RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,782
Posts: 5,434,642
Members: 24,841
Currently online: 442
Newest member: annieslc

TrekToday headlines

Trek Comics Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

German Volkswagen Campaign Features Trek Actors
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

Shatner And Nimoy In Trek 3?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

The Art of John Alvin Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 23 2013, 01:09 PM   #31
Mytran
Fleet Captain
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

stj wrote: View Post
The first thing that really hurt suspension of disbelief were the scenes with the swimmers effortlessly swimming down. After all, a split second before they didn't even have masks on!
I had the same thought when I saw the scene, but then I noticed a continuous stream of bubbles from their feet. It gave the impression of "thrust boots" of some sort, propelling them down. They'd certainly need the help at that depth!

Maybe they just whipped the masks into place when they hit the water, James-Bond-Thunderball style?
Mytran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 02:46 PM   #32
B.J.
Rear Admiral
 
B.J.'s Avatar
 
Location: Huntsville, AL, USA
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Yeah, the boots were definitely providing thrust, especially since they were hardly moving their limbs at all.
__________________
B.J. --- bj-o23.deviantart.com
B.J. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 05:44 PM   #33
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

The first thing that really hurt suspension of disbelief were the scenes with the swimmers effortlessly swimming down. After all, a split second before they didn't even have masks on!
I really don't understand this bit. What would be wrong with people swimming, say, twenty meters down without masks or flippers or other such equipment? I do it every so often, without much effort.

Is it that there's too little struggling with the limbs? But you wouldn't need that if you aren't buoyant but instead a bit denser than water, something fairly easily accomplished.

The second thing that really hurt suspension of disbelief was the ship falling but people not being in free fall. The scenes really did not suggest the ship's gravity was malfunctioning.
So why would anybody be in free fall? Artificial gravity exists to prevent that very thing!

PS Marcus is the one talking about Section 31 and he's lying through his teeth, raising the question whether there really is such a thing.
The same thing goes for Sloane in DS9. We have no evidence that he ever had an organization to back him up - his only colleagues were observed on a holodeck! For all we know, he was simply a former SF Intel agent who went crazy and rogue, with a few nuggets of important information that he could spin fantastic tales around.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 10:15 PM   #34
stj
Rear Admiral
 
stj's Avatar
 
Location: the real world
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Mytran wrote: View Post
stj wrote: View Post
The first thing that really hurt suspension of disbelief were the scenes with the swimmers effortlessly swimming down. After all, a split second before they didn't even have masks on!
I had the same thought when I saw the scene, but then I noticed a continuous stream of bubbles from their feet. It gave the impression of "thrust boots" of some sort, propelling them down. They'd certainly need the help at that depth!

Maybe they just whipped the masks into place when they hit the water, James-Bond-Thunderball style?
I have no visual reference for cavitation bubbles and air bubble didn't make any sense.

Also...

B.J. wrote: View Post
Yeah, the boots were definitely providing thrust, especially since they were hardly moving their limbs at all.
If they're getting thrust from their feet, why would they move them at all? Every move would turn them I should think.

Timo wrote: View Post
The first thing that really hurt suspension of disbelief were the scenes with the swimmers effortlessly swimming down. After all, a split second before they didn't even have masks on!
I really don't understand this bit. What would be wrong with people swimming, say, twenty meters down without masks or flippers or other such equipment? I do it every so often, without much effort.

Is it that there's too little struggling with the limbs? But you wouldn't need that if you aren't buoyant but instead a bit denser than water, something fairly easily accomplished.
First, my experience with diving a mere three meters doesn't fit. I'm impressed that you can go down so quickly. Second, and more importantly, the buoyant force doesn't depend upon water density alone, but water depth. I don't know how easy it would be to increase their body density when that affect physiology, nor how they would do it without divers' weights. But they certainly don't sink rapidly at first and slow down.

I'm sorry but to my eyes this scene just made me think of a bad movie made by people who were too pig ignorant to know how water in a swimming pool works, and didn't give a rat's ass if what they put on screen made a damn bit of sense.

The second thing that really hurt suspension of disbelief was the ship falling but people not being in free fall. The scenes really did not suggest the ship's gravity was malfunctioning.
So why would anybody be in free fall? Artificial gravity exists to prevent that very thing!
They would be in free fall because an intelligent person on the bridge would have turned the bloody artificial gravity off so that nobody would fall down the numerous shafts of unknown purpose!
__________________
The people of this country need regime change here, not abroad.
stj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 04:04 AM   #35
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

bryce wrote: View Post
Good point about re-entry...but still, the Enterprise itself, with shields, couldn't stand the heat?
I'd be willing to bet that it COULD, and Sulu was just being a chicken.

Remember, he said the same thing at the end of the movie, actually: "If we don't get the shields up, we'll be incinerated when we hit the atmosphere!" (Guess what didn't happen when the Enterprise hit the atmosphere?)

Not that I necessarily blame him:Enterprise clearly isn't specked for exploding volcanos so there's really no way for Sulu to know one way or the other whether the ship can take it or not, but he knows it really fucked up his shuttlecraft, and he has little reason to expect the Enterprise would be much better off.

I would have prefered some excuse about how the volcano's weird magnetic properties that messed up the transporters and sensors, also messed up the shuttles computers of something. Heat alone just seems...silly.
Actually, I would prefer heat.

Heat is simple. Heat is a real thing. You can speculate about what heat can do and what it won't do and under what circumstances and whether or not the kind of heat you're encountering will screw up your engines.

"Weird magnetic properties" is an asspull. It SOUNDS smarter because most people don't actually know anything about electromagnetism and can't comment either way. Star Trek usually takes it a step further and lists something like "The Volcano ash is composed of irradiated trellium-D, which will negatively affect our shields and sensors and will also block transporter functions along with whatever the hell else the writers can think of." THAT would be bullshit, and it would sound like bullshit.

IMO, if any further explanation is really needed for why heat is a problem it should be a line of dialog inserted where Kirk calls Scotty for a second opinion and Scotty replies "You can try it, Jim, but you'll definitely void our warranty!"

And maybe I am wrong. 23rd century Alternate Universe shuttles just may not be built for that kind of heat. (But I imagine that they have *some* sort of radiation protection...)

I mean that I think that Scotty's "Transwarp Beaming" is possibily some sort of the ultra-long-range "Subspace Transporter" that we saw in TNG, and that Ferengi Ex-Damon used to beam across light years into Picard's Ready Room.

Just saying that they may be two different names for the same technology...or two very similar technologies - like "Transwarp Drive" and "Slipstream Drive" are very similar technologies.
Someone recently suggested to me that Scotty's "discovery of transwarp beaming" is actually a reference to one of the Starfleet Corps of Engineer novels and relates to Scott's activities in the 24th century after the Dyson Sphere incident. I don't know exactly which book, so I can't really check to see if it's true. Either way, it's a more than plausible explanation.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 04:18 AM   #36
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

stj wrote: View Post
I have no visual reference for cavitation bubbles and air bubble didn't make any sense.
Almost everyone I've seen that movie with -- including my Dad, the guy who had to see the Matrix four times before he realized the agents weren't actually humans -- recognized that they had some kind of propellers in their boots. I think you simply missed it.

The second thing that really hurt suspension of disbelief was the ship falling but people not being in free fall. The scenes really did not suggest the ship's gravity was malfunctioning.
So why would anybody be in free fall? Artificial gravity exists to prevent that very thing!
They would be in free fall because an intelligent person on the bridge would have turned the bloody artificial gravity off so that nobody would fall down the numerous shafts of unknown purpose!
Already covered this in my first post in this thread. Artificial gravity is what normally keeps everyone's feet pointed at the floor while the ship is turning, tumbling, maneuvering or accelerating. When the gravity keeps turning on and off, suddenly the main force acting on the ship's contents -- meaning the crew -- is the motion of the ship around its center of gravity. Which means if the Enterprise is tumbling, most of the crew is between one and three hundred meters from the ship's center of gravity; they're being tossed around like rag dolls literally every time the gravity field shuts down.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 04:20 AM   #37
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Timo wrote: View Post
I really don't understand this bit. What would be wrong with people swimming, say, twenty meters down without masks or flippers or other such equipment? I do it every so often, without much effort.
You swim down 20 metres without equipment, and "without much effort"? How do your ears feel about that.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 10:19 AM   #38
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

But they certainly don't sink rapidly at first and slow down.
That's certainly different from freediving with a bit of extra weight, yes. But one of the most trivial things to do in a futuristic diving suit would be to have it maintain constant buoyancy. You wouldn't need much beyond that.

You swim down 20 metres without equipment, and "without much effort"? How do your ears feel about that.
I equalize pressure when the camera isn't watching, of course.

Okay, twenty might be overstating it, as it's a specific spot on a specific lake rather than a random glance at a depth gauge, sounded for more like 17 meters. But it's nicely beyond swimming pool depth to establish that you don't really need all that scuba gear, or all that caution associated with long stays. It's when you gear up (say, get a monofin and start going down more actively, for greater lengths of time) that you risk life and limb...

They would be in free fall because an intelligent person on the bridge would have turned the bloody artificial gravity off so that nobody would fall down the numerous shafts of unknown purpose!
I'm sorry but that doesn't make an ounce of sense. Gravity keeps people from being thrown about. You don't turn it off for safety!

One consequence of production realities is that turning off gravity is supposed to be somewhat difficult, even. We see it done in DS9 once or twice ("Past Prologue", "Melora"), and achieved violently in ST6, but it never happens by accident. The ship may be dead otherwise, but gravity lingers, even on Khan's centuries-dormant ship...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 10:32 AM   #39
stj
Rear Admiral
 
stj's Avatar
 
Location: the real world
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
stj wrote: View Post
I have no visual reference for cavitation bubbles and air bubble didn't make any sense.
Almost everyone I've seen that movie with -- including my Dad, the guy who had to see the Matrix four times before he realized the agents weren't actually humans -- recognized that they had some kind of propellers in their boots. I think you simply missed it.

So why would anybody be in free fall? Artificial gravity exists to prevent that very thing!
They would be in free fall because an intelligent person on the bridge would have turned the bloody artificial gravity off so that nobody would fall down the numerous shafts of unknown purpose!
Already covered this in my first post in this thread. Artificial gravity is what normally keeps everyone's feet pointed at the floor while the ship is turning, tumbling, maneuvering or accelerating. When the gravity keeps turning on and off, suddenly the main force acting on the ship's contents -- meaning the crew -- is the motion of the ship around its center of gravity. Which means if the Enterprise is tumbling, most of the crew is between one and three hundred meters from the ship's center of gravity; they're being tossed around like rag dolls literally every time the gravity field shuts down.
Every time the swimmers move their propellers, they change the direction of their motion, except that they didn't. This shows they weren't using propeller boots, no matter any bubbles.

At one point the Enterprise seems to be falling on its side, and Kirk has to leap over a cross corridor, from wall to wall. He is fearful that he will fall "down," meaning towards the Earth. But it is by no means obvious that the artificial gravity can even be tuned so that it points in a different direction. The mere ability to do so constitutes a safety hazard and a threat to the structural integrity of the ship. Also, no one ever accidentally launches themselves into the air whenever these alleged gravity failures occur. Nor is anybody falling "down" that giant hotel lobby space ever so fortunate as to have the supposedly malfunctioning gravity reverse and slow his fall. Also, the center of mass of the ship is irrelevant. Even if the ship were rotating as it fell, the conservation of angular momentum would keep the contents rotating with it. Only if there were angular acceleration on the vessel (as in the bridge crew trying to upright the ship as it fell) and there was a simultaneous gravity failure would anybody be tossed about. But even in this case, no one would be falling downward toward the Earth!

I'm sorry, all we see is people somehow falling faster than a free falling vessel.
__________________
The people of this country need regime change here, not abroad.
stj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 10:40 AM   #40
Herkimer Jitty
Rear Admiral
 
Herkimer Jitty's Avatar
 
Location: Dayglow, New California Republic
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Herkimer Jitty
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Star Trek just has different laws of physics. Period. I know this from watching Voyager.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1965-1965½, 1966-1969, Jan. 21-23 1972, 1979-2005, 2009-?
Herkimer Jitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 04:08 PM   #41
B.J.
Rear Admiral
 
B.J.'s Avatar
 
Location: Huntsville, AL, USA
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

stj wrote: View Post
Also, the center of mass of the ship is irrelevant. Even if the ship were rotating as it fell, the conservation of angular momentum would keep the contents rotating with it. Only if there were angular acceleration on the vessel (as in the bridge crew trying to upright the ship as it fell) and there was a simultaneous gravity failure would anybody be tossed about.
Wrong. If the ship is rotating, the people inside are going to be slung to the extreme edges if there's nothing like artificial gravity holding them in place. If there were no air or bulkheads in the ship, sure, they'd just float in place while the ship rotates around them. But the instant the person hits a bulkhead or is acted on by the fluid (air) around them, some of the ship's angular momentum is going to be translated to them by way of a force. If nothing else acts on them, they'll travel in a straight line, eventually hitting the outer bulkhead of the ship they're in. However, if you have a continuous force from the ship by way of a rotating bulkhead or the contained air, that person will be pushed into a rotation around the ship, which imparts a centrifugal force which forces them to the outer bulkhead again.

Note that I'm just pointing this out in general, I'm not necessarily agreeing with the theory that this is what happened in the movie.
__________________
B.J. --- bj-o23.deviantart.com
B.J. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 06:14 PM   #42
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

stj wrote: View Post
Every time the swimmers move their propellers, they change the direction of their motion, except that they didn't. This shows they weren't using propeller boots, no matter any bubbles.
I didn't see much movement with the legs apart from the minor adjustments you'd expect to see from somebody trying to maintain a particular direction or small adjustments to it. It seemed obvious to me they had thrusters or propellers or something in their feet and the scene reflected that.

I think you need to go back and watch it again.

At one point the Enterprise seems to be falling on its side, and Kirk has to leap over a cross corridor, from wall to wall. He is fearful that he will fall "down," meaning towards the Earth.
"Seems to be falling on its side"? Not based on the exterior shots, and I watched that scene very closely on the second viewing. I cannot actually recall a single moment where the Enterprise was falling stably in a particular orientation for more than a handful of moments. It was effectively in a constant multi-axis tumble the whole time, which is why nobody was ever propelled towards the ceiling.

But it is by no means obvious that the artificial gravity can even be tuned so that it points in a different direction.
Pretty sure that's what inertial dampeners are for.

Nor is anybody falling "down" that giant hotel lobby space ever so fortunate as to have the supposedly malfunctioning gravity reverse and slow his fall.
Gravity doesn't work that way, but even if it did, we wouldn't have really SEEN it since we only got to see the lobby for a handful of seconds when Kirk was running through it.

Also, the center of mass of the ship is irrelevant. Even if the ship were rotating as it fell, the conservation of angular momentum would keep the contents rotating with it.
And rotating with it would cause them to be accelerated AWAY from the center of gravity with a force proportional to their distance from it. The ship wouldn't need to be accelerating in the tumble at all; tumbling at a constant rate would produce the same effect, but it would be far less chaotic than what we've seen in the movie.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 06:17 PM   #43
stj
Rear Admiral
 
stj's Avatar
 
Location: the real world
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Aside from not seeing any motion at a tangent, how fast was the ship rotating? I think there would have to be a rather large angular acceleration for this to be noticeable. You are of course correct in principle.
__________________
The people of this country need regime change here, not abroad.
stj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24 2013, 08:52 PM   #44
Ronald Held
Rear Admiral
 
Location: On the USS Sovereign
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Normally AGS and IDF work together to keep a constant 1g environment regardless of the maneuvering and accelerating TOS may not of mentioned the IDF but they must had had one.
Ronald Held is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 12:37 AM   #45
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Timo wrote: View Post
Gary Seven's transport looked a bit different.
But apparently wasn't, since Kirk's hardware was so inconveniently compatible with it...

The problem I have with transwarp beaming is that something has to maintain the confinement beam until you reach the destination.
It clearly isn't the originating transporter, though, as transportees often rematerialize safely long after this transporter has been destroyed. Sounds like the confinement beam is self-maintaining, until the point where it no longer is, that is.

Well, except that it isn't clear why they can't just scan the volcano's interior and beam a device in with a timer, or why the volcano threatens the planet rather than just the local population, or what the device is actually supposed to do, since capping the volcano will just lead to pressure increasing until the volcano explodes with even greater force. Wibbly wobbly timey wimey.
We have previously seen that transporters have trouble penetrating about two kilometers of ordinary rock. Just add a smidgen of mysterium into the rock and you seriously reduce transporter performance. Not reliable enough for beaming a unique device into place - but reliability ceases to be a concern when it's the only way to extract a fellow officer.
Lol - yes but these explanations aren't all that satisfactory. Earth is moving fast, Qo'onos is moving fast. We can't beam you out of a volcano or from inside the katric ark (which in fairness might be shielded) but we luckily can beam you from one planet to a specific deserted location on another planet? Was it sheer luck that Harrison transported at the exact time that the planetary locations were aligned or can they beam through the hot centre of planets but not volcanoes?
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.