View Single Post
Old May 19 2013, 09:12 PM   #2
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

stj wrote: View Post
How could a wet suit make a person survive a long fall, then sink effortlessly and then swim unaffected by water pressure. Particularly without visible helmets.
Life support belts included, just without the visible-wavelength glow?

Although feet-first falling from up to fifty meters might well be survivable anyway; the planet might have reduced gravity (since it's always portrayed by one gee anyway); and the suits might have the fairly mundane functionality of going rigid at impacts, making for good surface-piercing.

Also, no particular reason a wet suit ought to be buoyant - it's not likely to be made of neoprene in the future any more. And why should water pressure be an issue? How deep did they go?

How can a hand-held devise pump massive quantities of heat from equally massive quantities of lava, without generating more heat as required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
That's standard fare for treknology anyway, dumping of energy or momentum somewhere unseen. Transporters ought to make that a breeze - or more exactly, those bits in the transporters that are used for dumping momentum when one comes up from a planet and into an orbiting starship. Those bits are probably smaller than the actual transporters (save, of course, for the miracle machines of this particular movie...).

How can the phrase "cold fusion" be reconciled as somehow referring to the previous?
Most nuclear fusion consumes energy; if a means exists for shoveling heat "upstream", then storing it into nuclear fusion might be as good a technique as any.

What power source could be in a ring sufficient to create the explosion in London? Could enough antimatter be inside the containment ring?
Trek antimatter, sure (see "Obsession"). Otherwise, it's probably a conduit for energies coming from somewhere else.

How can we reconcile the notion of warp drive with any determinate "speed" with the travel times in the movie?
No bloody idea.

Why can't the Klingons detect the vessel when it's leaving, after a patrol disappears, that they couldn't detect when it arrived?
You appear to mean "why can"..? Might be its stealth isn't quite omnidirectional, or degrades with time, or Klingon sensors simply adapt to threats, deciding that what looked like a sensor echo can now be determined to be an enemy.

How can the Enterprise be bigger on the inside than the outside?
What need is there for that when the thing is already about five miles long on the outside?

How can concrete floors be a useful spaceship construction material?
...Such as in ST5:TFF?

Why not? Pourable material should be ideal for creating large flat surfaces that don't need to bear major stresses. It would be lightweight, supposedly with lots of bubbles in it, and quickly repairable.

How can we justify the enormous empty spaces inside the Enterprise?
It doesn't cost anything extra to haul empty space along! Okay, hauling the air might cost something, but it's probably not even peanuts in terms of what starships otherwise do.

How did the Federation abolish Newton's First Law of Motion, so that people who fall off rails in a free falling spaceship would immediately fall even faster even though the Earth's gravitational field is unchanged?
Well, starships are full of gravity fields, which always work in free fall. If the ship is plummeting belly first, and you step into, say, the main vertical turboshaft, you should by all rights start falling down the shaft at one gee acceleration, because that's what the starship provides regardless of whether she's falling or not.

If the scene in question involves falling off the ship altogether, then I can only point to the scene in ST:TMP where there's surface gravity atop the saucer. That ought to give you a good start vs. the reference frame of the ship, even if you subsequently start freefalling.

Lastly, why would the Federation design a ship so that the crew could fall to its death?
I guess I'll have to go see the movie after all to answer this pressing question...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote