have a jump gate
: in your begining point and your destination. Warp engienes take you
: anywhere like a 4x4 where jump gates act like a tunel through a mountain.
: You don't have that much control.
You're wrong. Large ships (and some rare smaller ones) can create
Jump-points (tunnels into Hyperspace) all by themselves. Otherwise, how do
you think anyone could have gotten the Jumpgate machinery out that far into
space in the first place, Hmn?
R.A.H. Elf of the redwoods, Sonoma Valley, Breakfast Cereal Country.
"One must _Strive_ for the light. The dark ways come far too easily!" -
Mirth, the world mage, in 'Mage: The hero Discovered.'
Robert Abbott
<snip>
> : Of course, Lore invented something like jump drive in that episode where he
> : takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
> : other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
> : use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
>
> Actually, I think that was a natural phenomenon, not an artificial one,
> similar to a wormhole, but faster.
Perhaps, but Buckley(sp?) did create a jump get when he got "smarted-up" by
the array thingy. They visited a race that explored by bringing explorers
to their planet. I guess it was conveniently lost when he was removed from
the computer.
--
Robert Abbott rdab...@us.oracle.com
The views expressed are not necessarily my own or those of Oracle Corp.
James Grady Ward
In article <326E8F...@fiu.edu>, "Adrian B. Penalo" <apen...@fiu.edu> writes:
>Stephen wrote:
>> The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
>> quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
>> while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
>> that journey.
>
>Who said the B5 Universe covers all the Galaxy (Milky Way)??
>
there is no question that the shadows are tring to take over the
entire galaxy, the question is if the human part of the war
covers the entire galaxy or not.
James Grady Ward
In article <54o2vc$p...@bolt.sonic.net>, rah...@sonic.net (Robert Hubby) writes:
>James Grady Ward (jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
>: In article <326E1A...@psu.edu>, Stephen <sec...@psu.edu> writes:
>: >Johan Wevers wrote:
>: >> That is only an indication if you know the distance between Narn and Earth.
>: >> It is mentioned in "By Any Means Necessary", I believe it was about 10
>: >> light years. In Star Trek, warp 8 (reasonably fast) is 17640c, so this
>: >> distance would take 17900 sec = 0.2 days at warp 8. So warp drives can be
>: >> much faster.
>: >The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
>: >quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
>: >while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
>: >that journey.
>: has any of the ships in b5 ever been mentioned to have crossed such
>: a distance? i cant think of any unless you include the vorlons and
>: the other ancient races. none of the numan ships mentioned have.
>:
>: also when they were showing the location of shadow attacks on the
>: galaxtic map, did no one else notice that all the attacks they
>: showed were in one cube that was completly around one of the
>: spiral arms. so either b5 has no information from the rest of
>: the galaxy or the shadow war is taking place in a real small
>: area.
>:
>: more than likely the humans at least are only capable of traveling
>: in the near by area of a few hundred light years.
>
>"This part of the Galaxy is yours." was what our nasty shadow agent said,
>and the line that appeared on the map covered about a third of the outer
>edge of the galaxy. If the Centauri could realisticly expect to hold that
>much territory, then Hyperspace travel in the B5 universe HAS to be faster
>than Trek's Warp drive.
that was the shadows saying they would take one side of that
map. lando is not sure that centauri can hold the area they curently
control. i have never seen anything that suggests that any of
the races that were not involved in the last war have the ablility
to travel across galaxtic distances in short time frames. i really
cant think of anything that suggests that the membari(sp) can do it.
besides would you agree to be left to just your current area of
the galaxy, so obviously the shadows "gave" the centauri an area
larger than they could expect to control in the near future.
again a simple question has any ship that was not a shadow ship
or one of the ancient races been mentioned to have crossed the galaxy?
James Grady Ward
In article <326EAC...@psu.edu>, Stephen <sec...@psu.edu> writes:
>Adrian B. Penalo wrote:
>>
>> Stephen wrote:
>> > The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
>> > quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
>> > while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
>> > that journey.
>>
>> Who said the B5 Universe covers all the Galaxy (Milky Way)??
>
>Londo and Morden divied up the milky way in a hollow treaty (the shadows
>lied, go figure), and Sheridan was looking at a map of the galaxy and
>looking at shadow attacks all over the map. Exploratory ships probe the
>galactic rim, building jumpgates and occasionally sighting shadow ships.
no one has said that the vorlons and some of the other ancient races
cant cross the galaxy that quickly, the question is can the humans
and jump gates do it. the ships sent to the rim have not really traveled
that far. the eart is only like 15,000 or 10,000 light years from the rim
itself. not to mention has it ever been said how long it took the ships to
get to the rim?
no one has really questioned if the shadows are a threat to the enitre
galaxy, the real question is if the humans are involved in the war
across the entire galaxy or just one localized area.
Valheru
CAIRNS wrote:
>
> NIC...@DELPHI.COM (NIC...@news.delphi.com) wrote:
> :
> :
> : I think that jump gates and warp drive are very different. Aside from the
> : business with points and gates vs. warp engines, the is the very obvious
> : fact that jumping is incredibly faster. When Londo and Morden break off,
> : their map is one of the WHOLE GALAXY. This was reiterated in the most recent
> : episode, And the Rock..., when Sheridan's screen contained the entire galaxy.
> : In most other ways, Star Trek is far more high tech. Transporters, scanners,
> : replicators and medical tech bear this out. But if Voyager had jump engines,
> : they'd be home.
> :
> : takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
> : other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
> : use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
> : -Nicias
> :
> Someone correct me if I am wrong but don't you have to have a jump gate
> in your begining point and your destination. Warp engienes take you
> anywhere like a 4x4 where jump gates act like a tunel through a mountain.
> You don't have that much control.
> "Who Knows What Evil Lurks In The Hearts Of Men?- The Shadow Knows"
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> HAHAHACHARLESAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...@S-CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Jump gates are for small shuttles, fighters, general space traffic and
such.... they basically provide a free ride into and out of hyperspace.
Think of how cheap commerce would be in Star Trek if they had a
similiar device (in face in one TNG episode they had something like it
(a warp wave surfing thingy )) Ships of a sufficient size can carry
their own jump engines and go wherever they please.
Steve Sloan
Greg Skinner wrote:
> Either way isn't ds9's wormhole an artificial thing also? It's a
> hell of a lot faster than warp apparently.
Yes, but its other end only goes to one place. A jumpgate can be set to
open anywhere you want (as far as I can tell).
--
*********************************************************************
"Take my Worf... please!" Data, from "Star Trek: The Next Generation"
"The thing about aliens is... they're ALIEN." Gregory Benford
If the Microsoft Assembler is called "MASM", then what would you call
an Organized Assembler? I don't know, but I bet it would be fun to
program!
Matt Kennel
Timo S Saloniemi (tsal...@gamma.hut.fi) wrote:
: Given the current explanations on hyperspace navigation in B5, it
: would seem that even advance explorers do not loiter far away from
: mapped space and its hyperspace equivalent, or they risk getting
: forever lost between stars. Getting lost between Earth and Narn
: is just as bad as getting lost between Earth and Andromeda - the
: ships can't fly home through realspace even across a couple of lightyears,
: and navigation in hyperspace relies on established reference beacons
: (either jumpgates or free-floating buoys) and can't be done by blind
: reckoning. Even the independent explorers have to keep laying buoys
: or they get lost and can't find back ("The Distant Star").
Right: The global topology of hyperspace is NOT necessarily that of
nice R^3 Euclidean real space.
The global topology of Babylon 5 is much richer than Trek today.
: Timo Saloniemi
: .sigless and proud of it!
--
Matthew B. Kennel/m...@caffeine.engr.utk.edu/I do not speak for ORNL, DOE or UT
Oak Ridge National Laboratory/University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN USA/
I would not, could not SAVE ON PHONE, |==================================
I would not, could not BUY YOUR LOAN, |The US Government does not like
I would not, could not MAKE MONEY FAST, |spam either. It is ILLEGAL!
I would not, could not SEND NO CA$H, |USC Title 47, section 227
I would not, could not SEE YOUR SITE, |p (b)(1)(C) www.law.cornell.edu/
I would not, could not EAT VEG-I-MITE, | /uscode/47/227.html
I do *not* *like* GREEN CARDS AND SPAM! |==================================
M A D - I - A M!
James Grady Ward
In article <54p1lt$d...@gaia.ns.utk.edu>, m...@caffeine.engr.utk.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:
>Timo S Saloniemi (tsal...@gamma.hut.fi) wrote:
>: Given the current explanations on hyperspace navigation in B5, it
>: would seem that even advance explorers do not loiter far away from
>: mapped space and its hyperspace equivalent, or they risk getting
>: forever lost between stars. Getting lost between Earth and Narn
>: is just as bad as getting lost between Earth and Andromeda - the
>: ships can't fly home through realspace even across a couple of lightyears,
>: and navigation in hyperspace relies on established reference beacons
>: (either jumpgates or free-floating buoys) and can't be done by blind
>: reckoning. Even the independent explorers have to keep laying buoys
>: or they get lost and can't find back ("The Distant Star").
>
>Right: The global topology of hyperspace is NOT necessarily that of
>nice R^3 Euclidean real space.
well the topology of the universe is not euclidean anyway. there
is a reason that gravity wells are called wells:)
Greg Skinner
> : Of course, Lore invented something like jump drive in that episode where he
> : takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
> : other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
> : use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
>
> similar to a wormhole, but faster.
>
that required a specially modulated warp field or shield something a
rather to activate.
DC4...@american.edu
In article <3271D9...@bellsouth.co.nz>
Greg Skinner <greg.s...@bellsouth.co.nz> writes:
>> : Of course, Lore invented something like jump drive in that episode where he
>> : takes over those Borgs. It involved those often invoked tachyons. Like many
>> : other times, this fine new tech. has never been built upon. The Feds could
>> : use it to kick the Dominion's ass five times over.
>>
to create in "Threshhold". The borg seemed to have invented them and
used them to travel vast distances quickly. I would guess one problem with
using them is you have to be able to get to the other side with conventional
propulsion in order to construct one. (or possibly mastering transwarp
drive allows you to make one on the spot)
-Devin Clancy
James Grady Ward
In article <3270F9...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>, Steve Sloan <sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>Greg Skinner wrote:
>
>> Either way isn't ds9's wormhole an artificial thing also? It's a
>> hell of a lot faster than warp apparently.
>
>Yes, but its other end only goes to one place. A jumpgate can be set to
>open anywhere you want (as far as I can tell).
the idea for the jump gates seems to be that there exists
and can be accessed some form of lower(higher?) dimensions
in space, which btw is considered somewhat possible in reality.
the gate itself is just to get you into and out of this other
"space" and acts as a homing device in this space. now several
of the ships we see actually have engines on them that can
open points into this space whereever they want. i think without
those engines you would have to just travel in a staight line from
gate to gate to go anywhere.
Phillip Thorne
jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu (James Grady Ward) wrote:
>In article <3270F9...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>, Steve Sloan <sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>>Greg Skinner wrote:
>>
>>> Either way isn't ds9's wormhole an artificial thing also? It's a
>>> hell of a lot faster than warp apparently.
Artificial in the sense that it was created by the mysterious
entities who exist outside time, the so-called "Prophets."
It's faster than warp only because inside it's only a few
hundred km long (more or less), and outside it's tens of
thousands of LY long. Once inside, everyone travels at
impulse velocities.
>>Yes, but its other end only goes to one place. A jumpgate can be set to
>>open anywhere you want (as far as I can tell).
No. You can -construct- a jumpgate anywhere (say next to your
homeworld, colony world, handy stellar anomaly), and it will
give access to hyperspace. Entering a jumpgate doesn't
determine your exit.
>[SNIP]
>the gate itself is just to get you into and out of this other
>"space" and acts as a homing device in this space. now several
>of the ships we see actually have engines on them that can
>open points into this space whereever they want. i think without
>those engines you would have to just travel in a staight line from
>gate to gate to go anywhere.
Okay, I'll say it AGAIN:
In Babylon 5, jumpgates and jumppoints simply allow -access-
to hyperspace, which acts just like normal space. Once inside,
you can navigate, change direction, etc. But there are no
internal navigational cues, and hyperspace doesn't map in
any neat way to realspace, so you have to rely on the
"beacon" signals emitted by established jumpgates.
Small ships without jump engines must use jumpgates to
enter and exit hyperspace. Larger ships can support the
huge energy requirements of jump engines and can create
their own "jump points", temporary holes into hyperspace,
to get in and out.
A "jumpgate" is the huge open framework equipped with
"vortex generators" using "quantium 40" to open, within
the frame, a "jump point". A ship with "jump engines"
can open a jump point -without- the framework.
Jump points come in two flavors: enter hyperspace, and
exit hyperspace. (Yellow and blue respectively, IIRC)
Andrew Stuart Mason
In article <326EAC...@psu.edu>, Stephen <sec...@psu.edu> writes:
> Adrian B. Penalo wrote:
> >
> > Stephen wrote:
> > > The B5 universe covers the entire galaxy, while ST only deals with their
> > > quadrant. A B5 ship can cross the galaxy in a reasonable time frame,
> > > while it takes 70 years for a relly fast warp-driven ship to make half of
> > > that journey.
> >
> > Who said the B5 Universe covers all the Galaxy (Milky Way)??
>
> Londo and Morden divied up the milky way in a hollow treaty (the shadows
> lied, go figure), and Sheridan was looking at a map of the galaxy and
> looking at shadow attacks all over the map. Exploratory ships probe the
> galactic rim, building jumpgates and occasionally sighting shadow ships.
>
Um, I think you'll find that when L&M divided up the galaxy, Londo only got a
teensy sliver at the edge. As the Centauri were going to conquer all the
races on babylon 5 (well, that's what Morden wanted), this indicates that
B5 is not as far-reaching as you think.
It's perhaps worth noting at this point that Earth is very close indeed to the
galactic rim.
Incidentally, the Babylon 5 UNIVERSE covers the entire universe. A better
phrased question would involve the words "Known Space". But I'm just
being pedantic.
TTFN
ANDY
-"Brother, there is a grevious fault with thine weapon! It keepeth shooting
me.
Look! I have bloodied your bullets."
Steven W. Difranco
I tire of these stupid threads.
--
[ Steven W. DiFranco, CEO WEBCRAFT Data Resources ][ "A lot of people think
government is the cause of our problems. And some people think government
is the answer to our problems. But I think government is the result of our
problems." - Dick Feagler, columnist from the Cleveland Plain Dealer ]
Robert Hubby
: map. lando is not sure that centauri can hold the area they curently
: control. i have never seen anything that suggests that any of
: the races that were not involved in the last war have the ablility
: to travel across galaxtic distances in short time frames. i really
: cant think of anything that suggests that the membari(sp) can do it.
Just to be helpful, the correct spelling is "Minbari."
: again a simple question has any ship that was not a shadow ship
: or one of the ancient races been mentioned to have crossed the galaxy?
Not as such, but Zahadoon is supposed to be the center of the Shadows'
territory, which was supposed to be near the center of the Galaxy, so human
ships can make it at least halfway (Earth is near the edge of the Galaxy.)
R.A.H. Elf of the redwoods, Sonoma Valley, Breakfast Cereal Country.
Dodge Boy
Andrew Stuart Mason wrote:
> Um, I think you'll find that when L&M divided up the galaxy, Londo only got a
> teensy sliver at the edge. As the Centauri were going to conquer all the
> races on babylon 5 (well, that's what Morden wanted), this indicates that
> B5 is not as far-reaching as you think.
> It's perhaps worth noting at this point that Earth is very close indeed to the
> galactic rim.
>
> Incidentally, the Babylon 5 UNIVERSE covers the entire universe. A better
> phrased question would involve the words "Known Space". But I'm just
> being pedantic.
>
would be no need for first contact procedures.
Dodge Boy
orionca
On 28 Oct 1996 14:57:51 GMT, jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu (James Grady Ward)
wrote:
>
>In article <3270F9...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>, Steve Sloan <sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>>Greg Skinner wrote:
>>
>>> Either way isn't ds9's wormhole an artificial thing also? It's a
>>> hell of a lot faster than warp apparently.
>>
>>Yes, but its other end only goes to one place. A jumpgate can be set to
>>open anywhere you want (as far as I can tell).
>
>the idea for the jump gates seems to be that there exists
>and can be accessed some form of lower(higher?) dimensions
>in space, which btw is considered somewhat possible in reality.
>the gate itself is just to get you into and out of this other
>"space" and acts as a homing device in this space. now several
>of the ships we see actually have engines on them that can
>open points into this space whereever they want. i think without
>those engines you would have to just travel in a staight line from
>gate to gate to go anywhere.
>--
Since Star Furies have been known to go on patrol in hyperspace, via
Jump Gates, it's pretty clear that it's just a matter of entering &
exiting Hyperspace. Once in Hyperspace, you can go pretty much where
you want to. It becomes a matter of finding your way back OUT of this
alternate dimension.
Capital ships & exploration scouts carry their own Jump Drives. Once
a suitable star system is located, a permanent Jump Gate is
constructed on site to allow less capable ships access to the new
system.
Steve Sloan
Bertal wrote:
> However, nothing that we know of is truly faster than a
> wormhole unless you do some infinite speed job where you're
> everywhere at once.
That's how Warp 10 is supposed to work.
Merrick Baldelli
Dodge Boy <Dodg...@howellautomotive.com> wrote:
>I believe that you correct as if the whole galaxy were known, there
>would be no need for first contact procedures.
<grinning> Then again, mapping out a star system with the use of a
scout is one thing. Determining whether there was intelligent life in
that star system would be another thing.
Unlike Trek which sometimes goes off the deep end in thoroughness
when it comes to charting the system and including life on the planet(s)
in the system); many science fiction stories show the equal possibility
of just charting without discovery.
Hell, I've had whole RPG campaigns pertaining to exploration of
star systems without so much as making contact with the life forms in
that system. ;-)
__________
==\ /=======================================
===\ /====== Merrick Baldelli ================
====\ /======= merr...@america.net ============
=====\ /== http://www.america.net/~merrickb ======
======\/===========================================
Rob Lent
jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu (James Grady Ward) taught us that:
>In article <3270F9...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>, Steve Sloan <sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>>Greg Skinner wrote:
>>
>>> Either way isn't ds9's wormhole an artificial thing also? It's a
>>> hell of a lot faster than warp apparently.
>>
>>Yes, but its other end only goes to one place. A jumpgate can be set to
>>open anywhere you want (as far as I can tell).
>the idea for the jump gates seems to be that there exists
>and can be accessed some form of lower(higher?) dimensions
>in space, which btw is considered somewhat possible in reality.
>the gate itself is just to get you into and out of this other
>"space" and acts as a homing device in this space. now several
>of the ships we see actually have engines on them that can
>open points into this space whereever they want. i think without
>those engines you would have to just travel in a staight line from
>gate to gate to go anywhere.
>--
Yeah, the gates are just "on-ramps" to hyperspace. Once you are
there, you have to travel to the point in hyperspace that corresponds
to where in normal space you want to be, and then open another
gate, and get out.
Now, hyperspace seems to be more complicated than out 3-dimensional
space, and, as far as I have seen, it is possible to get lost... I
wonder if it would be possible to open a gate to someplace outside
of our universe? This might be a REALLY bad idea, especially if that
universe was fastly different than ours....
Rob
James Grady Ward
In article <5580ul$c...@bolt.sonic.net>, rah...@sonic.net (Robert Hubby) writes:
>James Grady Ward (jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
>: again a simple question has any ship that was not a shadow ship
>: or one of the ancient races been mentioned to have crossed the galaxy?
>
>Not as such, but Zahadoon is supposed to be the center of the Shadows'
>territory, which was supposed to be near the center of the Galaxy, so human
>ships can make it at least halfway (Earth is near the edge of the Galaxy.)
>
well the last show said that Zahadoon is somewhere on the rim.
of course that doesnt help much in saying how far away it is
since you can almost say the earth is on the rim of the galaxy.
it also made me think of something odd about the supposed
story line. they have always said that the shadows were
awakened by the human ship landing on zahadoon. if that
is the case where did the shadow ship come from to retreive
the ship found on mars?
Chris Young
In article <327A3F...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>,
sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov says...
>
>Bertal wrote:
>
>> However, nothing that we know of is truly faster than a
>> wormhole unless you do some infinite speed job where you're
>> everywhere at once.
>
>That's how Warp 10 is supposed to work.
>--
What about the impossibility of any object being in more than one place at
the same time?
The borg conduits mentioned in "Descent, Part I" were the only instances of
artificial wormholes, which were stated to permit travel 20 times faster
than normal, but this was never explained or investigated further except as
the Deux ex Machina of "Transwarp."
A WATTS-WILLIAMS
Bertal (a-...@students.uiuc.edu) wrote:
: On 24 Oct 1996, Robert Hubby wrote:
: > NIC...@DELPHI.COM (NIC...@news.delphi.com) wrote:
In most other ways, Star Trek is far more high tech. Transporters, scanners,
replicators and medical tech bear this out. But if Voyager had jump engines,
they'd be home.
I don't think so. It takes longer to get from one place to another in B5
when the places are actually further apart. Jump gates are a short cut,
not a wormhole.
IQ=175
On 2 Nov 1996 02:16:11 GMT, jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu (James Grady Ward)
wrote:
>
>
>it also made me think of something odd about the supposed
>story line. they have always said that the shadows were
>awakened by the human ship landing on zahadoon. if that
>is the case where did the shadow ship come from to retreive
>the ship found on mars?
Does the term "awakened" really mean the shadows were literally
sleeping or just "unaware"?
orionca
On 5 Nov 1996 15:24:34 GMT, A.Watts-...@bradford.ac.uk (A
WATTS-WILLIAMS) wrote:
NIC...@DELPHI.COM (NIC...@news.delphi.com) wrote:
> In most other ways, Star Trek is far more high tech. Transporters, scanners,
>replicators and medical tech bear this out. But if Voyager had jump engines,
>they'd be home.
>
I don't think so, really. Most of the technology in Star Trek falls
under the 'magic' category (ever calculate the rotational energy
released when Kirk beams up from a planet's surface - rotating at
1000km/hour & 4500km from the center of gravity, to a starship
orbiting at 22,000km/hour and 5000km from the cg? It's impressive.)
Babylon V is based - largely - in technology that we would recognize
today. Star Trek assumes that if they come up with convincing
technobabble that the true believers will overlook the logic flaws.
orionca
>
>well the last show said that Zahadoon is somewhere on the rim.
>of course that doesnt help much in saying how far away it is
>since you can almost say the earth is on the rim of the galaxy.
>
>it also made me think of something odd about the supposed
>story line. they have always said that the shadows were
>awakened by the human ship landing on zahadoon. if that
>is the case where did the shadow ship come from to retreive
>the ship found on mars?
>--
In a 2nd season episode, it was revealed that the Shadows were in
contact with Earthcorp at least 5 years before BV was conceived, so
the Icarus didn't 'awaken' the Shadows. It may have forced them to
move sooner than they would have otherwise, but that's all.
Robert Hubby
: >James Grady Ward (jgw...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
: >: again a simple question has any ship that was not a shadow ship
: >: or one of the ancient races been mentioned to have crossed the galaxy?
: >Not as such, but Zahadoon is supposed to be the center of the Shadows'
: >territory, which was supposed to be near the center of the Galaxy, so human
: >ships can make it at least halfway (Earth is near the edge of the Galaxy.)
Could be the rim of human territory instead of the galaxy.
: of course that doesnt help much in saying how far away it is
: since you can almost say the earth is on the rim of the galaxy.
:
: it also made me think of something odd about the supposed
: story line. they have always said that the shadows were
: awakened by the human ship landing on zahadoon. if that
: is the case where did the shadow ship come from to retreive
: the ship found on mars?
They were obviously wrong. Some of the Shadows must not have gone into
hibernation, and these are the ones who picked up the Mars ship.
James Mastros
On 5 Nov 1996 08:11:36 GMT, par...@webbernet.net (Chris Young) wrote:
>In article <327A3F...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>,=20
>sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov says...
>
>What about the impossibility of any object being in more than one place =
at=20
>the same time?=20
>The borg conduits mentioned in "Descent, Part I" were the only instances=
of=20
>artificial wormholes, which were stated to permit travel 20 times faster=
=20
>than normal, but this was never explained or investigated further except=
as=20
>the Deux ex Machina of "Transwarp."
Also, the Wormhole of ST:DS9.
What series is Transwarp from?
-=3D- James Mastros
James Mastros
On Fri, 08 Nov 1996 06:35:03 GMT, ori...@earthlink.net (orionca)
wrote:
The tech of Star Trek makes INTERNAL sense always (with a few
exceptions) but, on surprisingly few discripancys, it makes EXTERNAL
sense too.
I would tell you just how the transportors do that, but I can't find
my tech manual.
-=3D- The Orb / James Mastros
orionca
On Sat, 09 Nov 1996 04:17:32 GMT, abs...@epix.net (James Mastros)
wrote:
>
>The tech of Star Trek makes INTERNAL sense always (with a few
>exceptions) but, on surprisingly few discripancys, it makes EXTERNAL
>sense too.
>
>I would tell you just how the transportors do that, but I can't find
>my tech manual.
>
>-=3D- The Orb / James Mastros
It's some variation on 'inertial damper' magic - er, Star Trek
technology. And is not terribly 'internally' consistant, because even
if you somehow capture the momentum transfer, it's a LOT of energy to
dissipate in an awful big hurry. Either you go flying through the
bulkhead at 22,000 +/- 1000km/hr or the gizmo you've stuck the
momentum into does.
You can read more about the problems with Star Trek in a book called
"The Physics of Star Trek", I believe is the title.
Cecelia Harvey
unsubscribe
Phillip Thorne
ori...@earthlink.net (orionca) wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Nov 1996 04:17:32 GMT, abs...@epix.net (James Mastros)
>wrote:
>
>>
>>The tech of Star Trek makes INTERNAL sense always (with a few
>>exceptions) but, on surprisingly few discripancys, it makes EXTERNAL
>>sense too.
IMHO, it makes internal sense only with a LOT of exceptions,
and external sense only rarely. They appear to break conservation
laws on a regular basis, for instance (there -might- be ways around
those, but they're rather technical and I doubt the writers have
heard of them. Rick Sternbach might have, because he seems to have
read some stuff by physicist and SF novelist Robert L. Forward).
>It's some variation on 'inertial damper' magic - er, Star Trek
>technology. And is not terribly 'internally' consistant, because even
>if you somehow capture the momentum transfer, it's a LOT of energy to
>dissipate in an awful big hurry. [SNIP]
If you could interconvert linear and angular momentum into energy, it
might be doable -- but the conversion factors are huge, so you'd
get a LOT of energy. Converting it to mass would be safer.
(This is discussed briefly in Robert L. Forward's _Indistinguishable
from Magic_.)
Rationalization: the continuing unification of previously
separate physical laws. In The Beginning, we had four
Conservation laws: Energy (E), Mass (m), Linear Momentum (P),
and Angular Momentum (L). Then we discovered that Energy and
Mass could interconvert (E=mcc), so those two laws condensed
into the Law of Conservation of Mass/Energy. Admittedly the
interconversion isn't easy -- it requires antimatter or nuclear
reactions (chemical reactions do it to a only very small degree
IIRC, in terms of bond energies) -- so assuming interconversion
with L and P is even possible, it could require some really
exotic reactions.
Maybe -- subspace? :-)
Stephen R. Prest
James,
Actually, transwarp dates back to the USS EXCELSIOR. You might
recall that Scotty sabotaged their transwarp drive so that the ENTERPRISE
could go out and look for Spock, hence the title 'The Search for Spock.'
It's
also been followed up in Star Trek: VOYAGER, the actual episode was
called "Threshold." Transwarp is pretty much Warp 10 and beyond. While
Tom Paris from VOYAGER *did* achieve transwarp speeds, the results
were't exactly what one would call beneficial.
Stephen
James Mastros <abs...@epix.net> wrote in article
<3289fe9b...@newsserver.epix.net>...
On 5 Nov 1996 08:11:36 GMT, par...@webbernet.net (Chris Young) wrote:
>In article <327A3F...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>,
>sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov says...
>
>What about the impossibility of any object being in more than one place at
>the same time?
>The borg conduits mentioned in "Descent, Part I" were the only instances
of
>artificial wormholes, which were stated to permit travel 20 times faster
>than normal, but this was never explained or investigated further except
as
>the Deux ex Machina of "Transwarp."
Also, the Wormhole of ST:DS9.
What series is Transwarp from?
-=- James Mastros
----------
The Dragon
In article <3282d13c...@news.earthlink.net>,
orionca <ori...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>In a 2nd season episode, it was revealed that the Shadows were in
>contact with Earthcorp at least 5 years before BV was conceived, so
>the Icarus didn't 'awaken' the Shadows. It may have forced them to
>move sooner than they would have otherwise, but that's all.
The episode was the Season 3 opener, "Matters of Honour". What really
shocked me was when Morden and Londo were dividing up the Galaxy. I
thought that the B5 Universe was a small self-contained part of the
galaxy, much like Star Trek's 'Alpha Quadrant'. I never had any real
impression that it was the whole galaxy! Since Earth was considered a
major race, yet had only recently appeared on the scene.
This division of the spoils by Morden and Londo shows the superiority of
the Jump Gate vs the Warp Drive. If Voyager had access to this, they
would have been home by the third episode. Maybe the Borg's transwarp
drive would be faster or even the Sikarians' folding technology.
Personally I find the 'B5 Galaxy' idea a little excessive, but that's how
it is.
--
This has been ... Toni Taia :"I have never listened to anyone who criticized
dra...@sans.vuw.ac.nz :my taste in space travel, sideshows or gorillas
Teddy Bear X-Wing locked on :When this occurs, I pack up my dinosaurs and
Sheridan's Starfury. KOed! :leave the room." - Ray Bradbury 1980. Age 60.
AI at JPL
> In "Now For a Word" it was revealed that Earth had only a dozen or so
> colonies. I think in the Pilot movie, Londo said the Centauri Republic
> had only a few dozen worlds. Babylon 5's star, Epsilon Eridani, is only
> 11 or so LY from Earth. Coincidentally (?) it is also the traditional
> home-star of Vulcan. That is considered neutral territory at the
juncture
> of all the powers. And it is only 11 LY from Earth! We are 28,000 LY
from
> galactic core for reference purposes, the radius is around 50,000 LY
I think that Earth-like worlds must be few and far between. Like in a real
universe. That is why they have only colonized 12 or so. Not to mention
getting enough people together who want to move another planet and sending
ships to protect said colony.......
>
> The Federation has around 150 member worlds according to the Encyclopedia
> and apparently hundreds or thousands of minor colony worlds. It is
apparently
> bigger and has faster propulsion.
An average Star Trek ship couldn't cross the Federation in your lifetime.
It takes subspace a couple of weeks to get from one end of the Federation
to the other. Some 60% of the Federation is un explored or barely charted.
And that by long range sensors. The Federation is HUGE yes. But the time it
takes to get from one end of the Federation to the other is assinine to say
the least. They made it to big for warp engines. Now if the Federation had
jump engines....
Oh and Earth has only been on the scene for about 120 years in B5(if that
long). The Federation is at least 250 years old and is made up of muliple
races.
>
> The reason for dividing up the galaxy?, they were making very long range
plans.
> Most of inhabited space would be on the "flame" border. One side would
belong
> to the Centauri forever, Shadows would get the other half. Like Germany
and Japan
> dividing up the Americas and such in the Axis pact (I think), plans for
the very
> distant future, assuming they are completely successful.
Nope. They can get anywhere in the Galaxy within hours.
>
> Conclusion, UFP is bigger than Centauri, Minbari, Earth, and all other
powers
> combined. . .
Yeah. Because every other planet in Trek is exactly like earth. It is
absurd in the extreme. It makes very little sense for 70% of all planets to
be "class M" when only 11% are that way in our own solar system!!!!
--
Cronan Thompson
First Officer of
the USS Megadittos
60. Tribbles and Vorlons hold the
answers to the universe.
Any misspellings in the abuve ritings
are halusinasions. Egnore dem!!!
Joseph M. Osborne
The Dragon wrote:
>
> The episode was the Season 3 opener, "Matters of Honour". What really
> shocked me was when Morden and Londo were dividing up the Galaxy. I
> thought that the B5 Universe was a small self-contained part of the
> galaxy, much like Star Trek's 'Alpha Quadrant'. I never had any real
> impression that it was the whole galaxy! Since Earth was considered a
> major race, yet had only recently appeared on the scene.
In "Now For a Word" it was revealed that Earth had only a dozen or so
colonies. I think in the Pilot movie, Londo said the Centauri Republic
had only a few dozen worlds. Babylon 5's star, Epsilon Eridani, is only
11 or so LY from Earth. Coincidentally (?) it is also the traditional
home-star of Vulcan. That is considered neutral territory at the juncture
of all the powers. And it is only 11 LY from Earth! We are 28,000 LY from
galactic core for reference purposes, the radius is around 50,000 LY
The Federation has around 150 member worlds according to the Encyclopedia
and apparently hundreds or thousands of minor colony worlds. It is apparently
bigger and has faster propulsion.
The reason for dividing up the galaxy?, they were making very long range plans.
Most of inhabited space would be on the "flame" border. One side would belong
to the Centauri forever, Shadows would get the other half. Like Germany and Japan
dividing up the Americas and such in the Axis pact (I think), plans for the very
distant future, assuming they are completely successful.
Conclusion, UFP is bigger than Centauri, Minbari, Earth, and all other powers
combined. . .
Joseph M. Osborne
orionca
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996 10:48:40 -0800, "Joseph M. Osborne" <jmo...@sac.uky.edu>
wrote:
>
>Conclusion, UFP is bigger than Centauri, Minbari, Earth, and all other powers
>combined. . .
>
>Joseph M. Osborne
Star Trek assumes that every other star has a solar system with habitable (Class
M) planets. Babylon V is a bit more realistic/up to date, using current
astronomical predictions for planetary formation.
It's not that easy to form a star system. Half the stars in the galaxy belong
to binary/multi star groups. This makes it hard for those to form planetary
accretion rings or capture wanderers into stable orbits. As for the rest, most
are too large/too cold/too hot/too young/etc. to have the necessary 'temperate'
zones for so-called "Class M" planets to form. And no one knows exactly WHY or
WHERE you get rocky, iron-core planets instead of giant gas balls.
If there are 1000 habitable/terraformable planets in the Milky Way, I'll be
pleasantly surprised. (I don't expect to live long enough to read the final
talley, but that's another matter...) BV, with its hundreds, instead of
thousands, of habitable worlds, is probably much closer to the mark than Star
Trek.
Timo S Saloniemi
In article <56bvbb$p...@tao.sans.vuw.ac.nz> dra...@sans.vuw.ac.nz (The Dragon) writes:
>In article <3282d13c...@news.earthlink.net>,
>orionca <ori...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>In a 2nd season episode, it was revealed that the Shadows were in
>>contact with Earthcorp at least 5 years before BV was conceived, so
>>the Icarus didn't 'awaken' the Shadows. It may have forced them to
>>move sooner than they would have otherwise, but that's all.
>
>shocked me was when Morden and Londo were dividing up the Galaxy. I
>thought that the B5 Universe was a small self-contained part of the
>galaxy, much like Star Trek's 'Alpha Quadrant'. I never had any real
>impression that it was the whole galaxy! Since Earth was considered a
>major race, yet had only recently appeared on the scene.
Actually, we have a nice historical precedent: Spain and Portugal divided
the whole world in a similar way to two halves with papal blessings a
bit before America was found. Never mind that neither country had the
resources to actually conquer the globe, nor did they know what kind
of strange lands lay behind the horizon - Portugal got the Orient with
its spices, plus a tiny slice of South America that ended up being Brazil,
and Spain got the Americas and their gold and silver.
Londo strikes me as just the type to say "Yes, you can have the other
half of the galaxy, as long as my empire gets the other one", even if
Londo's puny little dozen of Centauri worlds are within 50 ly of each
other and even as such a major strain to the engines of the Republic's
warships.
> This division of the spoils by Morden and Londo shows the superiority of
>the Jump Gate vs the Warp Drive. If Voyager had access to this, they
>would have been home by the third episode. Maybe the Borg's transwarp
>drive would be faster or even the Sikarians' folding technology.
Jump gates and the whole hyperspace system would not help Voyager much
if the situation was identical to that of B5. Navigation through
hyperspace is a major problem, and navigating across the equivalent
of 70 000 ly would probably be suicide. Even popping in and out of
hyperspace doesn't seem to work, since there is constant drift and
other oddities in the hyperspace/realspace mapping function.
> Personally I find the 'B5 Galaxy' idea a little excessive, but that's how
>it is.
Oh, for the Shadows,it might be. But for the Centauri, I think the
division was more of a symbolic gesture than a "realpolitik" drawing
of interstellar borders. Note how Sheridan't War Room has a galactic-scale
map as well (probably provided by the Minbari or the Vorlons), but all
the skirmishes take place in one or two small grids near B5.
And the references to "the Rim" in B5 usually seem to mean the rim of
explored space, which varies from race to race and from time to time.
Very few references seem to be to the poorly defined "galactic rim",
which is quite far away from the apparently closely-spaced Earth, Centauri
and Narn.
(Oh, how I hate names like that. If Narns come from Narn and Minbari from
Minbar, why are the inhabitants of Earth humans and not Earthlings?
At least Quo'nos sounds cooler than Kling or Klingzhai or whatever other
ideas have been put forth in Trek.)
Timo Saloniemi
.sigless and proud of it!
Dodge Boy
orionca wrote:
>
> Star Trek assumes that every other star has a solar system with habitable (Class
> M) planets. Babylon V is a bit more realistic/up to date, using current
> astronomical predictions for planetary formation.
The Sol system has one M class planet, and one that now it looks like
was an M class at one time (Mars), also the moon of Europa could be
close to an M-class, so why is it hard to believe that every other star
would have an M class planet?
>
> It's not that easy to form a star system. Half the stars in the galaxy belong
> to binary/multi star groups. This makes it hard for those to form planetary
> accretion rings or capture wanderers into stable orbits. As for the rest, most
> are too large/too cold/too hot/too young/etc. to have the necessary 'temperate'
> zones for so-called "Class M" planets to form. And no one knows exactly WHY or
> WHERE you get rocky, iron-core planets instead of giant gas balls.
>
I don't know where Star Trek ever said a binary star system had an
M-class planet, and the M-class is very broad, I'm not sure that Mars
wouldn't fall under M-class, after all the air on Mars is not toxic,
just not enough oxygen for higher creatures that we know of. Actually
theory has a good Idea of why rocky planets form.
> If there are 1000 habitable/terraformable planets in the Milky Way, I'll be
> pleasantly surprised. (I don't expect to live long enough to read the final
> talley, but that's another matter...) BV, with its hundreds, instead of
> thousands, of habitable worlds, is probably much closer to the mark than Star
> Trek.
With the Sol system having 2 or 3 M-class plants (Ones a moon), I think
the odds are that far more than 1000 in the MIlky Way.
Dodge Boy
Dave
Joseph M. Osborne wrote:
>
> The Dragon wrote:
> >
>
> > ...... What really
> > shocked me was when Morden and Londo were dividing up the Galaxy. I
> > thought that the B5 Universe was a small self-contained part of the
> > galaxy, much like Star Trek's 'Alpha Quadrant'. I never had any real
>
> In "Now For a Word" it was revealed that Earth had only a dozen or so
> colonies.
> and apparently hundreds or thousands of minor colony worlds. It is apparently
> bigger and has faster propulsion.
>
> combined. . .
IMHO this is probably like comparing apples and oranges, due
to the different assumptions underlying the 2 shows. First off, B5
is probably assuming that "class M" planets are few and far between,
rightly so. There may be only 1 or 2 such planets in our whole
spiral arm of the galaxy, for all we know. And then, given that
you have some sort of FTL tech to get you around the galaxy, there
are still ~100 billion stars to sort through.
Finally, in the
B5 conception, there is apparently not a linear, uniform
mapping between hyperspace and normalspace. Thousands of
parsecs in normalspace may correspond to only a day's "jump"
in hyperspace in one case, while a different, say 5-day
jump in another hyperspatial direction may "only" carry you
a couple of light-years in another case. So the map of the
galaxy may not be as important as the map of the underlying
hyperspatial distances.
B5 gives me the impression that it is not the actual
traversing of the distances that is the problem,
but rather, it's the hyperspatial navigation that is the
major difficulty. If you knew the proper point to exit
hyperspace, you could theoretically go anywhere you
wanted in the galaxy in short order. Add to that what I
assume is the B5 implication that hyperspace is
constantly changing in a chaotic, sort of
"meteorological" manner, constantly being stirred
up by gravitational tides and turbulent eddies. Hence
the need for the hyperspatial "lock-on beacons", for
example.
--
**************************************************************************
"That's ASYMPTOTICALLY Kazinsky, not ASYMPTOMATICALLY, you moron!"
Dave Lee
Ph.D. Student -- Department of Engineering Physics
2950 P Street
Dayton, OH 45433-77765
dl...@afit.af.mil
"The opinions expressed here are not the opinions of the employer."
*************************************************************************
Desco
On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, orionca wrote:
> Star Trek assumes that every other star has a solar system with habitable (Class
> M) planets. Babylon V is a bit more realistic/up to date, using current
> astronomical predictions for planetary formation.
I hate to sound anti-Star Trek -- I watched TNG every night, hated
the first season of DS9 (It's gotten a lot better), and occasionally catch
Voyager between classes. But the one thing I absolutely HATE about ST is
the "prettiness" of the whole thing. Here's what I mean:
On a Star Trek (TNG & beyond) Starship, they have replicators,
transporters, and million-kiloquad computers. There's little need for a
monetary system since they can replicate almost anything. When some
automated function stops working, the officer says "I'm going to do it
manually" and is still pressing buttons on their console.
In Star Wars, Babylon 5, Wing Commander games, and old-time series
such as Buck Rogers, it was a different story. They have to barter and
trade to get an important ship part. They run out of money. Their ships
are pieces of JUNK that always need repair. And doing something manually
means breaking off the panels and re-wiring something, or going down to
the torpedo room and shoving the torpedo in manually (Janeway rocks!)
Personally, I like the later. What's your take?
Desco
Steve Sloan
Dodge Boy wrote:
> The Sol system has one M class planet, and one that now it looks like
> was an M class at one time (Mars), also the moon of Europa could be
> close to an M-class
There's a possibility Europa has life, but if it does, the lifeforms
would live under miles of ice, and live off sulfur compounds coming from
geysers down there. No human could live there without special life
support. Inhabited does not necessarily mean "Class M"... I thought
Class M worlds had to be habitable by a human without life support, if
not comfortable.
*********************************************************************
You don't tug on Superman's cape, You don't spit into the wind,
You don't pull the mask off the ol' Lone Ranger,
And you don't... Hit Worf in the face after you accuse him of turning
his back on the Federation... (With apologies to Jim Croce)
Voyager
On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, Desco wrote:
> I hate to sound anti-Star Trek -- I watched TNG every night, hated
> the first season of DS9 (It's gotten a lot better), and occasionally catch
> Voyager between classes. But the one thing I absolutely HATE about ST is
> the "prettiness" of the whole thing. Here's what I mean:
> On a Star Trek (TNG & beyond) Starship, they have replicators,
> transporters, and million-kiloquad computers. There's little need for a
> monetary system since they can replicate almost anything. When some
> automated function stops working, the officer says "I'm going to do it
> manually" and is still pressing buttons on their console.
> In Star Wars, Babylon 5, Wing Commander games, and old-time series
> such as Buck Rogers, it was a different story. They have to barter and
> trade to get an important ship part. They run out of money. Their ships
> are pieces of JUNK that always need repair. And doing something manually
> means breaking off the panels and re-wiring something, or going down to
> the torpedo room and shoving the torpedo in manually (Janeway rocks!)
>
> Personally, I like the later. What's your take?
The things I mostly like about Star Trek is the notion that
mankind has basically gotten its act together and the general emphasis on
exploration. However, I agree, Babylon 5, Star Wars, and the like have a
much more realistic bent on technology. In Star Trek, even the janitor
wouldn't think twice about having to reroute antimatter flow thingakabobs
or reprogram the entire ships computer. Everybody seems to know how to
operate and adjust everything. This just isn't so- not even now. Hell,
if technology were to truly reflect mankind's current ability to use it
competenly and responsibly, we'd still be in the Dark Ages.
On the other hand, B5 and Star Wars characters have some knowledge
of their own ship, as a pilot or auto mechanic would, but you don't see
everyone tinkering with everything. If you were to see a Vorlon ship on
DS9, O'Brien could just waltz onboard and immediately understand the
consoles (if they have any) and all ins-and-outs of the technology.
James Grady Ward
In article <01bbd19a$d81145c0$6f8e92cf@default>, "AI at JPL" <mal...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>> In "Now For a Word" it was revealed that Earth had only a dozen or so
>> colonies. I think in the Pilot movie, Londo said the Centauri Republic
>> had only a few dozen worlds. Babylon 5's star, Epsilon Eridani, is only
>> 11 or so LY from Earth. Coincidentally (?) it is also the traditional
>> home-star of Vulcan. That is considered neutral territory at the
>juncture
>> of all the powers. And it is only 11 LY from Earth! We are 28,000 LY
>from
>> galactic core for reference purposes, the radius is around 50,000 LY
>
>I think that Earth-like worlds must be few and far between. Like in a real
>universe. That is why they have only colonized 12 or so. Not to mention
>getting enough people together who want to move another planet and sending
>ships to protect said colony.......
you do realize that B5 is not even around an inhabitable world, so
the fequency of habitable worlds is not the issue. getting the
people is not a problem, and if the jump gates worked as well
as you say protecting them would not be a problem.
>>
>> The reason for dividing up the galaxy?, they were making very long range
>plans.
>> Most of inhabited space would be on the "flame" border. One side would
>belong
>> to the Centauri forever, Shadows would get the other half. Like Germany
>and Japan
>> dividing up the Americas and such in the Axis pact (I think), plans for
>the very
>> distant future, assuming they are completely successful.
>
>Nope. They can get anywhere in the Galaxy within hours.
umm it took 4 days for them to take the white star from its orignal hiding
place to earth and back. i never got the impression that the white star
was being hide on the other side of the galaxy so your numbers are a
tad off here. also it took the earth fleet 6 hours to cross the
11 or so light years it takes to get to B5.
and as to this B5 covering the whole galaxy, besides the races invloved
in the last war who has ever acted like it was more than a local affair?
only the vorlons and the shadows are thinking of the conflict as covering
the whole galaxy.
also as to crossing the galaxy, has any race ever been mentioned to have
crossed such distances besides the vorlons and shadows?
>>
>> Conclusion, UFP is bigger than Centauri, Minbari, Earth, and all other
>powers
>> combined. . .
>
>Yeah. Because every other planet in Trek is exactly like earth. It is
>absurd in the extreme. It makes very little sense for 70% of all planets to
>be "class M" when only 11% are that way in our own solar system!!!!
most likely ever star that has planets, which is now thought to be
the majority of the stars, will have one or two planets that are
relatively earth like as far as the atmospheric conditions go.
so the assertion that most stars have an earth like planet is
valid as far as anyone know to now.
also star trek has never said that all the planets are class M.
if you actuallyed listened to the show you frequently hear them
say things like rigel 4 or sol 3. in case you didnt catch on
to the naming convention it is this, the planets orbit number
following the star. they have always suggested that only one or
two planets in a solar system are close to earth like conditions.
--
buckysan: does anyone else like ani-mayhem?
James Grady Ward
In article <328dc077...@news.earthlink.net>, ori...@earthlink.net (orionca) writes:
>On Wed, 13 Nov 1996 10:48:40 -0800, "Joseph M. Osborne" <jmo...@sac.uky.edu>
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Conclusion, UFP is bigger than Centauri, Minbari, Earth, and all other powers
>>combined. . .
>>
>>Joseph M. Osborne
>
>Star Trek assumes that every other star has a solar system with habitable (Class
>M) planets. Babylon V is a bit more realistic/up to date, using current
>astronomical predictions for planetary formation.
star trek does not assume this, they follow what is currently believed
by astronmers. almost all stars have planets and of the ones that have
planets most of them will have one or two planets that match earth like
conditions. if you listen to the show, you will notice that they are
usually visiting the third or fourth planet in a solar system.
>It's not that easy to form a star system. Half the stars in the galaxy belong
>to binary/multi star groups. This makes it hard for those to form planetary
>accretion rings or capture wanderers into stable orbits. As for the rest, most
>are too large/too cold/too hot/too young/etc. to have the necessary 'temperate'
>zones for so-called "Class M" planets to form. And no one knows exactly WHY or
>WHERE you get rocky, iron-core planets instead of giant gas balls.
they have really good ideas about how the various planets form, read some current
astronmy books. the inner planets are rocky because in the early formation of the
solar system it was to hot for the light elemets to exist as liquids and solids and
in gasous form the proto sun could pull them away from the planets. the outer planets
are made up of almost entirely nebula dust (hydrogen and helium) just like the
sun is. actually jupiter would be a star if its mass was just like 3 times more
or something like that.
multi star groups have been found to have planetary rings, they would just be
further out. and the accretion rings you are talking about have to exist around
all stars by the current theories of how stars form, the only question is if the
material in the rings is dense enough generally to form planets. also no where
have i ever heard it seriously suggest that planets are caught as wanderers. the
odds of that are extremely low, but would actually be higher in a double or triple
star system due to a larger mass.
all main sequence stars, which acounts for 98% of the stars, will have a 'temperate'
zone. now there may not be planets in it and life may not have developed on the
one that are in it, but the zone will exist.
>If there are 1000 habitable/terraformable planets in the Milky Way, I'll be
>pleasantly surprised. (I don't expect to live long enough to read the final
>talley, but that's another matter...) BV, with its hundreds, instead of
>thousands, of habitable worlds, is probably much closer to the mark than Star
>Trek.
lets see, 100 billion stars means that you are saying only one in 10 million stars
have planets. read some current books on astronmy you are way off. now if only
one in 10 million stars has life that may be, but most likely 1 in 10 stars( or less)
will have a planet that can be made habitable with a little work.
Nathan Domagalski
It's kind of a hard to describe what's good and what's bad with Star Trek
"looking too pretty." Perhaps the replicators and computer consoles are
the quickie tools used to solve the mundane problems. That leaves the
characters free to use their wits to solve the *big* problem in a given
episode. Of course, maybe the technology itself is used too often as a
solution ("Bombard the [insert target name] with a [insert wacky word]
particle burst!" -- how times has that happened?).
I must admit that I think Star Trek may seem a bit too perfect, but new
technology was always a part of the show. It sort of gave a picture of
what the future had to offer.
One last point -- although you may argue that ST is too pretty, shouldn't
the arguement really be "Starfleet" is too pretty? There are quite a few
examples of alien races on the various ST series who suffer the troubles of
no food or water, lack of money (and forced to barter or gamble), run-down
starships, etc. I don't know, maybe it's just me -- I like to see that the
heroes have the best tools/weapons.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
N. Domagalski
Home email: na...@ptdprolog.net
Lone Gunmen: "Mulder, you look down. You're welcome to come over
on Saturday. We're going to jump on the internet
and nitpick the scientific inaccuracies of Earth
2."
Mulder: "I'm doing my laundry."
Desco <de...@purdue.edu> wrote in article
<Pine.SV4.3.95.961115...@crier.cc.purdue.edu>...
> On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, orionca wrote:
>
> > Star Trek assumes that every other star has a solar system with
habitable (Class
> > M) planets. Babylon V is a bit more realistic/up to date, using
current
> > astronomical predictions for planetary formation.
>
> I hate to sound anti-Star Trek -- I watched TNG every night, hated
> the first season of DS9 (It's gotten a lot better), and occasionally
catch
> Voyager between classes. But the one thing I absolutely HATE about ST is
> the "prettiness" of the whole thing. Here's what I mean:
> On a Star Trek (TNG & beyond) Starship, they have replicators,
> transporters, and million-kiloquad computers. There's little need for a
> monetary system since they can replicate almost anything. When some
> automated function stops working, the officer says "I'm going to do it
> manually" and is still pressing buttons on their console.
> In Star Wars, Babylon 5, Wing Commander games, and old-time series
> such as Buck Rogers, it was a different story. They have to barter and
> trade to get an important ship part. They run out of money. Their ships
> are pieces of JUNK that always need repair. And doing something manually
> means breaking off the panels and re-wiring something, or going down to
> the torpedo room and shoving the torpedo in manually (Janeway rocks!)
>
> Personally, I like the later. What's your take?
>
> Desco
>
>
>
James Grady Ward
In article <328CBB...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov>, Steve Sloan <sl...@mapsrus.msfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>Dodge Boy wrote:
>
>> The Sol system has one M class planet, and one that now it looks like
>> was an M class at one time (Mars), also the moon of Europa could be
>> close to an M-class
>
>There's a possibility Europa has life, but if it does, the lifeforms
>would live under miles of ice, and live off sulfur compounds coming from
>geysers down there. No human could live there without special life
>support. Inhabited does not necessarily mean "Class M"... I thought
>Class M worlds had to be habitable by a human without life support, if
>not comfortable.
>
i dont think they ever really defined class M on the show, but most assume
it means earth like in terms of atmosphere and such. the only thing clearly
said in the show is that humans can live on class M planets with out life
support.
Reepicheep
> I hate to sound anti-Star Trek -- I watched TNG every night, hated
> the first season of DS9 (It's gotten a lot better), and occasionally catch
> Voyager between classes. But the one thing I absolutely HATE about ST is
> the "prettiness" of the whole thing.
I have watched every episode of ST in every one of it's incarnations. So I do
like the saga; BUT you raise one problem I have with it. ST is too "clean" -
increased technology is not going to change human nature. There will always be
the criminal element, racism, etc. among us Though this doesn't mean we
shouldn't try to improve ourselves).
But B5 is much more realistic. Thieves, killers, bigots, etc. That's human
nature. It's not good but it just is. And it needs to be dealt with, not
glossed over.
BTW, I am NOT one of those who think ST is popular because of the "rosy"
picture of the future it presents. I'm not sure who started that rumor. It's
popular because Sci-Fi is exciting and ST, for all its problems, does do a good
job of presenting Sci-Fi - most of the time.
--
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
><> Reepicheep ><> ><> Darkness to Light ><>
><> g...@usaor.net ><> http://www.usaor.net/dtl/ ><>
Jennifer Taylor
Why not the Star Trek dudes use that person , the "Travellers" method of
travelling at the speed of thought ?. He took Enterprise to a place which was
at the Rim of the Universe and brought it back when they were testing the
warp drives. This person takes Crusher ( Wesley ) with him in some other
episdode.
Also they have the design parameters of the warp drie that was used by
that silly engineer who got invaded by the 8th dimensional being and brought
them to 8th dimension. They travelled using TransWArp and they do have the design data with them.
Sometimes i wonder if the story writer ever go back abd look what they did!.
If they ever did, They would have a Star Ship that will have Cloaking TEch
with Metaphasic Sheilds, cloak and then go through matter, quantum anti-
matter missiles and torpedoes, transwarp and inter-dimensional warp!.
Will make Federation rule the entire four quadrants and even go and tease
Q a bitput the table cloth on his head for a change.
AI at JPL (mal...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: > In "Now For a Word" it was revealed that Earth had only a dozen or so
: > colonies. I think in the Pilot movie, Londo said the Centauri Republic
: > had only a few dozen worlds. Babylon 5's star, Epsilon Eridani, is only
: > 11 or so LY from Earth. Coincidentally (?) it is also the traditional
: > home-star of Vulcan. That is considered neutral territory at the
: juncture
: > of all the powers. And it is only 11 LY from Earth! We are 28,000 LY
: from
: > galactic core for reference purposes, the radius is around 50,000 LY
: I think that Earth-like worlds must be few and far between. Like in a real
: universe. That is why they have only colonized 12 or so. Not to mention
: getting enough people together who want to move another planet and sending
: ships to protect said colony.......
: >
: > The Federation has around 150 member worlds according to the Encyclopedia
: > and apparently hundreds or thousands of minor colony worlds. It is
: apparently
: > bigger and has faster propulsion.
: An average Star Trek ship couldn't cross the Federation in your lifetime.
: It takes subspace a couple of weeks to get from one end of the Federation
: to the other. Some 60% of the Federation is un explored or barely charted.
: And that by long range sensors. The Federation is HUGE yes. But the time it
: takes to get from one end of the Federation to the other is assinine to say
: the least. They made it to big for warp engines. Now if the Federation had
: jump engines....
: Oh and Earth has only been on the scene for about 120 years in B5(if that
: long). The Federation is at least 250 years old and is made up of muliple
: races.
: >
: > The reason for dividing up the galaxy?, they were making very long range
: plans.
: > Most of inhabited space would be on the "flame" border. One side would
: belong
: > to the Centauri forever, Shadows would get the other half. Like Germany
: and Japan
: > dividing up the Americas and such in the Axis pact (I think), plans for
: the very
: > distant future, assuming they are completely successful.
: Nope. They can get anywhere in the Galaxy within hours.
: >
: > Conclusion, UFP is bigger than Centauri, Minbari, Earth, and all other
: powers
: > combined. . .
: Yeah. Because every other planet in Trek is exactly like earth. It is
: absurd in the extreme. It makes very little sense for 70% of all planets to
: be "class M" when only 11% are that way in our own solar system!!!!
: --
: Cronan Thompson
: First Officer of
: the USS Megadittos
: 60. Tribbles and Vorlons hold the
: answers to the universe.
: Any misspellings in the abuve ritings
: are halusinasions. Egnore dem!!!
:
--
Regards,
Jennifer.
email : mus...@lux.latrobe.edu.au
http : http://lux.latrobe.edu.au/~musjmt
===============================================================================
Note : My Home Page in incomplete at the moment and will be up soon. Anyone |
wanting to know about astral travelling and other occult stuff, my |
page is the one to look for information is free and i will answer the |
questions if i have time. Any reccomendations are welcome. Specially |
those people who are smarties in making home pages look cool. |
I am not so good in that as my computer skills are very low. |
===============================================================================
gr.w...@student.canterbury.ac.nz
I think the Star Trek has to be "pretty" if it's going to realistically
portray life in the 24th century. Just think of the difference between a
1596 Navy and a 1996 Navy. There was a scene on Babylon 5 where someone
complained he couldn't get eggs for breakfast. In "pretty" Star Trek the
replicator solves this problem. This may not be realistic but in a few
centuries doesn't it make sense we'd have some way to get fresh eggs to a
space station? I won't even mention the ultimate "unpretty" series Space:
Above and Beyond, where they can travel between the stars but still can't
get rid of cockroaches.
Kyonghun Lee
Voyager wrote:
> > space station? I won't even mention the ultimate "unpretty" series Space:
> > Above and Beyond, where they can travel between the stars but still can't
> > get rid of cockroaches.
Well they WILL survive the nuclear war...
Besides, they are all aliens. Just ask agent Mulder from the X-files.
KYong
--
_________________________________________________________________________
|Kyonghun Lee |
| | \ / | Class of '93 | || || | Class of 199X |
| | \/ | University of \ \/ /\ \/ / University of Wisconsin |
| | |\ /| | Michigan Mech.E. \ / \ / Mechanical Engineering |
|| |\/| | Go Blue! | | | | Go Badgers?...NOT! |
|kyon...@cae.wisc.edu & http://smartcad.me.wisc.edu/~kyonghun/kh.html
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard Kiteman
Steve Sloan wrote:
>
> Dodge Boy wrote:
>
> > The Sol system has one M class planet, and one that now it looks like
> > was an M class at one time (Mars), also the moon of Europa could be
> > close to an M-class
>
> There's a possibility Europa has life, but if it does, the lifeforms
> would live under miles of ice, and live off sulfur compounds coming from
> geysers down there. No human could live there without special life
> support. Inhabited does not necessarily mean "Class M"... I thought
> Class M worlds had to be habitable by a human without life support, if
> not comfortable.
Arthur C. Clarke addressed this in "2061: Odyssey Three" (his
second semi-sequel to "2001: A Space Odyssey".
Steve Sloan wrote:
Voyager
On 17 Nov 1996 gr.w...@student.canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
> I think the Star Trek has to be "pretty" if it's going to realistically
> portray life in the 24th century. Just think of the difference between a
> 1596 Navy and a 1996 Navy. There was a scene on Babylon 5 where someone
> complained he couldn't get eggs for breakfast. In "pretty" Star Trek the
> replicator solves this problem. This may not be realistic but in a few
> centuries doesn't it make sense we'd have some way to get fresh eggs to a
> Above and Beyond, where they can travel between the stars but still can't
> get rid of cockroaches.
Just like Star Trek was almost called "Wagon Train to the Stars,"
I think Space, Above and Beyond was originally to air as "Space 90210."
Kyonghun Lee
Reepicheep wrote:
> I have watched every episode of ST in every one of it's incarnations. So I do
> like the saga; BUT you raise one problem I have with it. ST is too "clean" -
> But B5 is much more realistic. Thieves, killers, bigots, etc. That's human
> nature. It's not good but it just is. And it needs to be dealt with, not
> glossed over.
I'd say that it really does not matter whether it is more realistic or
not, since
ST setting WORKS. The setting of ST does not really get in the way of
making the
audience "BUY" into the show because it really is NOT about the setting
at all.
It is about the characters and the situations they are put in.
I bet ST will fare well with B5-resque setting, too.
But in B5s case, the setting *IS* the major point. It *IS* about the
setting
so it HAS to be more realistic (more like our own, that is.)
> BTW, I am NOT one of those who think ST is popular because of the "rosy"
> picture of the future it presents. I'm not sure who started that rumor. It's
Same here. it is something Paramount/Roddenberry thought up to agrandize
themselves.
it is a good fun show. It is not about human spirit or anything that
grand.
as a lot of them want us to believe.
> popular because Sci-Fi is exciting and ST, for all its problems, does do a good
> job of presenting Sci-Fi - most of the time.
I agree completely.
kyong
A.L.Fitzgerald
In article <56mcrh$t...@news.latrobe.edu.au>,
--------------------------------
Okay, they call it the EPSILON system, but ive never heard it called Epsilon
Eridani, it could be epsilon Indi, or a more distant star not yet named by us-
For example- there is reference to the Orion system -Orion 7 colony, one which
broke away from earth- Orion is a constellation, not a single star....so
obviously they named it the orion system because its was a previously unamed
system in the general direction of the orion constellation. Also, Vega, a
little further away than Epsilon Eridani, is an earth colony.
I have also heard reference to the Rigel (Or it may have been
Beltegeuse) system by sheridan, saying he visited there or something( its a
star in the orion constellation) and trust me, Rigel is a damn sight further
away than Epsilon Eridani. So then its more probable that its a previously
unnamed system, named epsilon.
Of course, i may be wrong, and JMS may have no comprehension of the distances
of different stars( oops, hope he doesnt read this)
From me to you lot
Alec Fitzgerald - write me
James Grady Ward
MCA...@news.salford.ac.uk (A.L.Fitzgerald) writes:
>Okay, they call it the EPSILON system, but ive never heard it called Epsilon
>Eridani, it could be epsilon Indi, or a more distant star not yet named by us-
>For example- there is reference to the Orion system -Orion 7 colony, one which
>broke away from earth- Orion is a constellation, not a single star....so
>obviously they named it the orion system because its was a previously unamed
>system in the general direction of the orion constellation. Also, Vega, a
>little further away than Epsilon Eridani, is an earth colony.
eridani and indi are the same distance basicly(10.7 and 11.2 ly)
it is unlikely a new star would be given the name epsilon. currently
new stars are given letter and number names that desribe what type
of star they are.
and for the record a star named epsilon eridani is the fifth brightest
star in the constellation eridani, if they are using the normal naming
conventions for stars. anytime you see a greek letter staring the
name, it should mean you find out what number the letter is in the
greek alphabet and the star is that far from being the brighest in
the grouping called by the rest of the name. so really the system being
called epsilon is a mistake on their part.
just because a colony is named orion 7, does not have to mean it has
anything to do with orion. or is bablyon 5 orbiting something called
bablyon?
>
>I have also heard reference to the Rigel (Or it may have been
>Beltegeuse) system by sheridan, saying he visited there or something( its a
>star in the orion constellation) and trust me, Rigel is a damn sight further
>away than Epsilon Eridani. So then its more probable that its a previously
>unnamed system, named epsilon.
rigel is 910 light years away. now if we say e.Eridani(thats the way
the star is listed in star charts) is 10 light years away, then rigel is
only 91 times as far. it takes at most a day to get from bablyon to earth.
why would it be so hard to beleive that someone took a trip that was
3 months to get there and 3 months to get back? actually i think it only
takes 6 hours to get to the station from earth so it would be more like
a month each way.
and again if it is a new system, it would have either a pure letter/number
designation, such as NGC 1952 or HD 87901. of course normal name could
be given to the star as well if it were to be commonly visited but it would
not be a greek letter unless the people naming it were very drunk.
>
>Of course, i may be wrong, and JMS may have no comprehension of the distances
>of different stars( oops, hope he doesnt read this)
--
Neil Olsen
On 17 Nov 1996 19:38:40 GMT, gr.w...@student.canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
>I think the Star Trek has to be "pretty" if it's going to realistically
>portray life in the 24th century. Just think of the difference between a
>1596 Navy and a 1996 Navy. There was a scene on Babylon 5 where someone
>complained he couldn't get eggs for breakfast. In "pretty" Star Trek the
>replicator solves this problem. This may not be realistic but in a few
>centuries doesn't it make sense we'd have some way to get fresh eggs to a
>space station? I won't even mention the ultimate "unpretty" series Space:
>Above and Beyond, where they can travel between the stars but still can't
>get rid of cockroaches.
>
However, remember how far our technology has advanced in just 150
years. A food vending machine was considered by Jules Verne and other
fantasy writers as just that - fantasy...ditto, visits to the moon,
genetic science, test tube babies. To me, I believe that Star Trek's
vision of technology is not far off target. After all, just look at
mankind's accomplishments today versus accomplishments and scientific
benchmarks of 200 years or even 100 years ago. Food processors,
microwave ovens, garage door openers, even electric appliances of all
sorts are recent inventions and discoveries.
It's all relative.
Neil Olsen
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
A House Divided Cannot Stand
Congress excepted, of course
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Joyce Harmon
In article <56rb7a$p...@nadine.teleport.com>, nco...@teleport.com says...
Right - four hundred years ago, "sweeping the floor" would just smooth out
the dirt.
Joyce
Joseph M. Osborne
There has been much discussion recently
about how many habitable worlds are there
and how this could be used to figure
out the relative speed of WD and JG.
This is aimed mainly at the B5 crowd, but
the ST types might find it interesting too.
B5 types seem to say that there are too many
habitable worlds in ST. Well, maybe we do
have more than the natural amount and we may
have an excuse you will seem a little familiar.
In B5, the Vorlons, Shadows, Walkers, ect, have
been fiddling with younger races for millenia.
In ST we have a similar deal. Two races in ST
have been filling this role.
First, The Preservers. From TOS "The Paradise
Syndrome." Revealed to go about the galaxy
transplanting humanoid life from world, to
world. They worked as recently as around
1400's.
Second, our "First Ones". From TNG "The Chase".
They went around the galaxy seeding worlds with
organic molecules and genetic material. They
existed long before any other sentient race, and
died out before any of their "offspring" knew of
them.
It is reasonable to assume that one or both of
these races also went around terraforming many
suitable worlds before planting life on them.
This would artificially inflate the count of
habitable worlds. Thus explaining why ST has
more "Class M" planets than B5.
This is not meant to put down B5 or ST, I am
a fan of both (YES, it's possible) and I am
trying to be objective.
Joseph M. Osborne
Barry
Desco wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, orionca wrote:
>
> > Star Trek assumes that every other star has a solar system with habitable (Class
> > M) planets. Babylon V is a bit more realistic/up to date, using current
> > astronomical predictions for planetary formation.
>
> the first season of DS9 (It's gotten a lot better), and occasionally catch
> Voyager between classes. But the one thing I absolutely HATE about ST is
> the "prettiness" of the whole thing.
It's not the "prettiness" of the technology that I dislike about
the "Star Trek" universe, it's the perfection of mankind in a mere few
hundred years' time that bothers me. The Enterprise and Voyager project
a future that's like living 24-hours a day in Disneyland where everything
and everyone are the same. Even the only "bad" guy on Voyager, that
former-Maquis who was conspiring with Seska, got killed-off. Kirk,
Picard and Janeway are Mickey Mouse in uniforms. Yet, I guess
stripping-away all of the "real world" problems like politics, budgets
and conflict makes it easier to write episodes that have to explore a
message and yet satisfy the people who watch Star Trek for the phaser
blasts and transporter effects.
I'm sorry, but, human beings today are not much different than
human beings of 500 years ago in terms of the good and bad qualities that
make us what we are, and, those qualities aren't going to change much in
the next 500 years, either. I think, though, that's the reason I get
this perverse pleasure from watching Star Trek - to imagine an existence
that's so simple and predictable, so different from my real life. As
fantasy, it's A-OK, and I think that's all we should expect it to be
(fantasy, I mean).
I hate it when the Star Trek universe time travels back to the
20th Century and the Star Trek characters constantly slam this time.
Just once, I'd like someone from the 20th Century to answer-back, saying
something like, "You know, everything you've said about our century is
true, but, judging from you guys, I'd say mankind will eventually bore
itself to death."
Barry
Chris Young
In article <328C6A...@afit.af.mil>, dl...@afit.af.mil says...
>
>Joseph M. Osborne wrote:
>>
>> The Dragon wrote:
>IMHO this is probably like comparing apples and oranges, due
>to the different assumptions underlying the 2 shows. First off, B5
>is probably assuming that "class M" planets are few and far between,
>rightly so. There may be only 1 or 2 such planets in our whole
>spiral arm of the galaxy, for all we know. And then, given that
>you have some sort of FTL tech to get you around the galaxy, there
>are still ~100 billion stars to sort through.
Actually there should be quite a few M class planets, since there are about
200 billion stars, and any long-lived star with planets will be bound to
have at least ONE planet with the right temperature to form earth-like
conditions, even if the gravity is different.
>
>Finally, in the
>B5 conception, there is apparently not a linear, uniform
>mapping between hyperspace and normalspace. Thousands of
>parsecs in normalspace may correspond to only a day's "jump"
>in hyperspace in one case, while a different, say 5-day
>jump in another hyperspatial direction may "only" carry you
>a couple of light-years in another case. So the map of the
>galaxy may not be as important as the map of the underlying
>hyperspatial distances.
>
>B5 gives me the impression that it is not the actual
>traversing of the distances that is the problem,
>but rather, it's the hyperspatial navigation that is the
>major difficulty. If you knew the proper point to exit
>hyperspace, you could theoretically go anywhere you
>wanted in the galaxy in short order. Add to that what I
>assume is the B5 implication that hyperspace is
>constantly changing in a chaotic, sort of
>"meteorological" manner, constantly being stirred
>up by gravitational tides and turbulent eddies. Hence
>the need for the hyperspatial "lock-on beacons", for
>example.
>
They DID speak of differing levels of hyperspace (level 1 etc).
so it may be that higher levels, which make for shorter distances, are more
difficult to navigate due to less connection with the universe (assuming the
literal interpretation of the term "hyperspace" v. "subspace."
The idea of "tides and eddies" is interesting since this involves the idea
of free universal matter in hyperspace which come to make up separate
universes, however there's no way to find other ones due to lack of points
of reference outside of our own universe.
>--
>**************************************************************************
>"That's ASYMPTOTICALLY Kazinsky, not ASYMPTOMATICALLY, you moron!"
>
"But there were NO symptoms!"
Timo S Saloniemi
In article <32924E...@sac.uky.edu> "Joseph M. Osborne" <jmo...@sac.uky.edu> writes:
>B5 types seem to say that there are too many
>habitable worlds in ST. Well, maybe we do
>have more than the natural amount and we may
>have an excuse you will seem a little familiar.
>
>In B5, the Vorlons, Shadows, Walkers, ect, have
>been fiddling with younger races for millenia.
>In ST we have a similar deal. Two races in ST
>have been filling this role.
>
>First, The Preservers. From TOS "The Paradise
>Syndrome." Revealed to go about the galaxy
>transplanting humanoid life from world, to
>world. They worked as recently as around
>1400's.
I thought they got the Amerinds of that episode from
our 18th century? Or even 19th?
>Second, our "First Ones". From TNG "The Chase".
>They went around the galaxy seeding worlds with
>organic molecules and genetic material. They
>existed long before any other sentient race, and
>died out before any of their "offspring" knew of
>them.
And third, the "Sargonians" from "Return to Tomorrow" apparently
transplanted the Vulcans to Vulcan. It may not be uncommon at all that
advanced races see it their divine duty to spread life across the
galaxy...
>It is reasonable to assume that one or both of
>these races also went around terraforming many
>suitable worlds before planting life on them.
>This would artificially inflate the count of
>habitable worlds. Thus explaining why ST has
>more "Class M" planets than B5.
Also, there are major interstellar empires at probably more or less
regular intervals in Trek history who go around altering planets
to the needs of their *own* species. The Iconians, the Tkon, the
"Tin Man" people may all have altered hundreds or thousands of
planets - and since the "First Ones" have given most races a common
inheritance of compatible DNA and eventual humanoid form, all the
empires would pretty much be making human-compatible, class M worlds.
>Joseph M. Osborne
Timo Saloniemi
.
.
Stephan A. Manchir
I think one thing people are forgetting is that we really only see the
"Star Trek" universe through StarFleet, which only accepts the "best
and the brightest" from the umpteen trillion people in the Federation,
and even on DS we see very little of non-Starfleet life. That said,
Star Trek has always been based on an optimistic view of the future,
that's a given.
I do find it funny, tho, that one of the themes of the last DS9 was a
group of protesters on Risa that felt the people of the Federation
were getting too lazy and pampered. So at least people are thinking of
such things.
(and although it's not what the subject means, if anyone is guilty of
"making space pretty" it's B-5, with their totally gratiutious placing
of nebulas and multicolored gas clouds in every other shot ;)
"There is an art, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies
in learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss"
- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
sa...@po.cwru.edu http://k2.scl.cwru.edu/~sam14
ead...@ibm.net
In <32940B...@tezcat.com>, Barry <ba...@tezcat.com> writes:
>Desco wrote:
[snip]
>Here's what I mean:
>> On a Star Trek (TNG & beyond) Starship, they have replicators,
>> transporters, and million-kiloquad computers. There's little need for a
>> monetary system since they can replicate almost anything. When some
>> automated function stops working, the officer says "I'm going to do it
>> manually" and is still pressing buttons on their console.
I always wondered about that "manual" control... I'm confused--I thought
that there was a monetary system or is that just so they can deal with
species like the Ferengie? Still, I agree there's little point to it... They must
have some OS to do all that "automation" the enviromental system is
enough to boggle the mind.
>> In Star Wars, Babylon 5, Wing Commander games, and old-time series
>> such as Buck Rogers, it was a different story. They have to barter and
>> trade to get an important ship part. They run out of money. Their ships
>> are pieces of JUNK that always need repair. And doing something manually
>> means breaking off the panels and re-wiring something, or going down to
>> the torpedo room and shoving the torpedo in manually (Janeway rocks!)
>>
Actually, in the old series things did have to be done manually and Spock
or Uhura would be found with soddering gun in hand. I just recently watched
some old Battlestar Galactica (first series) and really preferred it over Star
Trek because the technologies weren't perfect and neither were the people.
I also still love the old style effects like in StarWars & Battlestar. I hate
the overly bright background stars used in DS9 and the new shots of the
first Enterprise left a bad taste in my mouth. They should have taken care
to use established shots from the old series instead of the close ups.
Babylon 5's use of computer graphics is nice (but I wasn't impressed by the
giant Vorlon ships) and doesn't get in the way. Between the two, B5 is a
more likely future than the pseudo Utopia of Star Trek. I've got to say that
the morals of the Star Trek characters are as bad as daytime soaps these
days and I've found that not adding to my enjoyment of the show(s)--quite
the contrary. What happened to actual relationships?
Still, Sci-Fi is big enough for the Utopian Trek and the grittier B5.
imho,
-Ed.
Greg Francis
In article <56q1k4$d...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, jgw...@eos.ncsu.edu (James Grady
Ward) wrote:
> rigel is 910 light years away. now if we say e.Eridani(thats the way
> the star is listed in star charts) is 10 light years away, then rigel is
> only 91 times as far. it takes at most a day to get from bablyon to earth.
> why would it be so hard to beleive that someone took a trip that was
> 3 months to get there and 3 months to get back? actually i think it only
> takes 6 hours to get to the station from earth so it would be more like
> a month each way.
In "Message from Earth," the jump to Earth from Babylon 5 was two days in
the White Star which I suspect goes faster than the standard transport
ship or scout.
> and again if it is a new system, it would have either a pure letter/number
> designation, such as NGC 1952 or HD 87901. of course normal name could
> be given to the star as well if it were to be commonly visited but it would
> not be a greek letter unless the people naming it were very drunk.
I would expect that to change once a planet is inhabited. There is
Sigma-957, an uninhabited planet where the First Ones are. There have been
other planets that contain a number in the name but they have always had a
full name to go with it. Currently, it makes since to use numbers because
we haven't been to any of these stars. Once we're there and colonized,
we'll no doubt want to give it a name a little more personable.
Greg
--
Greg and Stacy Francis
gfra...@iea.com
Macintosh users and proud of it.
Shah
> One last point -- although you may argue that ST is too pretty, shouldn't
> the arguement really be "Starfleet" is too pretty? There are quite a few
> examples of alien races on the various ST series who suffer the troubles of
> no food or water, lack of money (and forced to barter or gamble), run-down
Re lack of water:
While I admit that it is a good example of "unpretty" startrek. I have
always found it hard to believe that a race that can build powerful and
advanced interstellar starships powered by massive antimatter or fusion
power sources have not yet figured out how to synthesize water.
You put together the hydrogen and the oxygen guys!
---Peter Shah
Joyce Harmon
In article
<Peter_Shah-24...@gradcd-bootp-217.gradcenter.brown.edu>,
Peter...@Postoffice.Brown.edu says...
If you're referring to the Kazon, they didn't "build" anything - they stole
all their technology, and probably even the ships themselves, from the
Trabe. Note in Alliances, when Voyager first meets up with the Trabe fleet,
they think it's Kazon, because the ships are identical.
Joyce
James Grady Ward
In article <gfrancis-231...@spk0a-19.iea.com>, gfra...@iea.com (Greg Francis) writes:
>In article <56q1k4$d...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, jgw...@eos.ncsu.edu (James Grady
>Ward) wrote:
>
>> rigel is 910 light years away. now if we say e.Eridani(thats the way
>> the star is listed in star charts) is 10 light years away, then rigel is
>> only 91 times as far. it takes at most a day to get from bablyon to earth.
>> why would it be so hard to beleive that someone took a trip that was
>> 3 months to get there and 3 months to get back? actually i think it only
>> takes 6 hours to get to the station from earth so it would be more like
>> a month each way.
>
>In "Message from Earth," the jump to Earth from Babylon 5 was two days in
>the White Star which I suspect goes faster than the standard transport
>ship or scout.
well i am not sure how long it took to get to earth in that episode.
they were off the station for four days, but they first had to go
to where the white star was and then go to earth. i figure that the
white star was closer to membari space than to earth is where i got
it taking one day from for a straight trip.
>
>> and again if it is a new system, it would have either a pure letter/number
>> designation, such as NGC 1952 or HD 87901. of course normal name could
>> be given to the star as well if it were to be commonly visited but it would
>> not be a greek letter unless the people naming it were very drunk.
>
>I would expect that to change once a planet is inhabited. There is
>Sigma-957, an uninhabited planet where the First Ones are. There have been
>other planets that contain a number in the name but they have always had a
>full name to go with it. Currently, it makes since to use numbers because
>we haven't been to any of these stars. Once we're there and colonized,
>we'll no doubt want to give it a name a little more personable.
>
star already have personalized names. i dont have my books with me
at the moment but i think the HD number i gave is for rigel. i am
sure that any star with more than just an outpost would get a "name",
it just wont be a greek letter because of how they are currently
used in the offical namings of stars.
James Grady Ward
In article <3294ec37...@news.mindspring.com>, eq...@mindspring.com (M.D.B.) writes:
>On 21 Nov 1996 21:44:17 GMT, par...@webbernet.net (Chris Young)
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Actually there should be quite a few M class planets, since there are about
>>200 billion stars, and any long-lived star with planets will be bound to
>>have at least ONE planet with the right temperature to form earth-like
>>conditions, even if the gravity is different.
>>
>There is much more involved in creating a habitable planet than simply
>the temperature. Yes, gravity is one of them. Then you must consider
>the available elements. It there enough oxygen and hydrogen to make
>water? Is there enough carbon to make enough organic chemicals to
>make the production of life a likelihood? What other type of
>radiation is falling on the planet? Is there a lot of debris in the
>system that may impact the planet?
ever take a serious look at how much debris is in our
solar system....
>
>All of these things can disrupt the potential for life on world.
but it has never been said that class M planets have to have
life on them. the only thing i ever remember being said in
star trek is that they have oxygen/nitrogen atmospheres such
that you can breathe. did they ever list any other of the
properties of class M planets?
BTW as long as you havent somehow found a population 3 star, it will
have formed from a cloud that has at least carbon and oxygen in it
as well as a lot of iron:)
Cecelia Harvey
Cecelia Harvey <Cece...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
<01bbcf19$8150aa60$9455...@worldnet.worldnet.att.net>...
>
>
> unsubscribe
Neil Olsen
On 25 Nov 1996 04:22:26 GMT, "Cecelia Harvey"
<Cece...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
If you want to unsubscribe, fine do so - JUST GO AWAY!
GA Byrne
Barry (ba...@tezcat.com) wrote:
: It's not the "prettiness" of the technology that I dislike about
: I'm sorry, but, human beings today are not much different than
: make us what we are, and, those qualities aren't going to change much in
: the next 500 years, either. I think, though, that's the reason I get
: this perverse pleasure from watching Star Trek - to imagine an existence
: that's so simple and predictable, so different from my real life. As
: fantasy, it's A-OK, and I think that's all we should expect it to be
: (fantasy, I mean).
The other thing that really annoys me is the way the humanity are always to
superior to everybody else. Any ancient or powerful race is always arrogant
and strutting. Lacking humanity's compassion, etc. Anyone less primitive
is just a low life form.
There's the Klingons - primative, violent, aggressive, even though not one
of them seems to be very bright they still manage to invent a cloking device
that Starfleet never manage to copy.
There's the Romulans - Even though they appear to be physically and
mentally superior to us with far more advanced technology they are still
arrogant and strutting. Picard looked down his nose at them when they were
first re-encountered at the end of the first series. The planet is, of
course, in political turmoil and requires the help of the enterprise crew to
sort it all out.
The Ferengi - Good little capitalists, we laugh at their ugliness and silly
ways.
Even the Q - a race advanced beyond our strangest imaginings yet even the
lowliest Enterprise crew member regularly look down upon them.
The least reviled of other races in ST universe are the Vulcans, who of
course want to be just like us humans.
When Q introduces Picard to the Borg, Picard even goes on to thank him for
giving humanity something to keep them occupied.
It's all a bit Imperialistic if you ask me.
Compare this to the B5 universe and the cultural interchange between the
main characters. All of the different ways of life are given respect and it
is difficult to dislike even the Centauri.
: I hate it when the Star Trek universe time travels back to the
: 20th Century and the Star Trek characters constantly slam this time.
: Just once, I'd like someone from the 20th Century to answer-back, saying
: something like, "You know, everything you've said about our century is
: true, but, judging from you guys, I'd say mankind will eventually bore
: itself to death."
:
: Barry
:
:
: Here's what I mean:
: > On a Star Trek (TNG & beyond) Starship, they have replicators,
: > transporters, and million-kiloquad computers. There's little need for a
: > monetary system since they can replicate almost anything.
: > Personally, I like the later. What's your take?
: >
: > Desco
Ever read the Micheal Moorcock story (title escapes me) where a race gain
the ability to convert energy to matter (like replicators.) They end up
living ridiculously long and dull lives and just sink to lower and lower
levels of depravity while they try to seek some new pleasure.
I think thats the realistic situation. Power corrupts after all.
- Ged.
Alexander W. Dorn
u5...@cc.keele.ac.uk (GA Byrne) wrote:
>The other thing that really annoys me is the way the humanity are always to
>superior to everybody else. Any ancient or powerful race is always arrogant
>and strutting. Lacking humanity's compassion, etc. Anyone less primitive
>is just a low life form.
Ah, my favorite gripe about the Star Trek series, the utter Arrogance
that the characters have, and each newer series seems to have a
greater degree of arrogance, superiority for those around them.
One reason I liked the original Star Trek was that, while they seemed
to have solved mankind's cultural problems, they did not think that
their way was the best. Quite often, Spock would make references to
our "bloody" history.
The Newer episodes, however, show more and more arrogance.
>It's all a bit Imperialistic if you ask me.
>Compare this to the B5 universe and the cultural interchange between the
>main characters. All of the different ways of life are given respect and it
>is difficult to dislike even the Centauri.
What is amazing about B5 is it's unpredictability. I think this text
is low enough not to spoil anything for people who have not seen the
latest episodes.
Could you have imagined in the first season that Londo would be the
heavy villian, and that G'Kar would be the poor unfortunate soul, or
that the Vorlons would be an enemy by the time things got sorted out?
B5 seems much closer to life, lots of problems, new and old, with
newer ones happening every day. Each day must be lived one step at a
time, as the future is uncertain. For all you know, your commander
could become a historic figure in an alien's history thousands of
years ago, and the person standing next to you could be a latent
telepath, or the poor slob slowly drinking himself to his grave could
one day become the emperor of his society.
And who, as it turns out, are the villains? Well, there the ones who
try to tell everyone else how to live their lives - that their way is
best!