Warp 10

[Richard Gardineer]

Back in TNG Season 1 ("Where No One Has Gone Before"), the
Enterprise was tinkered by the Traveller; as a result, the ship
"exceeded" Warp 10. The only effect was to reach The Energy Field At
The End Of The Universe, where memories and fantasies came true. Why
has no writer (inside and outside Viacom) brought this up? And why
wasn't the technology put on Starfleet Warp Drives?

- Arthur A. Gardineer

[Carlos DaSilva]

Richard Gardineer wrote in article <33C317...@j51.com>...

You will hear a hundred and one different things about this. This is
strictly Trekspeak, so save the real physics and science for another
newsgroup:

1. Warp 10 is impossible. Some theorize that Warp 10 is impossible to
achieve. At Warp 10, the ship is suppose to occupy every single point in
space [ie. you'd be travelling at infinite speed, and thusfore be
everywhere at once]. Which makes for a nice, round upper limit.

2. Warp 10 is not yet possible. Some say that Warp 10 and above is possible
by advanced beings and that Starfleet just hasn't come up with it yet.
Since we abide by the Prime Directive of not giving technology to
primitives, we do not accept technology by superiors (or so it should be.)
In TOS and TNG quite a few supernatural beings have sent the Enterprise
into Warp 10+ situations. The Enterprise manages to hold together, and
everything is wrapped up nicely at episode close.

3. Warp 10 is not OK, but Warp 11 is. Some say that being exactly at Warp
10 is impossible, but going at a speed faster than that is ok. Sort of like
the same theory that nothing move at light speed, but going faster is ok.
The little problem of passing light speed without actually touching it is
ignored. ;) So these alien beings pop the Enterprise into 11 gear, skipping
right past the 10th gear.

Anybody else have any ideas, theories?

CJD

[Anon]

In "Where No One Has Gone Before" Warp 10 was achieved though the mental
abilities of the Traveler. These extrodinary means caused the effect.

Voyager is very baddly written so it's Warp10 Episode can be ignored....
..as can most of its characters.

Enterprise D traveled at warp13 in "All Good Things"

The Romulan plasma-weapon traveled at warp 13.

[Paul Weaver]

In article <5q0bgs$820$1...@news.iag.net>, Anon <an...@truth.net> writes

Obviously the speedometer was broken, Geordit couldn't exactly say
passing warp 9.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
9999999999999999999999999999999 now could he?

>
>Voyager is very baddly written so it's Warp10 Episode can be ignored....
>..as can most of its characters.

I disagree

>
>Enterprise D traveled at warp13 in "All Good Things"
>

But is this a new Warp scale? See Below.

>The Romulan plasma-weapon traveled at warp 13.
>

On the old TOS Scale, warp 14 is around TNG 9.7

Where did it say Warp 13?

TOS takes warp factor, cubes it and you have the speed in c. TNG's scale
increases expenationly to infinity at warp 10.

Paul

[Philip Molter]

On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Anon wrote:

: In "Where No One Has Gone Before" Warp 10 was achieved though the mental

: abilities of the Traveler. These extrodinary means caused the effect.

Actually, it was just very close to Warp 10, not exactly Warp 10.
It was like Warp 9.99999999... To go Warp 10, you literally have
to be at all points in space at once (as I've heard it explained
.. I don't actually know anything to back that up).

: Voyager is very baddly written so it's Warp10 Episode can be ignored....

: ..as can most of its characters.

Actually, some of Voyager is quite good. The Warp 10 Episode
actually explained a lot. Unfortunately, you can't just ignore a
Paramount ST series, as it's pretty much canon.

: Enterprise D traveled at warp13 in "All Good Things"

Yeah, and the Enterprise D existed in that future too. Obviously,
there are some discrepencies between that future and the actual
one that is to be lived out by Picard. It was either an alternate
reality or a false one.

: The Romulan plasma-weapon traveled at warp 13.

Was this old TOS? I don't remember this.

Phil

[patrick stewart]

In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.970709...@staff2.texas.net>,
Philip Molter <phi...@texas.net> wrote:

EngageOn Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Anon wrote:
Engage
Engage: In "Where No One Has Gone Before" Warp 10 was achieved though the
mental
Engage: abilities of the Traveler. These extrodinary means caused the effect.
Engage
EngageActually, it was just very close to Warp 10, not exactly Warp 10.
EngageIt was like Warp 9.99999999... To go Warp 10, you literally have
Engageto be at all points in space at once (as I've heard it explained
Engage.. I don't actually know anything to back that up).
Engage
Engage: Voyager is very baddly written so it's Warp10 Episode can be ignored....
Engage: ..as can most of its characters.
Engage
EngageActually, some of Voyager is quite good. The Warp 10 Episode
Engageactually explained a lot. Unfortunately, you can't just ignore a
EngageParamount ST series, as it's pretty much canon.
Engage
Engage: Enterprise D traveled at warp13 in "All Good Things"
Engage
EngageYeah, and the Enterprise D existed in that future too. Obviously,
Engagethere are some discrepencies between that future and the actual
Engageone that is to be lived out by Picard. It was either an alternate
Engagereality or a false one.
Engage
Engage: The Romulan plasma-weapon traveled at warp 13.
Engage
EngageWas this old TOS? I don't remember this.
Engage
EngagePhil

No one cann trully achieve warp to except for Q. When any Ship Is said To
Achieve Warp 10 the warp meter is recalibrated, the ship is actually doing
warp 9.9. warp 9.99 is warp 11, warp 12 is 10.999 and warp 13 is 10.9999.
This is easy to understand since its a nother way for the writers to save
their butts from the fans. Now if someone could explain the third nacell.

--
"Sprout Is In The House"

[Rich & Lynn]

Great explanation, now try to see if you can remove the "Engage" from each of the line you repost.

patrick stewart <pstu...@mail.idt.net> wrote in article
<pstuart9-090...@lrno4-4.linknet.net>...

[Arjan Almekinders]

Carlos DaSilva wrote:

Besides the fact that I don't believe you can actually pass warp 10, I
would say:
If you're at Warp 10 you're at infinite speed i.e. you are at a specific
location the same time you choose to go there. So at Warp 11 You are
already there before you've chosen it.

This means that when you pass warp 10 (which is impossible but 9 or 11
*ARE* possible) you're getting back in time. Isn't there kind of a
statement about going back in time....?

--
Arjan Almekinders
http://www.xs4all.nl/~almekind/index.htm
mailto:A.J.Alm...@iName.com

[Steve Pugh]

Richard Gardineer <gard...@j51.com> wrote:

>Back in TNG Season 1 ("Where No One Has Gone Before"), the
>Enterprise was tinkered by the Traveller; as a result, the ship
>"exceeded" Warp 10. The only effect was to reach The Energy Field At
>The End Of The Universe, where memories and fantasies came true. Why
>has no writer (inside and outside Viacom) brought this up? And why
>wasn't the technology put on Starfleet Warp Drives?

This was written early on in TNG and officially it never happened!
Warp ten means being everywhere in the universe at once, according to
the TNG Tech Man and Voyager "Threshold."
The Enterprise made three Traveller assisted jumps. In the first
Geordi had the line about passing Warp Ten. In the second, which took
them to never-never land, the readout on Geordi's console never went
past warp one point five (or whatever), similarly in the third (which
got them back home). So it's likely that the first time either Geordi
or the ship's computer made a mistake.
That line has been retconned, by the TNG tech man, 'cos warp ten is
something different, not just a faster speed than warp 9.99999999, but
a whole different means of transportation. Hence there is no way
Geordi's console could have told him they were passing warp ten.

As to why they don't install the technology in every starship, simple,
it's not a technology. It's a byproduct of the Traveller's advanced
relationship with time and space. No Traveller, no super drive.

Cheers,
Steve

--
Stephen Richard Pugh http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/estate/ax16

"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

[Grif]

On Wed, 09 Jul 1997 00:47:15 -0400, Richard Gardineer
<gard...@j51.com> wrote:

>Back in TNG Season 1 ("Where No One Has Gone Before"), the
>Enterprise was tinkered by the Traveller; as a result, the ship
>"exceeded" Warp 10. The only effect was to reach The Energy Field At
>The End Of The Universe, where memories and fantasies came true. Why
>has no writer (inside and outside Viacom) brought this up? And why
>wasn't the technology put on Starfleet Warp Drives?
>

> - Arthur A. Gardineer

The reason that no-one put this technology into future warp drives is
because in later episodes it is discovered that it was never the
technology or the computations, but rather the power of The Traveller.
Also How come they got to the end of the universe when they exceded
warp 10 but when Tom Paris did it in Voyager he turned into a slug?

The Grifter

[Graham Kennedy]

In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.970709...@staff2.texas.net>,
Philip Molter <phi...@texas.net> writes

>On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Anon wrote:
>
>: In "Where No One Has Gone Before" Warp 10 was achieved though the mental

>: abilities of the Traveler. These extrodinary means caused the effect.
>

>Actually, it was just very close to Warp 10, not exactly Warp 10.

>It was like Warp 9.99999999... To go Warp 10, you literally have

>to be at all points in space at once (as I've heard it explained

>.. I don't actually know anything to back that up).

As I recall Geordi said "We're passing Warp 10...". I took this to mean
that they were going into another dimension or something, where their
instruments gave screwy readings.

>
>: Voyager is very baddly written so it's Warp10 Episode can be ignored....

>: ..as can most of its characters.
>

>Actually, some of Voyager is quite good. The Warp 10 Episode

>actually explained a lot. Unfortunately, you can't just ignore a

>Paramount ST series, as it's pretty much canon.

I hated this episode. It was just so silly. Paris achieved Warp 10, so
why didn't he send a message to Earth while he was there? They said he
had data on some big area around them - dozens of sectors or something -
but why so little? He should have been able to chart the entire
universe! Writers just don't seem to understand the difference between
very, very fast and infinite.

Now that they have this technology, why doesn't Voyager send somebody
home in this shuttle with all the files regarding how to treat the
medical problems ready for when he gets there? Why not send the Doctor,
now that he has a portable holo-emittor and no DNA? Why not make the
same modifications to Voyager and take the whole damn ship back, then
treat everybody when they get there? This episode has holes in it you
could drive a Galaxy class starship through.

I could go one and on about this, I really could. I haven't even
scratched the surface of my hatred for this episode. But I will desist,
because I think the point is made.

>
>: Enterprise D traveled at warp13 in "All Good Things"
>

>Yeah, and the Enterprise D existed in that future too. Obviously,

>there are some discrepencies between that future and the actual

>one that is to be lived out by Picard. It was either an alternate

>reality or a false one.
>

>: The Romulan plasma-weapon traveled at warp 13.
>

>Was this old TOS? I don't remember this.
>

>Phil
>

In TOS, yes. The E herself went at Warp 14.1 once in TOS. They
recalibrated the scale for Next Gen. It's widely assumed that the scale
was recalibrated again in the future, something that is sorely needed.
At the point where someone is on a bridge yelling "they went to Warp
9.99976, damnit! Got to Warp 9.999761!" you know they need to make a
change.

This whole "Warp 10 is infinite speed" was the silliest thing StarTrek
has ever done. If they wanted an upper limit, they should have made it
Warp 100 and called that a million times the speed of light or
something. That would have given them plenty of room to have new ships
achieving higher and higher warp speeds, allowed them to have ships
break the "warp barrier" with exotic tech if they wanted, but still not
mess everybody up with infinite speed.

I gather Rodenberry and some other guy came up with it for some peculiar
reason - well, out of respect for Gene's memory I won't go any further
in that direction.

--
Graham Kennedy

[Steve Pugh]

Graham Kennedy wrote:
>
>I hated this episode. It was just so silly. Paris achieved Warp 10, so
>why didn't he send a message to Earth while he was there? They said he
>had data on some big area around them - dozens of sectors or something -
>but why so little? He should have been able to chart the entire
>universe! Writers just don't seem to understand the difference between
>very, very fast and infinite.

I think they actually mentioned that the shuttles computer memory was
full and that's why they only got data on a few (relatively speaking)
sectors. Makes sense.

>Now that they have this technology, why doesn't Voyager send somebody
>home in this shuttle with all the files regarding how to treat the
>medical problems ready for when he gets there? Why not send the Doctor,
>now that he has a portable holo-emittor and no DNA? Why not make the
>same modifications to Voyager and take the whole damn ship back, then
>treat everybody when they get there? This episode has holes in it you
>could drive a Galaxy class starship through.

There was a line of dialogue in there which stated that they didn't
know how to make then shuttle come out of "warp ten" anywhere other
than where they started. That's the only way that Paris got back to
Voyager.

Problem is that later, when 'evolved' Paris stole the shuttle he went
to another planet and had kiddies with 'evolved' Janeway.
Now maybe that planet was random (in which case why was it close to
Voyager, why not the other side of the universe?).
Which only leaves the idea that 'evolved' Paris figured out how to
control the "warp ten" thingy, but forgot it when he devolved back to
normal.

This episode actually makes sense up to the piont where Paris starts
evolving. From then on it's rubbish of the first order.

[Graham Kennedy]

In article <33c61781...@news.dial.pipex.com>, Steve Pugh
<maf...@dial.pipex.com.?> writes

If they transmit continually while at Warp 10, everybody in the universe
should recieve it as they pass. So load up the suttle with a transmitter
and fire it off.

If they come out at random, why did Paris end up so close to Voyager the
first time? Within a few light years, out of all the universe?

--
Graham Kennedy

[Jonathan McHugh]

In article <zaCPVdAo...@adeadend.demon.co.uk>, Graham Kennedy
<gra...@adeadend.demon.co.uk> writes

>In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.970709...@staff2.texas.net>,
>Philip Molter <phi...@texas.net> writes
>>On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Anon wrote:
>>
>>: In "Where No One Has Gone Before" Warp 10 was achieved though the mental
>>: abilities of the Traveler. These extrodinary means caused the effect.
>>
>>Actually, it was just very close to Warp 10, not exactly Warp 10.
>>It was like Warp 9.99999999... To go Warp 10, you literally have
>>to be at all points in space at once (as I've heard it explained
>>.. I don't actually know anything to back that up).
>
>As I recall Geordi said "We're passing Warp 10...". I took this to mean
>that they were going into another dimension or something, where their
>instruments gave screwy readings.
>
>>
>>: Voyager is very baddly written so it's Warp10 Episode can be ignored....
>>: ..as can most of its characters.
>>
>>Actually, some of Voyager is quite good. The Warp 10 Episode
>>actually explained a lot. Unfortunately, you can't just ignore a
>>Paramount ST series, as it's pretty much canon.
>

>I hated this episode. It was just so silly. Paris achieved Warp 10, so
>why didn't he send a message to Earth while he was there? They said he
>had data on some big area around them - dozens of sectors or something -
>but why so little? He should have been able to chart the entire

The shuttle had run out of memory.

>universe! Writers just don't seem to understand the difference between
>very, very fast and infinite.
>

>Now that they have this technology, why doesn't Voyager send somebody
>home in this shuttle with all the files regarding how to treat the
>medical problems ready for when he gets there? Why not send the Doctor,
>now that he has a portable holo-emittor and no DNA? Why not make the
>same modifications to Voyager and take the whole damn ship back, then
>treat everybody when they get there? This episode has holes in it you
>could drive a Galaxy class starship through.
>

>I could go one and on about this, I really could. I haven't even
>scratched the surface of my hatred for this episode. But I will desist,
>because I think the point is made.

Also Tom's shuttle was travelling at speed close to Warp10 before it
acctually hit warp ten it traveled as Warp 9.9999, So why did they not
fit this technology to Voyager and trevel home at 9.9999 they would get
there in just less that 19 Days at that speed.

>
>>
>>: Enterprise D traveled at warp13 in "All Good Things"

According to my star trek magazine the Warp Speed had been reriten to
acccomidate Intermediate speeds such as warp 9.9 was reriten as Warp 12
and warp 9.999 as warp 13

>>
>>Yeah, and the Enterprise D existed in that future too. Obviously,
>>there are some discrepencies between that future and the actual
>>one that is to be lived out by Picard. It was either an alternate
>>reality or a false one.
>>
>>: The Romulan plasma-weapon traveled at warp 13.
>>
>>Was this old TOS? I don't remember this.
>>
>>Phil
>>
>
>In TOS, yes. The E herself went at Warp 14.1 once in TOS. They
>recalibrated the scale for Next Gen. It's widely assumed that the scale
>was recalibrated again in the future, something that is sorely needed.
>At the point where someone is on a bridge yelling "they went to Warp
>9.99976, damnit! Got to Warp 9.999761!" you know they need to make a
>change.
>
>This whole "Warp 10 is infinite speed" was the silliest thing StarTrek
>has ever done. If they wanted an upper limit, they should have made it
>Warp 100 and called that a million times the speed of light or

Warp10 is not the upper limit, on Startrek TNG "A Final Unity" (The PC
Game) the unity ddevice could reach warp17, at that speed the subject
becomes as big as the universe itself.

>something. That would have given them plenty of room to have new ships
>achieving higher and higher warp speeds, allowed them to have ships
>break the "warp barrier" with exotic tech if they wanted, but still not
>mess everybody up with infinite speed.
>

P.S. Warp10 is 2000 x the speed of light.

>I gather Rodenberry and some other guy came up with it for some peculiar
>reason - well, out of respect for Gene's memory I won't go any further
>in that direction.
>

--
Jonathan McHugh

[Christopher Reid]

Rinze van Huizen wrote:
>
> Jonathan McHugh wrote:
> <--SNIP-->

> > >mess everybody up with infinite speed.
> > >
> > P.S. Warp10 is 2000 x the speed of light.
> >
>

> Excuse me, but that is not true. According to the data Warp 10 is
> infinite speed, ie occupying every point in space at the same time.
>
> even if I'm wrong about this, consider this, the speed exponentially
> increased with ever warp factor, so warp 10 should be a helluva lot
> more than 2000c

That's correct. Warp 9.65 is approximately 2000 times the speed of
light, and as you said, the number rises dramatically from warp 9 on so
something like warp 9.9999 is 200000 times the speed of light.

Chris Reid
CRei...@aol.com

[Rinze van Huizen]

Jonathan McHugh wrote:
<--SNIP-->
> >mess everybody up with infinite speed.
> >
> P.S. Warp10 is 2000 x the speed of light.
>

Excuse me, but that is not true. According to the data Warp 10 is
infinite speed, ie occupying every point in space at the same time.

even if I'm wrong about this, consider this, the speed exponentially
increased with ever warp factor, so warp 10 should be a helluva lot more
than 2000c

just my humble opinion
--

Rinze van Huizen
http://www.il.fontys.nl/~picard
mb...@diespam.hi.ft.hse.nl
to contact me remove the diespam.

[Jon Nailor]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01BC906F.42CC8300
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Using the formulas in the tech manuals...

(1) TOS Warp 10: 10x10x10c=3D1000c
(2) TransWarp 10: 10x10x10x10c=3D10000c (this is used by the =
Excalibur thru Constellation Class ships)
(3) TNG Warp 10: 10x10x10x10x10c=3D100000c (this is used by the =
Galaxy, Intreped, Hope, Defiant, and other newr class ships)
--
Jon Nailor silverheart@tbfdotcom
Anti-spammer remove "dot" and replace
with "."<without the "">.

| Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, =A7227,
| any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address
|is subject to adownload and archival fee in the amount of $500
|US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.

Rinze van Huizen wrote in article =
<33CA15...@diespam.hi.ft.hse.nl>...

------=_NextPart_000_01BC906F.42CC8300
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"Trident 4.71.0544.0"' name=3DGENERATOR>

</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Using the formulas in the tech =
manuals...</FONT>

<OL>
<LI><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TOS Warp 10: =
10x10x10c=3D1000c</FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TransWarp 10: 10x10x10x10c=3D10000c =
(this is=20
used by the Excalibur thru Constellation Class =
ships)</FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TNG Warp 10: =
10x10x10x10x10c=3D100000c (this=20
is used by the Galaxy, Intreped, Hope, Defiant, and other newr =
class=20
ships)</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT></LI>
</OL>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR>
--<BR>
<HTML><BODY><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Jon=20
Nailor&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <A=20
href=3D"mailto:silverheart@tbfdotcom">silverheart@tbfdotcom</A><BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp; Anti-spammer&nbsp;&nbsp; remove &quot;dot&quot; and =
replace<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;=20
with &quot;.&quot;&lt;without the &quot;&quot;&gt;.<BR>
<BR>
| Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, =
&sect;227,<BR>
| any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address<BR>
|is subject to adownload and archival fee in the amount of $500<BR>
|US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.</FONT></FONT>
<FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>
<P></P>
Rinze van Huizen<MB...@DIESPAM.HI.FT.HSE.NL> wrote in article=20
&lt;33CA15...@diespam.hi.ft.hse.nl&gt;...<BR>
<HTML><BODY><FONT size=3D2><BR>
Jonathan McHugh wrote:<BR>
&lt;--SNIP--&gt;<BR>
&gt; &gt;mess everybody up with infinite speed.<BR>
&gt; &gt;<BR>
&gt; P.S. Warp10 is 2000 x the speed of light.<BR>
&gt;<BR>
<BR>
Excuse me, but that is not true. According to the data Warp 10 is<BR>
infinite speed, ie occupying every point in space at the same time.<BR>
<BR>
even if I'm wrong about this, consider this, the speed exponentially<BR>
increased with ever warp factor, so warp 10 should be a helluva lot =
more<BR>
than 2000c<BR>
<BR>
just my humble opinion<BR>
--<BR>
<BR>
Rinze van Huizen<BR>
<A=20
href=3D"http://www.il.fontys.nl/~picard">http://www.il.fontys.nl/~picard<=
/A><BR>
<A =
href=3D"mailto:mb...@diespam.hi.ft.hse.nl">mb...@diespam.hi.ft.hse.nl</A>=
<BR>
to contact me remove the diespam.<BR>
</FONT></FONT>
</BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_01BC906F.42CC8300--

[David Ralphs]

Arjan Almekinders (alme...@xs4all.nl) wrote:

: Besides the fact that I don't believe you can actually pass warp 10, I

: would say:
: If you're at Warp 10 you're at infinite speed i.e. you are at a specific
: location the same time you choose to go there. So at Warp 11 You are
: already there before you've chosen it.

: This means that when you pass warp 10 (which is impossible but 9 or 11
: *ARE* possible) you're getting back in time. Isn't there kind of a
: statement about going back in time....?

So you are saying that warp 10 is not possible (ie travel is zero time)
but warp 11 is (which you define to be arriving before you leave??)

Ok - so lets say at warp 11 - I arrive 1 second before I leave.
Now I do that, but add 1 second to turn my headlights off!
So how long did it take to get there?? 0 seconds.
Hmmm - looks like warp 10 to me!

DN
--

----------------------------------------------------------
| David N Ralphs |
| ATN - Channel 7 Phone: (02) 9877 7707 |
| Mobbs Lane Fax: (02) 9877 7894 |
| Epping, NSW Email: d...@atn.atn7.oz.au |
----------------------------------------------------------
These views are mine.. no one else would agree with them!

[Ken Williams]

Christopher Reid wrote:

> Rinze van Huizen wrote:
> >
> > Jonathan McHugh wrote:
> > <--SNIP-->
> > > >mess everybody up with infinite speed.
> > > >
> > > P.S. Warp10 is 2000 x the speed of light.
> >

> > even if I'm wrong about this, consider this, the speed exponentially
>
> > increased with ever warp factor, so warp 10 should be a helluva lot
> > more than 2000c
>

> That's correct. Warp 9.65 is approximately 2000 times the speed of
>
> light, and as you said, the number rises dramatically from warp 9 on
> so
> something like warp 9.9999 is 200000 times the speed of light.
>

The original Star Fleet Technical manual listed Warp speeds as a
quotient of C. Specifically C^3 [Speed of light Cubed] Warp 10 would
then be 1000 x C.
what happened to this original usage of warp factoring???

and... if the above [Warp 10 = infinate] is so - why can't they find
another way to measure it so the people can get a feel for the REAL
speeds
[IE: "Course: 1023m2, 3000C, Engage!!"]

--
Ken Williams - ITV Spec, Electronics - Web Author
AU-Graduate Outreach - http://www.eng.auburn.edu/department/eop
ken...@eng.auburn.edu - http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~kenwill

[Steve Pugh]

Ken Williams <ken...@eng.auburn.edu> wrote:
>
>The original Star Fleet Technical manual listed Warp speeds as a
>quotient of C. Specifically C^3 [Speed of light Cubed] Warp 10 would
>then be 1000 x C.
>what happened to this original usage of warp factoring???

It was too slow. Using the old warp scale it should have taken the
original Enterprise centuries to do all the travelling it did in its
five year mission.

But, we ignore that.

In TNG the warp scale was redefined, Gene Rodenberry didn't want any
warp factors over warp ten and so they made that infinite velocity,
and defined a scale below that. I've explained it in another thread in
this post or there's a mini-faq about it somewhere.

>and... if the above [Warp 10 = infinate] is so - why can't they find
>another way to measure it so the people can get a feel for the REAL
>speeds
>[IE: "Course: 1023m2, 3000C, Engage!!"]

Because by using warp factors they can dodge the issue of some smart
alec physics nerd (like me for instance) telling them that it should
have taken so long to recah such and such but they did it in etc.,
etc.
Also "warp 9" is quicker to say than "light speed times two thousand"
or even "two thousand cee". The problems only occur at speeds like
"warp nine point nine seven five" which are a mouthful.
Finally, they can't cahnge now as the terms "warp five" etc are
imprinted on people's minds as part of the Trek language.

[Steve Pugh]

"Jon Nailor" <silve...@tbf.com> wrote:

>Using the formulas in the tech manuals...
>

> (1) TOS Warp 10: 10x10x10c=1000c
> (2) TransWarp 10: 10x10x10x10c=10000c (this is used by the

> Excalibur thru Constellation Class ships)

> (3) TNG Warp 10: 10x10x10x10x10c=100000c (this is used by the

> Galaxy, Intreped, Hope, Defiant, and other newr class ships)

Which Tech Manuals did you get these from?
(1) is accepted as the definition of the TOS warp scale.

(2) was given in some Fandom sources, before we learnt that Transwarp
was a failure. And I've never heard of teh Excalibur class, do you
mean Excelsior?

(3) The only place I've seen this is in FASA's "TNG Officer's Manual".

The TNG warp scale is as follows:
warp 1 to 9, speed is equal to warp factor to the power 3.3 times the
speed of light. (ie v = c * w^3.3 ). After warp 9 the speed rises
exponentionally with an asymptote at warp 10. That is to say that warp
ten is a theoretical velocity only as it would represent infinite
velocity, taking infinite energy and infinite time to reach.

> Jon Nailor silverheart@tbfdotcom
> Anti-spammer remove "dot" and replace
> with "."<without the "">.

What's the point when your return address is perfectly formatted
anyway? See the attribution above.

And could you please not post messages in HTML format?

>| Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, =A7227,
>| any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address
>|is subject to adownload and archival fee in the amount of $500
>|US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.

I wish I knew what that meant.

[Agamemnon]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01BC9577.F3966D60
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

How does the Enterprise overcome the effect of Time Dilation

Agamemnon

------=_NextPart_000_01BC9577.F3966D60
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"Trident 4.71.0544.0"' name=3DGENERATOR>

</HEAD>
<BODY><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>
<P><FONT size=3D2>How does the Enterprise overcome the effect of Time=20
Dilation</FONT></P>

<P><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;

<P><FONT size=3D2>Agamemnon<BR>
</FONT></P>
</FONT>
</BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_01BC9577.F3966D60--

[jla]

That is what the warp field does. It warps space, making faster than light
travel possible, without the effects of time dilation.
--
jla

Agamemnon <argyros...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in article
<5qubjc$3...@cherry.news.easynet.net>...

How does the Enterprise overcome the effect of Time Dilation

Agamemnon

----------

[ItzMe]

Warp 10 would be a hell of a lot more than 2000c.

(quoted from Star Trek Encyclopedia)
Warp 9.9999(Max. subspace radio speed w/ booster relays) is 199,516

[Jay Phillips]

Correct, Warp 10 is the maximum speed which can not be broken in "warp"
space just as the speed of light is the maximum speed in "normal" space.
There are means of travel other than "warp" and "normal" space such as is
used by the Borg to travel long distances. In TOS the Enterprise exceded
warp 10 on two occasions. Both times the engines were modified in an
unknown way. Either the Enterprise was not traveling in "warp" space or the
instruments at that time were not able to acurately measure speeds close to
warp 10.

Steve Pugh <maf...@dial.pipex.com.> wrote in article
<33cde20...@news.dial.pipex.com>...

[Mike Perry]

On 23 Jul 1997 01:48:40 GMT, "Jay Phillips" <jayc...@mindspring.com>
wrote:

[ Binaries group REMOVED from crosspost list ]

>Correct, Warp 10 is the maximum speed which can not be broken in "warp"
>space just as the speed of light is the maximum speed in "normal" space.
>There are means of travel other than "warp" and "normal" space such as is
>used by the Borg to travel long distances. In TOS the Enterprise exceded
>warp 10 on two occasions. Both times the engines were modified in an
>unknown way. Either the Enterprise was not traveling in "warp" space or the
>instruments at that time were not able to acurately measure speeds close to
>warp 10.

its amazing how many people still dont have a clue about this whole
Warp 10 crap. The original Enterprise exceeded Warp 10, true. But it
did it ON ITS OWN WARP SCALE. The Next Generation and other new series
use A DIFFERENT WARP SCALE. Warp 10 for the original E is something
like 6.5 on the new on. And teh no one has a nasty exponential
increase once you go past 9.

That means, that 9.5 is more than twice as fast as 9.4, etc... And
when you get to Warp 10, its INIFINITE SPEED. You can't go faster than
Warp 10, because, by its very definition, THERE IS NO SPEED FASTER.
Anyone at Warp 10 is going so fast, they occupy all points in the
universe simultaneously.

Now, to address that Warp 13 thing in the last Episode of TNG, they
CHANGED THE WARP SCALE AGAIN. Warp 13 for them was most likely
something like Warp 9.75 for the current series.

So it doesn't matter if your using something other than Warp space,
different engines, or "though power" of the Traveller, NOTHING is
faster than Warp 10. Not even the Q can break that rule.

I think i'm going to make a rant-based web page to help educate people
on this...As long as the all-mighty Paramount doesn't see me as a
threat to thier existance and sue my ass...

[Pallis Mortis (Pale Death)]

jla wrote:

Actually, what a warp field does, is bring the planet to them - in a
manner of speaking.
With warp drive, you don't really travel the great distances across
space. You create a fold in space (a warp), and then you just _step_
across it.

Example:
Imagine sitting on a rug and lassoing a table several feet away. If
we are strong enough and the floor is slick enough, we can pull the
lasso until the carpet begins to fold underneath us. If we pull hard
enough, the table comes to us, and the _distance_ between the table and
us disappears into a mass of crumpled carpeting. Then we simply hop
across this _carpet warp_. In other words, we have hardly moved; the
space between us and the table has contracted, and we just step across
this contracted space. Similarly, the Enterprise does not really cross
the entire space to another planet or solar system; it simply moves
across the crumpled space.

In other words, the question of time dilation does not particularily
come into play as far as warp drive is concerned.

Don't write me saying how full of crap I am either. This description
is per Michio Kaku. He is a quantum physicist who studies theories of
parallel universes, time warps, and the 10th dimension. Before blasting
me over it, I would suggest you take a look at his book Hyperspace.
Unless you have some grasp of physics (especially quantum theory, I
would recommend not bothering.

Pallis Mortis (Pale Death)
The Great Equalizer of Man

Did you ever see a hearse go by, and figure some day you would surely
die.
They put you in a little box, and cover you over with dirt and rocks.

[David S]

On Wed, 23 Jul 1997 14:48:34 GMT, ma...@REMOVE.kent.net (Mike Perry)
wrote:

>On 23 Jul 1997 01:48:40 GMT, "Jay Phillips" <jayc...@mindspring.com>
>wrote:
>
>[ Binaries group REMOVED from crosspost list ]
>
>

>That means, that 9.5 is more than twice as fast as 9.4, etc... And
>when you get to Warp 10, its INIFINITE SPEED. You can't go faster than
>Warp 10, because, by its very definition, THERE IS NO SPEED FASTER.
>Anyone at Warp 10 is going so fast, they occupy all points in the
>universe simultaneously.
>

I think the BBC or Douglas Adams should sue Paramount for stealing
this idea. The Infinite Improbability Drive was occupying all points
in space simultaneously long before ST ever said anything about it.
<G>

>
>So it doesn't matter if your using something other than Warp space,
>different engines, or "though power" of the Traveller, NOTHING is
>faster than Warp 10. Not even the Q can break that rule.
>

Then what are transwarp conduits? And how do the Q move things across
the universe instantly?

(I'm still waiting for Wesley to show up on Voyager; it'll come down
to some ethical reason why he has to do something else instead of help
them get home...)

(Anti-Wes flames will be cheerfully ignored.)

David Streeter
--
to reply, remove AUNTIESPAM. from my email address

SPAM bait: the current board of the
Federal Communications Commission:

Chairman Reed Hundt: rhu...@fcc.gov
Commissioner James Quello: jqu...@fcc.gov
Commissioner Susan Ness: sn...@fcc.gov
Commissioner Rachelle Chong: rch...@fcc.gov
(This section of this sig blatantly stolen
from Paul Campbell of the Tampa Tribune,
who stole it from someone else.)

[Eby Henry]

Warp 10 has got to be possible. For many years scientist have been saying
"you can't do that , it's not possible!" In all good things, the Beverly's
med ship went warp 13. Q, wouldn't show Picard a reality that's completely
fictional. And what about that dinosaur race on Voyager that was going
transwarp? When Parris tested his transwarp drive I think he was on to
something. It has to be possible. I think Parris will oneday in the Trek
timeline be considerd the Wilbur Wright of Federation transwarp.

Any comments or idea's or comments or conversation, I'm at
mr.j....@worldnet.att.net

[Steve Pugh]

Eby Henry wrote:
>
>Warp 10 has got to be possible.

Warp ten is just a label. It means different things at different
times.
In TOS it meant 1000 times the speed of light.
In TNG it means infinite velocity.

>For many years scientist have been saying
>"you can't do that , it's not possible!"

Don't start that thread again!

Warp's one to nine are power consumption minima. (ie it actually takes
less power to travel at warp five than at warp four point nine.)
Federation science only know of nine such minima. After the last of
these minima, the power consumption and the achieved velocity rise
exponentially, the asymptote, (the point at which both power
consumption and velocity go to infinity) is labelled as warp ten.

It's just a label.

Warp Ten is not the same sort of thing as Warps One to Nine. It is
confusing that they use a label that suggests that it is.

Unless you have infinite power at your disposal you can not achieve
warp ten via normal warp drives.

> In all good things, the Beverly's
>med ship went warp 13. Q, wouldn't show Picard a reality that's completely
>fictional.

Why not? We know that the future Q showed Picard was fictional.
(Enterprise-D not destroyed, Troi died before Worf dumped her, etc.)
Wouldn't it be just like Q to include little clues like an impossible
warp factor? And wouldn't it be just like Picard to be so tied up with
saving the universe that he wouldn't notice the little things?

Alternatively, they changed the labels. Warp ten now does not mean
infinite velocity.

> And what about that dinosaur race on Voyager that was going
>transwarp?

That episode hasn't reached me yet.
But transwarp is just used to denote ANY technology that is 'beyond'
warp drive.

>When Parris tested his transwarp drive I think he was on to
>something. It has to be possible. I think Parris will oneday in the Trek
>timeline be considerd the Wilbur Wright of Federation transwarp.

I hope not. Paris has got quite a big enough ego a sit is.
Anyway, that episode made it clear that you had no control over where
you came out of transwarp. When the test shuttle reappeared next to
Voyager, it had been at all points in the universe, but Paris couldn't
make it drop out of transwarp anywhere except where he started. Not
much point being able to go everywhere in the same instant if you can
only actually stop back where you started.
Yes, I know that later in the episode salamander-Paris piloted the
shuttle to swamp planet in order to get his leg over with
salamander-Janeway. For that I can only say two things:
1. As soon as Paris started "evolving" that episode turned into pure
bullshit.
2. Maybe salamander-Paris had some "evolved" sense that allowed him to
navigate in transwarp. He clearly can't remember anything about the
period, so however he did it is lost. (Hmm, is Paris's loss of memory
in anyway connected with having sex with Janeway?)

Steve

--
1. There is no such thing as canon.
2. William Shatner can't write.
3. It's Defiant class, dammit.
4. All Good Things... was an illusion created by Q.

[Da Man]

You are a @*#$^(@ MORON!

You honestly don't know what you're talking about-

Warp 10 is not a speed, it is Infinite speed. You can' go any faster
than infinite speed.

Why is infinity so hard to grasp? You should be executed by public
anti-stupidty groups and every hint of your DNA vaporized!

Your eyes should be burned out road flares to purge the Demons Of
Ignorance from your body!

On 1 Aug 1997 08:28:25 GMT, "Eby Henry" <Mr.J....@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>Warp 10 has got to be possible. For many years scientist have been saying
>"you can't do that , it's not possible!" In all good things, the Beverly's

>med ship went warp 13. Q, wouldn't show Picard a reality that's completely

>fictional. And what about that dinosaur race on Voyager that was going
>transwarp? When Parris tested his transwarp drive I think he was on to

>something. It has to be possible. I think Parris will oneday in the Trek
>timeline be considerd the Wilbur Wright of Federation transwarp.
>

[Philip Molter]

On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Skylar Thompson wrote:

: Transwarp conduits are "tunnels" in interspace. The Q transport
: objects across the universe, not move them physically.

Umm .. just for clarity's sake, what is the difference between
"move" and "transport". Isn't one a subset of the other? I think
what you mean to say is that the Q don't transport them through
what we would consider to be normal space.

Someone posted something about the Q "existing" at Warp 10 earlier
this summer (based on their ability to appear anywhere at any time
and the similarities between a Q flash and a warp flash). That's
the best explanation I've heard about how the Q could possibly
tranport things, in which case, yes, they do out outside of normal
space.

Phil

[Mitchell Higginbotham]

Mr.J.Henry is correct about Dr. Beverly's ship (I believe it was named
"USS Pascal") in the final episode of STNG ("All good thing..."). This
simple medical ship was capable of warp 13 as was the "refitted"
Enterprise under the command of Adm. Riker. Both of these ships were
capable of warp 13.
There are only a couple of solutions to this subject.
(1) The writters of STNG and STV did not properly compared notes.
(2) The level of technology being used is the only limit to warp speed.
If Warp 10 is Infinite speed how do you explain the other events where
ships have traveled at much greater speeds?

There have been other episodes of STNG that refered to faster than Warp
10 speeds.
I am not sure about the speed of the Borg ships in their episodes but
the speed of their ships did greatly exceed the speed of the
Enterprise-D.
The episode of where Lt. Barkley is effected by an alien probe and
connects his mind to the Enterprise's computer and then takes the ship
to the other side of the galaxy in a matter of seconds. A reference was
made to the distance and time traveled but not an actual speed.
The episode where The Traveler (I believe this is the name of the being
that takes Wesley Crusher "under his wing" during his last appearance in

STNG) takes the Enterprise to a place in space where dreams became
reality. A great distance was traveled in a short amount of time.
The episode where Q takes the Enterprise to meet the Borg for the first
time. The Enterprise was taken to the Delta quadrent in the time it took

Q to snap his fingers.
I am aware that most of these can be considered "special instances" or
some form of "magic" that is not confined to normal rules of Physics.
Also consider "wormholes" and other naturally occuring features of
space. I know mixing wormholes speeds and warp speeds is much the same
as mixing apples and oranges. The speed of a ship in a worm hole might
never reach full impulse but the actual speed (distance vs. time) makes
Warp 10 a snail's pace.
In these cases this high rate of speed did not cause any "side effects"
such as those experienced by Lt. Parris on his attempt.

If anyone could explain how faster than Warp 10 speeds are possible
except for those using Federation technology without refering to anyone
as a MORON feel free to respond to mi...@iar.net

[Christopher Reid]

Wolf wrote:
>
> If warp 9.8 won't take you across the galaxy in a day, how can warp 10
> take you everywhere at once? Kinda a quick jump, isn't it?

Very much so. Some warp speeds:

Warp 1 1 c
Warp 5 214 c
Warp 7 656 c
Warp 9 1516 c
Warp 9.2 1649 c
Warp 9.6 1909 c
Warp 9.9 3053 c
Warp 9.99 7912 c
Warp 9.9999 199,516 c
Warp 10 imaginary number, you exist at all points imultaneously

Chris Reid
CRei...@aol.com
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/7575

[Wolf]

If warp 9.8 won't take you across the galaxy in a day, how can warp 10 take you
everywhere at once? Kinda a quick jump, isn't it?

Wolf
/\_/\
\. ./
\ /
o

[Steve Pugh]

Christopher Reid wrote:

> Very much so. Some warp speeds:
>
>Warp 1 1 c

>Warp 9.99 7912 c

>Warp 9.9999 199,516 c
>Warp 10 imaginary number, you exist at all points imultaneously

NO! An imaginary number is the square root of a negative number. (For
example the square root of -1 is i, the square root of -4 is 2i and so
on.) Warp 10 is infinite velocity. The speed labelled Warp 10 is not
really a number at all. It is larger than all numbers.
Pick a number, any number. Infinity is bigger than it.
Double your number. Infinity is still bigger than it.
Continue to double your number for ever. Infinity will still be bigger
than it.

[Da Man]

Ok, I won't use the word MORON, you PATHETIC LITTLE POOR EXCUSE FOR A
HUMAN. You knwo there are monkeys Smarter than You?

If you were a liberal arts major or something, thent hat explains how
you were dumbed up- to be a better laborer- but try to understand that
warp 10 is infinite speed....

In All Good Things... they go warp "13" because in the 25 years
between TNG and all good theings,t hey have Re-defined the warp
scale...

In TNG times, the warp scale increases exponentially, and reaches and
acentote (OK so i'm not the speller) at warp 10- there is nothing
beyond warp 10- but because the graph rises so fast near warp 10, warp
9.9999 is twice as fast as warp 9.999

They redifine the warp scale because instead of saying "Ensign- warp
9.998345, engage! "

it's easier to say "Ensign- warp 13, engage!"

While there's no way to what the All Good Things equivelent of "warp
10" is, it's probably around warp 15 or 20 . and in 25 years after All
Good Things, they'll probably again change the warp scale because
people would have to say "Warp 19.9238472312" when it will be easier
to say "warp 21"

As for your "special circumstances" liek when Q snapps his fingers-
they are moving at warp 9.999999 which is 1000 times faster than warp
9.999

And in fact on the episode with the traveler- which you bring up- they
mention that with these new speeds they will need a new scale-
they need a new scale because they were mioving at a speed equivilent
to warp 9.999999999999999999999 which is Millions of times faster than
warp 9.99...

Do you have any idea of your ignorance- or are you unable to grasp
the concept of intellegence and base all of your "facts" upon Oprah
and The Psychic Hotline?

[Steve Pugh]

Wolf <r...@flash.net> wrote:

>If warp 9.8 won't take you across the galaxy in a day, how can warp 10 take you
>everywhere at once? Kinda a quick jump, isn't it?

Find maths textbook.
Open maths textbook at index.
Look up "Exponential"
Look up "Non-linear"
Turn to indicated pages.
Read.

Or if you can't be bothered to do that, trust us, the warp scale is
non-linear that means that the increase in speed between Warp 5 and
Warp 6 is not the same as the increase in speed between Warp 7 and
Warp 8, despite the fact that 6 - 5 and 8 - 7 are both 1.
Also, above Warp 9 the scale is exponential. So warp 9.99 is a lot
faster than Warp 9.9. Warp 9.999 is a lot faster than Warp 9.99. And
so on. You can never reach Warp 10 as Warp 10 is infinite speed and
requires infinte energy to reach using normal warp technology.

Steve

--
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe...
Attack ships on fire off the shores of Orion...
I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate.
All those moments will be lost... like tears in rain." - Roy Batty.

[pch...@phoenix.net]

On Fri, 01 Aug 1997 11:01:12 GMT, maf...@dial.pipex.com. (Steve Pugh)
wrote:

>Eby Henry wrote:
>>
>>Warp 10 has got to be possible.
>

>Warp ten is just a label. It means different things at different
>times.
>In TOS it meant 1000 times the speed of light.

Not confimable yet.

>In TNG it means infinite velocity.

Mentioned in Voy:"Threshold"

>
>>For many years scientist have been saying
>>"you can't do that , it's not possible!"
>

>Don't start that thread again!

Its too late! :P

>
>Warp's one to nine are power consumption minima. (ie it actually takes
>less power to travel at warp five than at warp four point nine.)

Actually, this we don't know for sure either.

>
>Unless you have infinite power at your disposal you can not achieve
>warp ten via normal warp drives.

Yup.

[snip]

>
>> And what about that dinosaur race on Voyager that was going
>>transwarp?
>

>That episode hasn't reached me yet.
>But transwarp is just used to denote ANY technology that is 'beyond'
>warp drive.

Interestingly, the Borg have both the Transwarp Conduits and plain ol'
Transwarp (looks like really fast warp and is detectable by sensors).

>>When Parris tested his transwarp drive I think he was on to
>>something. It has to be possible. I think Parris will oneday in the Trek
>>timeline be considerd the Wilbur Wright of Federation transwarp.
>

>I hope not. Paris has got quite a big enough ego a sit is.
>Anyway, that episode made it clear that you had no control over where
>you came out of transwarp. When the test shuttle reappeared next to
>Voyager, it had been at all points in the universe, but Paris couldn't
>make it drop out of transwarp anywhere except where he started.

I don't believe so. He stated that he "thought" about Voyager and he
ended up back where he was. He piloted the shuttle in Transwarp
pretty much like how the Traveler steered the E-D in "Where No One Has
Gone Before".

.

------------------------------------------------------------
Peter W Chung

E-Mail: pch...@phoenix.net
st...@jetson.uh.edu

Homepage: http://www.phoenix.net/~pchung
+starships

[Randy Reingold]

Why am I so sure that Star Trek will allow excesses of Warp 10?

1) 50 years ago, science said breaking the sound barrier would kill a
human being.

2) Modern physics dictates the impossibility of FTL velocities.

3) Star Trek is fiction, and the writers can do anything they want.

[pch...@phoenix.net]

On Fri, 08 Aug 1997 11:49:44 GMT, maf...@dial.pipex.com. (Steve Pugh)
wrote:

>pch...@phoenix.net wrote:
[snip]

>>
>>Interestingly, the Borg have both the Transwarp Conduits and plain ol'
>>Transwarp (looks like really fast warp and is detectable by sensors).
>

>I haven't seen them using "normal" transwarp yet. Is that in a Voyager
>episode? All I've seen them doing is using normal warp drive bloody
>fast in QWho and Best of Both Worlds.

This was seen in the season finale of Voyager (I forget the episode
title). It was kinda neat because the Transwarp messed up Voyager's
warp drive and they got tossed about as the Borg cubes whizzed by.

[snip]

>>
>>I don't believe so. He stated that he "thought" about Voyager and he
>>ended up back where he was. He piloted the shuttle in Transwarp
>>pretty much like how the Traveler steered the E-D in "Where No One Has
>>Gone Before".
>

>Hmm, does this mean that Paris is really wesley's evil twin?
>That could explain a lot ! ;-)
>
>You're quite right. I'd forgotten about the "thinking about Voyager"
>line.
>Bugger.
>That removes the one big obstacle to Voyager using the transwarp to
>get home. After all the Doctor can cure the so called evolution thing.
>They surely haven't used up all the neodilithium. So it can work
>right? Now we need to come up with a new reason why they don't use it.
>Howabut, the 'evolution' thing might effect the bio-neural gel packs
>in Voyager and destroy them before they reached Earth?

Hey, you might be onto something. The gelpacks might freak out and
shutdown the AM containment fields while at Warp 10 and BOOM, there
goes Voyager and most of the universe... hmmm. Or, maybe you can
only "evolve" once. The next time would kill Paris and Janeway which
isn't that bad of an idea :P

Peter

[Richard Gardineer]

> You're quite right. I'd forgotten about the "thinking about Voyager"
> line.
> Bugger.
> That removes the one big obstacle to Voyager using the transwarp to
> get home. After all the Doctor can cure the so called evolution thing.
> They surely haven't used up all the neodilithium. So it can work
> right? Now we need to come up with a new reason why they don't use it.
> Howabut, the 'evolution' thing might effect the bio-neural gel packs
> in Voyager and destroy them before they reached Earth?
>

> Steve
>
Please don't give Berman and Company any more (bad) ideas.

- Arthur A. Gardineer

[Steve Pugh]

Randy Reingold wrote:

>Why am I so sure that Star Trek will allow excesses of Warp 10?

I don't know, why are you so sure of that?

>1) 50 years ago, science said breaking the sound barrier would kill a
>human being.

No it didn't. Science said no such thing. Some people believed that it
would kill a person, but there was no scientific basis for that.

>2) Modern physics dictates the impossibility of FTL velocities.

So?

>3) Star Trek is fiction, and the writers can do anything they want.

I'll let you into a little secret. One of things that distinguishes
good fiction from bad fiction is that good fiction is consistent.

By saying that Warp 10 is infinite velocity (first in the TNG Tech
Manual and then in VOY "Threshold") they have made it impossible to go
any faster. Not because Warp 10 is some sort of barrier like the sound
barrier or the light speed barrier. (Or even the time barrier referred
to in TOS which is generally taken to be Warp 4 for no particularly
good reason).
But because speeds in excess of Warp 10/infinite speed do not exist.

Now, the writers and actors may get fed up of Warp 9.9976 etc. And the
Producers may decide to recalibrate the warp scale so that Warp 10
means something else (say, whatever Warp 9.9 means now). In that case
then travel beyond Warp 10 will be seen in Trek but not otherwise.

[Mephisto]

Wolf <r...@flash.net> wrote in article <33E8B8...@flash.net>...

> If warp 9.8 won't take you across the galaxy in a day, how can warp 10
take you
> everywhere at once? Kinda a quick jump, isn't it?
>

> Wolf
> /\_/\
> \. ./
> \ /
> o
>

Warp 10 is an infinite speed, thus you are everywhere and nowhere, while
going at an infinite speed since you are infinitely everywhere.

[Steve Pugh]

pch...@phoenix.net wrote:

>Steve Pughv wrote:
>>Eby Henry wrote:
>>>
>>>Warp 10 has got to be possible.
>>
>>Warp ten is just a label. It means different things at different
>>times.
>>In TOS it meant 1000 times the speed of light.
>
>Not confimable yet.

Not confirmed on screen, granted. But accepted by just about everyone.
It's in numerous books and manuals produced over the past thirty
years.

>>Warp's one to nine are power consumption minima. (ie it actually takes
>>less power to travel at warp five than at warp four point nine.)
>
>Actually, this we don't know for sure either.

Yes we do. It's in the TNG Tech Manual. As the speed curve goes up,
flattens out a bit then goes up really steeply afterw arp nine, the
power consumption curve goes up then drops down again at each interger
warp factor, then goes up really steeply after warp nine.

>>> And what about that dinosaur race on Voyager that was going
>>>transwarp?
>>
>>That episode hasn't reached me yet.
>>But transwarp is just used to denote ANY technology that is 'beyond'
>>warp drive.
>

>Interestingly, the Borg have both the Transwarp Conduits and plain ol'
>Transwarp (looks like really fast warp and is detectable by sensors).

I haven't seen them using "normal" transwarp yet. Is that in a Voyager
episode? All I've seen them doing is using normal warp drive bloody
fast in QWho and Best of Both Worlds.

>>>When Parris tested his transwarp drive I think he was on to

>>>something. It has to be possible. I think Parris will oneday in the Trek
>>>timeline be considerd the Wilbur Wright of Federation transwarp.
>>
>>I hope not. Paris has got quite a big enough ego a sit is.
>>Anyway, that episode made it clear that you had no control over where
>>you came out of transwarp. When the test shuttle reappeared next to
>>Voyager, it had been at all points in the universe, but Paris couldn't
>>make it drop out of transwarp anywhere except where he started.
>

>I don't believe so. He stated that he "thought" about Voyager and he
>ended up back where he was. He piloted the shuttle in Transwarp
>pretty much like how the Traveler steered the E-D in "Where No One Has
>Gone Before".

Hmm, does this mean that Paris is really wesley's evil twin?
That could explain a lot ! ;-)

You're quite right. I'd forgotten about the "thinking about Voyager"

line.
Bugger.
That removes the one big obstacle to Voyager using the transwarp to
get home. After all the Doctor can cure the so called evolution thing.
They surely haven't used up all the neodilithium. So it can work
right? Now we need to come up with a new reason why they don't use it.
Howabut, the 'evolution' thing might effect the bio-neural gel packs
in Voyager and destroy them before they reached Earth?

Steve

[Randy Reingold]

>
>I'll let you into a little secret. One of things that distinguishes
>good fiction from bad fiction is that good fiction is consistent.

Hey, I'm a Trekker from way back, and I can assure you, consistency
and Star Trek tend to be mutually exclusive.

>
>By saying that Warp 10 is infinite velocity (first in the TNG Tech
>Manual and then in VOY "Threshold") they have made it impossible to go
>any faster. Not because Warp 10 is some sort of barrier like the sound
>barrier or the light speed barrier. (Or even the time barrier referred
>to in TOS which is generally taken to be Warp 4 for no particularly
>good reason).
>But because speeds in excess of Warp 10/infinite speed do not exist.
>
>Now, the writers and actors may get fed up of Warp 9.9976 etc. And the
>Producers may decide to recalibrate the warp scale so that Warp 10
>means something else (say, whatever Warp 9.9 means now). In that case
>then travel beyond Warp 10 will be seen in Trek but not otherwise.

Maybe they will simply develop a superior form of propulsion which
will negate the problems inherent with the rather flawed and
oft-dangerous warp drive, allowing travel at velocities undreamed of
by Cochrane himself. After all, horse propulsion cannot exceed 100
MPH, Prop Planes cannot break Mach 2, and so far, solid fuel booster
rockets cannot break the light barrier (Probably need Nuclear
Rockets).

In any event, if the scale IS recalibrated, then my original statement
applies, technically, and I for one would laud such a move as I am
sick of hearing stuff like "We're at warp 9.7625 and the Borg have
increased velocity to Warp 9.8235 and are closing." (Just an example,
not a quote.)

As an aside, I seem to recall that NCC-1701 maxed at Warp 8, yet under
the right conditions, had exceeded Warp 11 (Yeah, I know, that's the
OLD Warp Scale). Also, I seem to recall something about the original
Enterprise (Capt. Pike) using a combination propulsion of Hyperdrive
and a Time Warp system to protect the ship from the temporal strains
of higher (4+) Warp Speeds, which was then consolidated into the Warp
Drive. Therefore, I feel it safe to assume a similar development could
occur with Warp Drive, Maybe the fabled Trans-Warp, but then, didn't
NX-2000 (Excelsior) come with that? How inconsistent.....

[Steve Pugh]

Richard Gardineer wrote:
>Steve Pugh wrote:

>> Now we need to come up with a new reason why they don't use it.
>> Howabut, the 'evolution' thing might effect the bio-neural gel packs
>> in Voyager and destroy them before they reached Earth?
>

>Please don't give Berman and Company any more (bad) ideas.

Um, excuse me, I don't want to give anybody the wrong idea here, but
there is something I really do feel the need to ask.

Why do you think blowing Voyager up is a bad idea?

Just wondering.

Steve

--
"When I want your opinion, I'll ask for it."

Stephen Richard Pugh http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/estate/ax16/

[Steve Pugh]

Randy Reingold wrote:

>Steve Pugh wrote:
>>
>>I'll let you into a little secret. One of things that distinguishes
>>good fiction from bad fiction is that good fiction is consistent.
>
>Hey, I'm a Trekker from way back, and I can assure you, consistency
>and Star Trek tend to be mutually exclusive.

Which means that Star Trek is not good fiction....

This is correct if Trek is taken as a whole. Individual episodes or
films are sometimes great fiction. Some of the story arcs are good
fiction. But the sprawling whole of just one great big mess of
contradictions and retcons and altered premises.

It may be ugly, it may be stupid, by heaven help us, we love it!

;-)

>As an aside, I seem to recall that NCC-1701 maxed at Warp 8, yet under
>the right conditions, had exceeded Warp 11 (Yeah, I know, that's the
>OLD Warp Scale). Also, I seem to recall something about the original
>Enterprise (Capt. Pike) using a combination propulsion of Hyperdrive
>and a Time Warp system to protect the ship from the temporal strains
>of higher (4+) Warp Speeds, which was then consolidated into the Warp
>Drive. Therefore, I feel it safe to assume a similar development could
>occur with Warp Drive, Maybe the fabled Trans-Warp, but then, didn't
>NX-2000 (Excelsior) come with that? How inconsistent.....

The transwarp on the Excelsior was a failure. It did however lead to
some improvements in the conventional warp drive that account for the
better understanding of warp field physics as demonstrated in TNG etc.

Cheers,
Steve

--
"And all I ask is a tall ship, and a star to steer her by."
"Though a cloaking device, pulsed phaser cannons
and a full load of quantum torpedoes would be quite nice too."

Stephen Richard Pugh maf...@dial.pipex.com

[Margaret McClure]

> >As an aside, I seem to recall that NCC-1701 maxed at Warp 8, yet under
> >the right conditions, had exceeded Warp 11 (Yeah, I know, that's the
> >OLD Warp Scale). Also, I seem to recall something about the original
> >Enterprise (Capt. Pike) using a combination propulsion of Hyperdrive
> >and a Time Warp system to protect the ship from the temporal strains
> >of higher (4+) Warp Speeds, which was then consolidated into the Warp
> >Drive. Therefore, I feel it safe to assume a similar development could
> >occur with Warp Drive, Maybe the fabled Trans-Warp, but then, didn't
> >NX-2000 (Excelsior) come with that? How inconsistent.....
>
> The transwarp on the Excelsior was a failure. It did however lead to
> some improvements in the conventional warp drive that account for the
> better understanding of warp field physics as demonstrated in TNG etc.

Who says it was a failure? Scotty just screwed it up, that's why it didn't
work. There was no failure about it, SF just decided to drop the project.

Ryan McClure

[Steve Pugh]

Margaret McClure wrote:
>Steve Pugh wrote:

>> The transwarp on the Excelsior was a failure. It did however lead to
>> some improvements in the conventional warp drive that account for the
>> better understanding of warp field physics as demonstrated in TNG etc.
>
>Who says it was a failure? Scotty just screwed it up, that's why it didn't
>work. There was no failure about it, SF just decided to drop the project.

The TNG Tech Manual said it was a failure and that the Excelsior was
refitted with normal warp drive, (though still housed in same
nacelles). Some people accept that as proof.

Look at what you wrote: "SF just decided to drop the project". Why on
earth would they do that? They have invested a lot of time and
resources in "the great experiment", are they likely to just drop it
for no good reason? They need faster travel: the Federation is
expanding all the time. The only logical reason for abandoning the
transwarp project was that it did not work.

[Timo S Saloniemi]

In article <33E7EA71...@iar.net> Mitchell Higginbotham <mi...@iar.net> writes:

>Mr.J.Henry is correct about Dr. Beverly's ship (I believe it was named
>"USS Pascal") in the final episode of STNG ("All good thing...").

USS Pasteur, actually. Kinda fitting for a medical ship.

>This simple medical ship was capable of warp 13 as was the "refitted"
>Enterprise under the command of Adm. Riker. Both of these ships were
>capable of warp 13.
>There are only a couple of solutions to this subject.
>(1) The writters of STNG and STV did not properly compared notes.
>(2) The level of technology being used is the only limit to warp speed.

(3) Warp 13 is not faster than warp 10; the former number is just given
on a different scale.

>If Warp 10 is Infinite speed how do you explain the other events where
>ships have traveled at much greater speeds?

Well, the ships that went warp 13 clearly did NOT go infinitely fast,
nor did they go faster than infinity! So by definition, they went slower
than warp 10. We never see ships go faster than infinite speed (since that
would look too weird for us to comprehend...), so there are no events when
warp 10 (as defined in the Tech Manual and implied in some episodes) has
been really passed.

>There have been other episodes of STNG that refered to faster than Warp
>10 speeds.

Beep if you think I forgot something:

"Where No One..." - reference to the tachometer showing speeds beyond
warp 10 (although what kind of idiot would design a tachometer that has
a scale that goes beyond infinite speed), but in connection of a trip
that was probably made at finite speed (the ship got from A to B in
a finite amount of time, after all!).

"Time Squared" - speculation of time travel being achieved by going
faster than warp ten (this actually strenghtens the case of warp 10
being infinite speed - if you go faster than that, you get from A to
B in negative time, so you have time travel!)

"All Good Things..." - ships regularly move at warp 13, but this is
slower than infinity (it is pretty darn fast, though - the Klingon
ships are said to be retreating at a speed that would leave the
current ships and probably Q himself standing still!).

"Threshold" - infinite speed is reached, by using finite energy
thanks to the discovery of new type of dilithium crystals. This
infinite speed is called warp 10. Traveling at the speed creates
effects verysimilar to those described in the Tech Manual - there is
no indication that warp 10 is actually "broken" or "passed", though.

In many other episodes, ships and phenomena are moving fast, but
warp factors of 10 or higher are never quoted.

>I am not sure about the speed of the Borg ships in their episodes but
>the speed of their ships did greatly exceed the speed of the
>Enterprise-D.

Indeed. They do not go faster than warp 10, though, not even when using
the transwarp conduits - in "Best of Both Worlds", the Borg are said to
be traveling at warp 9.7 or 9.9 or something equally staggering - the
E-D theoretically should not be able to hang on at those speeds, so I
may be misremembering things...

>The episode of where Lt. Barkley is effected by an alien probe and
>connects his mind to the Enterprise's computer and then takes the ship
>to the other side of the galaxy in a matter of seconds. A reference was
>made to the distance and time traveled but not an actual speed.

Regardless of what numbers were given, this is clearly less than infinite
speed... So no fear of warp 10 being broken. IMHO it's not very practical
to use the warp scale for describing methods of travel other than warp -
even the Tech Manual says that the warp scale is not a direct speed scale
but rather describes warp power usage.

>The episode where The Traveler (I believe this is the name of the being
>that takes Wesley Crusher "under his wing" during his last appearance in
>STNG) takes the Enterprise to a place in space where dreams became
>reality. A great distance was traveled in a short amount of time.

Yes, at first a finite distance was traveled at a finite time. On the return
trip, the ship ended up in the dreamland in a finite time, but it was not
made clear if the distance had been finite - the ship may have traveled an
infinite distance, or no distance at all!

>The episode where Q takes the Enterprise to meet the Borg for the first
>time. The Enterprise was taken to the Delta quadrent in the time it took
>Q to snap his fingers.

One COULD argue even that is a "finite time". But it indeed seems that
Q can easily travel at infinite speed, and also manipulate time at will.
So it will do no good to put warp 10 limits on his way - he can circumvent
any such limits by time-traveling.

>I am aware that most of these can be considered "special instances" or
>some form of "magic" that is not confined to normal rules of Physics.
>Also consider "wormholes" and other naturally occuring features of
>space. I know mixing wormholes speeds and warp speeds is much the same
>as mixing apples and oranges. The speed of a ship in a worm hole might
>never reach full impulse but the actual speed (distance vs. time) makes
>Warp 10 a snail's pace.

Actually, it's quite vice versa. If warp 10 in TNG parlance is infinite speed
(and it is not said NOT to be in TNG..), then a wormhole trip is still
snail's pace compared to warp 10. OTOH, some wormholes move through time
as well as through space ("Eye of the Needle"), so one can travel way
faster than infinity through them...

>In these cases this high rate of speed did not cause any "side effects"
>such as those experienced by Lt. Parris on his attempt.

There was no movement faster than warp 10 in any other episode except
"Eye of the Needle" (and probably also other time-travel shows).

>If anyone could explain how faster than Warp 10 speeds are possible
>except for those using Federation technology without refering to anyone
>as a MORON feel free to respond to mi...@iar.net

Speeds faster than warp 10 (if warp 10 is taken to mean infinity) are
possible if time travel is involved in the rigid Newtonian (non-Einsteinian)
universe Trek is using. Simply go from A to B so that you are at B before you
left A. Any other questions? :)

>Da Man wrote:
>> You are a @*#$^(@ MORON!

Is @*#$^(@ a changeling smiley? :)

Timo Saloniemi

[Matt Conforth]

True, I think the best instance is ST IV: the Voyage Home in which using
the suns gravity to give them the extra oumpf needed, the crew in their
captured Bird of Prey travel faster than infinite speed allowing time
travel on a huge scale (~300 years).
I however think there is another important aspect of time travel. The
crew will still age normally during the trip.

Please correct me if I'm wrong

Matthew