RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,759
Posts: 5,433,661
Members: 24,838
Currently online: 581
Newest member: MaineLen

TrekToday headlines

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

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18


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 > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 25 2013, 04:26 PM   #1021
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

I seem to remember enjoying this scene quite a lot when watching it, pity that never survives contact with the fandom.
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 04:30 PM   #1022
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

YellowSubmarine wrote:
It is also a decent way to acknowledge the existence of artificial gravity, to familiarize the audience with it
Isn't that accomplished by all the usual scenes where people are walking around on starships instead of floating?
__________________
"Your advertising's just dandy. Folks'd never guess you ain't got a thing to sell."
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 04:31 PM   #1023
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Set Harth wrote: View Post
YellowSubmarine wrote:
It is also a decent way to acknowledge the existence of artificial gravity, to familiarize the audience with it
Isn't that accomplished by all the usual scenes where people are walking around on starships instead of floating?
Yup.
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 05:09 PM   #1024
YellowSubmarine
Rear Admiral
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Set Harth wrote: View Post
Isn't that accomplished by all the usual scenes where people are walking around on starships instead of floating?
In my experience, this could lead to people saying "What a stupid film, do they know there is no gravity in space? I knew I shouldn't have listened to you to watch this Star Trek bullshit" Well, except that was Prometheus, but I guess Star Trek would have had the same reaction.

The scenes in TUC and STID where the gravity failed, as well as the scenes in Enterprise, STXI and STID where people floated away in space after a hull breach, were a very convincing and influencing reminder that you are not on the ground, that the gravity is only artificial and that it might fail you at any moment. It suddenly makes me think how that the rules I know no longer apply, and makes me enjoy being somewhere else.

Or are you saying that the film is better off without that scene? I am not following.
__________________
R.I.P. Cadet James T. Kirk (-1651)
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 07:39 PM   #1025
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Spock said that the gravity systems were failing, that could mean they were going haywire, it didn't help that the Enterprise was caught in the gravity field of Earth.
__________________
Here's proof that I can write something without using the word f**k.
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 10:35 PM   #1026
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Kruezerman wrote: View Post
Spock said that the gravity systems were failing, that could mean they were going haywire, it didn't help that the Enterprise was caught in the gravity field of Earth.
At 300,000km from Earth, the gravitation field from the Earth is effectively 0. So, they should never have been "caught" in the gravity field of Earth. And even if they were, it would have taken quite a long time to fall (in fact, they probably should have crashed into the moon instead). Enough time for any given Federation starship, or a fleet of shuttles, to rescue them. Hence another majorly egregious BAD SCIENCE moment.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 10:54 PM   #1027
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
View SeerSGB's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
Spock said that the gravity systems were failing, that could mean they were going haywire, it didn't help that the Enterprise was caught in the gravity field of Earth.
At 300,000km from Earth, the gravitation field from the Earth is effectively 0. So, they should never have been "caught" in the gravity field of Earth. And even if they were, it would have taken quite a long time to fall (in fact, they probably should have crashed into the moon instead). Enough time for any given Federation starship, or a fleet of shuttles, to rescue them. Hence another majorly egregious BAD SCIENCE moment.
Yes, and are you going to bust Trek's nuts over every single one of them over the last ~50 years?
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Blog | Homepage |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:05 PM   #1028
YellowSubmarine
Rear Admiral
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
At 300,000km from Earth, the gravitation field from the Earth is effectively 0.
How do we have a Moon then? It would have floated away from Earth by now if the gravitation field was effectively 0. We also don't know the real distance from Earth the scene takes place, and we don't know the meaning behind the phrase. It could as well mean the current velocity has put the ship on a trajectory that will be intercepted by Earth's gravity.

I also just saw the film again, and I must admit that I was wrong. While the implication is clearly there, and in fact the ship is always aligned so that the people are falling towards the Earth, everything is vague enough that it can be interpreted in any way you want, and in no place a connection between Earth's gravity and the people falling has been established. Sorry, I was going on by the memory of my earlier impressions.

Oh, and let's not forget... The moon's gravitational pull obscured our warp signature.
__________________
R.I.P. Cadet James T. Kirk (-1651)
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:20 PM   #1029
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

YellowSubmarine wrote: View Post
WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
At 300,000km from Earth, the gravitation field from the Earth is effectively 0.
How do we have a Moon then? It would have floated away from Earth by now if the gravitation field was effectively 0.
e = Earth

g_e = GM_e/r_e^2 = (6.67e-11)(5.98e24)/(2.4e8)^2 = 0.007 N/kg

Compare this with 9.8 N/kg at the surface. This is "effectively 0". Why do we have a moon? Because (a) it is HUGE compared to a starship (mass = 10^22 kg), and F = mg_e). Second, it's orbital velocity is enough to offset this gravitational pull. If the moon weren't moving, it would fall into us.

We also don't know the real distance from Earth the scene takes place,
Sulu: We're 237,000 km from Earth!

That's very clear as to what the real distance is. Drifting 10,000km here or there doesn't change the physics significantly.

They seem pretty stationary, otherwise, considering the moon is so close (and doesn't drift away). Assuming they were in a direct line-of-sight between the two, they'd have been about 140,000km from the moon. This would decrease the total gravitational field by a marginally small amount, but it would still be directed toward the Earth.

Last edited by WarpFactorZ; August 25 2013 at 11:36 PM.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:36 PM   #1030
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

/thread

I bet Einstein would have loved Star Trek Into Darkness
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:43 PM   #1031
YellowSubmarine
Rear Admiral
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
Sulu: We're 237,000 km from Earth!
240000 km from Earth sounds like peanuts compared to the ~1 AU of Soran's rocket in Generations. If children fireworks can take 1 AU in 6 seconds, why couldn't a ship that just dropped out of warp, received massive photon torpedo bombardment and felt the enormous shockwave from the explosion of 72 experimental torpedoes, make it well into Earth's gravity well in a few minutes (or hours, because unless Sulu also mentions the time, it is also unclear)?
__________________
R.I.P. Cadet James T. Kirk (-1651)
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:44 PM   #1032
gerbil
Captain
 
Location: USA
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

If the Enterprise were stationary compared to Earth, there's a good chance it would cease being in freefall and be drawn directly downward.

Given that the Enterprise's thrusters were still functioning (Sulu aligns the Enterprise with the Vengeance), I assume there was some sort of station keeping. Especially considering the incredible damage to the Enterprise there had to have been a lot of residual gas leaks.

Once the ship lost power, any sort of venting atmosphere could be enough to accelerate the ship into a death spiral.
__________________
"Life should be revered simply for the fact that we need to be thankful that we are currently able to consciously appreciate what we are going through right now. ... This moment that we're having right now is highly significant." -Maynard James Keenan
gerbil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:51 PM   #1033
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
Yes, and are you going to bust Trek's nuts over every single one of them over the last ~50 years?
Can you imagine what a clusterfuck this board would be if every scientific inaccuracy throughout Trek was treated with as much venom as Into Darkness?
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:57 PM   #1034
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
View SeerSGB's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

BillJ wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
Yes, and are you going to bust Trek's nuts over every single one of them over the last ~50 years?
Can you imagine what a clusterfuck this board would be if every scientific inaccuracy throughout Trek was treated with as much venom as Into Darkness?
Not enough Excedrin in the world for that.

Put it always amuses me the amount of bullshit science and "speculative fiction" ST fans will buy into, and only to flip out over equally as bad speculative bullshit fiction when they don't like an episode or movie.

Then again, it isn't just ST fans, sci-fi and fantasy fans in general are fickle creatures.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Blog | Homepage |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 25 2013, 11:59 PM   #1035
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Suspension of disbelief is a funny thing!
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
argument, size, starship

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 05:14 PM.

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