I had thought at the time that there was way too much energy to be channeled through a single dilithium crystal for the entire ship, or even the FOUR crystals we hear about in "Mudd's Women." That's why I kind of thought it probably went the other way (and bear with me on this idea) that the dilithium crystals actually catalyze the creation of antimatter which is then sent to the reactors in the nacelles for consumption. Some power is drawn off from the nacelles and sent back down to engineering where it is conditioned and rectified by a very large transformer assembly (behind Scotty's chainlink fence) and distributed throughout the ship. The reason I came to this conclusion is that various metals (gold, for instance) can be used to produce positrons when struck by high energy photons. I suppose that there's something about dilithium that when you set it as the target for a high-velocity particle beam (in a conventional TOS setup or a TNG-style warp core) the incoming particles deflect off the crystal with reversed spins/charges and are thus converted into antimatter. The resultant antiparticles are drawn off and sent to the nacelles where their mass is converted to energy. Meanwhile, the ramscoops in the warp nacelles gather hydrogen from the interstellar medium to be reacted with the antimatter, with excess hydrogen being pumped down to engineering and fed to the converter assembly to be flipped into antimatter (so their power "regenerates" over time, as long as the warp engines are operating; if not, they'll burn the hydrogen in the impulse engines). This way I kind of disagree with your #3, that the only source of usable power for the ship is the dilithium crystals; from "Elaan of Troyus" it's implied that the main source of power is the warp drives themselves. But from that same episode, there's something else a little worrisome: Scotty initially tells Kirk "the antimatter pods are rigged to blow up the moment we go into warp drive!" But later he tells Kirk "The entire dilithium converter assembly is fused, no chance of repair." Those appear to be separate, unrelated problems, and apparently the first problem cannot be resolved "without being blown halfway across the galaxy." But Scotty only corrects the latter problem with Elaan's necklace... so what about those sabotaged antimatter pods, and how come nobody mentions them again? The most likely scenario is that the antimatter pods--located in the nacelles--are fed FROM the dilithium chamber and contain the reserve fuel supply for the warp engines. This would explain why Scotty didn't realize the converter assembly was fused until later; he simply realized that the crystal was no longer producing antimatter and that activation of warp drive would cause the flow of "bad" fuel into the lines where it would explode on contact with the good fuel already present.
Although your idea of the use of the prefixes "di-" and "tri-" to denote stable ranges seems logical, I'm unaware of it being established in a reliable source that lithium, dilithium, and trilithium exist in three different stable ranges, and that the prefixes are actually used in this manner. We don't even know the atomic number of either dilithium or trilithium. What sources would you use to back up your assertions on this matter? Just because it is a logical pattern, that doesn't mean that the elements were necessarily named according to it. In real life, many things get established names before other patterns are recognized. Sometimes patterns are thought to exist which are later revised, yet the original relatively haphazardly coined names stick. (See the history of the name of the muon as an example: the Greek letter mu was chosen to name the particle since, in Greek, it is the first letter of "meso-". Even though today the muon is not considered a meson, the letter mu remains associated with its name. Why couldn't lithium have as much to do with dilithium as mesons have to do with muons, which is to say nothing at all?) To make this point in a slightly different way, at one time October really was the 8th month of the calendar year, but not any more. Just from the name October alone, we can't conclude that it's actually the 8th month of the year. Also, note that the element dikironium occurs TOS. Is there such an element as kironium in Star Trek? We don't know, but if there is such a thing in theory as kironium in Trek, maybe it isn't even an element.
I have a different take on the dilithium slabs seen so often in the show. Let me first describe my take on the properties of dilithium itself. It is used (as it is on TNG) to regulate the reaction of matter and antimatter. This is possible because in it's purest form, it has a crystalline lattice structure that, while correctly charged, at the correct temperature, can isolate antimatter from the rest of the world without the big boom and allow the M/AM reaction to occur in a finely tuned and controlled fashion. It also is capable of building up and very efficiently holding an electrical charge. It not only focuses the reaction, but actually amplifies the power being given. This doesn't last forever and the more power is rattled out of it, the quicker they will fracture and break and be useless for regulation anymore. Such was the crystal Spock held in "Mudd's Women." ((Though throughout the episode, we hear references to "lithium circuits" I'm willing to suppose the dilithium was routinely referred to as just plain lithium from time to time. I see no need to assume that the ship at some point used lithium and then traded up to dilithium early on, just the verbiage changed to a more technically accurate nomenclature. (I can almost imagine a speaker voice like in M*A*S*H saying "All crew members will refrain from using the word 'lithium' to refer to 'dilithium.' That is all.") Besides, as I understand it, real lithium doesn't actually ever occur in crystal form anyway. )) Anyhow, the crystal Spock holds while lamenting how beautiful it is whilst even cracked and broken, looks suspiciously similar to the dilithium crystal in the articulation frame in the 1701-D's reactor. I would suggest that it actually operates on a similar principle to how it does there. That is indeed where the power comes from, just like TNG; a crystal that regulates the reaction of matter and antimatter. So where do the dilithium paddles come into play? I suggest that the reaction crystals are shaped from the highest grade of natural crystal (a similar process to faceting a diamond). The leftovers from that shaping process are collected and mixed with ground up dilithium from lower grade deposits and formed into that paddle shape. This process results in the translucent red-orange color, while the good clean and pure stuff is quite clear, like a real nice diamond. This material can't really be used to regulate the reaction but still is efficient at holding an electrical charge. In this way, they are used as power cells in high energy equipment. They are charged up in the room form "The Alternative Factor" and are used in various places around the ship. The dilithium crystal converter assembly from "Elaan of Troyius" was perhaps a portion of the reactor which needed the paddle power to operate. (One wonders why they would need to use the guest star's necklace crystals if there's a a drawer full of them in the AF room, but that problem with this script exists no matter what that thing Kryton sabotaged really is supposed to do.) That's my .02 I'll throw in. But I'm open to friendly discussion.... --Alex P.S. I also have well thought out and practical reasons for the ship to have three reactors, one in the Engineering Hull and one each in the nacelles. "Mudd's Women" suggests there are actually four "lithium" circuits. Perhaps the lower reactor actually has two M/AM streams running in parallel? I don't know. I've been up for nearly 23 hours now and I'm beginning to get too old to think straight without sleep. So I hope I haven't rambled too much. Good Night! --AM
One minor property of Dilithium that I think we're forgetting about is that they emit radiation of some sort, as in "Elaan of Troyius". But anyway, I agree with newtype alpha that the anti-matter pods are in the nacelles (if not referring to the nacelles themselves) containing the reserve fuel supply for the warp engines, and about Dilithium converting matter to anti-matter; because, as I've said before in other threads, in TOS everything seems to start with Dilithium, and we're never told where starships get there anti-matter fuel from. The writers for TOS seem to have assumed it comes from Dilithium somehow? And I like Albertese's suggestion about the two types of Dilithium crystals and how they might be used. This could have great utility in reconciling various Trek tech references. My own take on Dilithium is that it is an allotrope of Lithium, as Diamond is to Carbon or Dioxygen is to Oxygen etc.
So, you guys are taking the canonical term "dilithium crystal converter" to mean that which transforms matter into antimatter? I just don't see it... I really don't. Newtype... re: the "power source," well... I think you're missing what I said. Think of a modern nuclear fission reactor. What is the "source" of the usable power from that? Is it the fissionable material, which is in an enhanced state of decay sufficient to generate significant heat? Or is it the water, which is boiled by that heat to become steam? Or is it the turbine which the steam passes through, through which this heat is transformed into mechanical energy? Or is it the generator which is driven by that turbine which transforms that mechanical energy into electrical energy? So, the reaction of matter and antimatter is the root source of the energy, but at that point it is not USEABLE ENERGY. It's equivalent to the raw heat produced by the accelerated fusion reaction in a modern nuclear reactor. This then goes through some process analogous to that of the turbine/generator assembly in a modern fission reactor, by which this becomes (and this is the key word you seem to have missed in my original statement) USEABLE ENERGY. The dilithium is not the source of the energy, in my view... but it IS the source of the USEABLE ENERGY (transformed from the - mostly - unusable reaction products of the matter/antimatter reaction) _______________ Corporal-Captain, Fair enough... you're right, I'm reading in a LITTLE bit. But we do know that dilithium has an atomic number, which means its an element, not a molecule. And we do know that there are other "di-" elements referenced from time to time in Treknology, which are "di-" versions of known elements. There are also a few "magic" materials which have no relationship to any known materials whatsoever (dikyronium, for example). It wasn't 'til late in the TNG-era when we started hearing "tri-" elements, and while I seem to recall some other "tri- besides "trilithium," I can't place it right now. Realistically, we know that those who came up with "trilithium" were people with minimal concern about REAL science, and just wanted something that sounded "better than dilithium." But it's exceptionally rare, even in TNG-era times. So... you're right, I've extrapolated a bit. But I think my extrapolation is the only remotely reasonable conclusion based upon the various info we have. We KNOW that these things are elements... and we know that that are rare... and that they have very high atomic numbers. And that they have "magic" properties, of course, far outside of that of any known real matter. In the end, of course, it's just a McGuffin, so there's no real "correct" interpretation, is there? But I like mine best... Now, in terms of MOLECULES, the terms "di-" and "tri-" have totally different meanings. After all, the molecule "di-hydrogen-oxide" is reasonably significant in normal human life, isn't it? You could argue that "di-lithium" was some molecular form of lithium with two lithium nuclei somehow tied together... except for the fact that it is made clear that these are elements (atomic numbers don't apply to molecules, only to elements). In the end, it's all "TV magic," and it's likely that nothing remotely like any of this actually exists. But... we DO know that the periodic table becomes more unstable as atomic numbers increase, and we know that nature tends to work in a "fractal" fashion... with patterns repeating periodically as a matter of scale. SO, the idea that the periodic table "repeats" with regions of stable elements, following similar patterns, is consistent with other elements of reality we DO know. Definitely extrapolation on my part, though. Fair enough. _________________________________ Alex, To be entirely fair, the crystal held by Spock was a chunk of rock taken from the lot's property department... and this was the first-ever time that the term "dilithium" had so much as been spoken wasn't it? And the chunk was clearly intended to represent a chunk of something else which had shattered. That TNG replicated that, shattered chunk as a functional device always bothered me. For ME, that is a fragment of a large crystal (probably cylindrical?) which had broken up. Very likely, immediately after this, the ship's crystal system was refurbished at a dockyard, and they got the "amber slabs" system installed. (We never see dockyard delays, of course, because that's not exciting storytelling unless Kirk is being tried for killing Ben Finney, of course!) The big question regarding the crystals (in amber-slab form) to me is... did the application of these significantly change when Enginering got the "balls-covered polygon" console, or was that just a minor alteration to the existing system? We DO see the amber slabs in that consoles several times, and we do see the Troian cut gem being placed in there as well. Again, what we know (as a matter of real physics) is that matter and antimatter react just fine without anything else involved. But we also know (as a matter of storytelling) that the ship has "no power" from the main reactor system (and let's be clear, it seems that this also means little or no power from the auxiliary power system, which I interpret as meaning fusion reactors) without these crystals, don't we? We can interpret this as just inconsistent storytelling... "auxiliary power" seems to be significant in combat situations, doesn't it, yet clearly the ship is pretty much powerless without dilithium crystals, running purely on batteries. The alternative to "inconsistent storytelling" requires us to look at this practically. Dilithium crystals are the source of power... or more correctly, "power we can use to run the ship." This is like saying that the generator at a nuclear reactor is the source of power you can use. Entirely accurate... as long as you ensure that you remember that you're converting an unusable form of power into a useable form, and you're talking about the source of USEABLE power. They, and the "energizer" (I've come to believe that the "cathedral of tubes" is what's called the energizer in TOS) make up the equivalent of the turbine-and-generator system in a modern fission power plant, while the m/am reactor is the equivalent of the fission reactor in a modern fission power plant. One last point.. diamond to carbon and "di-oxygen" to atomic oxygen? These are two utterly different concepts. One discusses a crystal-lattice structure, the other discusses a molecule. Utterly different concept. And NEITHER relates, in any way whatsoever, to the concept of a unique ELEMENT with a unique atomic number. It's unlikely that we're all going to come to a common conclusion, though, isn't it? I just want to ensure that we stop trying to "retrocon" TOS to fit in with post-TOS design concepts. Do we try to "retrocon" "Trek-science" to fit? That's less objectionable (and I've done it myself, above). But we must never "re-write" TOS ideas to fit in with Berman-era (or Abrams-era, for that matter) ideas which SHOULD have derived from and conformed to those TOS ideas. We were never really intended to fully understand the TOS engine system. TNG-era guys, frankly, sort of screwed up by attempting to pin this stuff down too closely, and moreover by deviating from TOS-era concepts when they did so. In the end, "it's just a TV show." But I've made a hobby of trying to make it make some form of sense in a real-world context. As it seems, have you guys. It sure would be nice if we could all agree... but we might as well say that it'll be nice to have peace in the middle east, huh?
Well, maybe, but here's what wikipedia says... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotropy Notice that it says "Allotropy or allotropism is the property of some chemical elements to exist in two or more different forms, known as allotropes of these elements." And notice that it says "The term allotropy is used for elements only, not for compounds." But then it also says "For some elements, allotropes have different molecular formulae which can persist in different phases – for example, two allotropes of oxygen (dioxygen, O2 and ozone, O3), can both exist in the solid, liquid and gaseous states." So it seems "diamond to carbon and "di-oxygen" to atomic oxygen" are not "two utterly different concepts" but are in fact related to one another threough the concept of allotopy, just as I wrote, and could therefore be aplied to explain how real Lithium might relate to imaginary Dilithium crystals. Also, where do you find (especially in TOS) Dilithium established as a "unique ELEMENT with a unique atomic number"? I don't recall anything of the sort being mentioned anywhere.
Throwing my thoughts in the mix as well I see the Enterprise's main power system as using three M/AM reactors. The one in the engineering hull pumps its reaction energy into the main energizer system that contains the lithium/dilithium crystal converter assembly. In the converter assembly, the crystals are charged up by the M/AM energy. The crystals are simultaneously drained of energy (discharges) as ship's systems request it. The crystal's side product is the creation of antimatter and/or matter. It either is creating extra matter/antimatter or tapping into antimatter universe as it discharges (ala "The Alternative Factor"). This gives the ship a nearly unlimited range and covers the "regenerating" aspect. That M/AM is split between fuel for the two M/AM engines (nacelles) and the main M/AM reserves which then loops back to the engineering M/AM reactor. Each nacelle also holds a small reserve of M/AM fuel that can be redistributed back to the main M/AM fuel system. I am also hypothesizing that a M/AM reaction engine is required on Starfleet warp engines to be able to create a space warp. In an emergency, we know that the crystals can be bypassed ("bypass circuits") and the M/AM energy can be fed directly to the ship's systems. The bypass circuits are part of the crystal converter assembly, and in "Mudd's Women" and "Elaan of Troyius" the bypass circuits were either blown out or the assembly fused. We saw one successful bypass in ST2:TWOK. The downside is that AM fuel (range) will be a problem after a while if the system isn't fixed. The energizer we saw in "The Alternative Factor" I believe also powered the ship (that's where the crystals plug into) and in Season 2, the ship received an upgrade and the energizer system was moved beneath the engine room. The full charge held by the 4 lithium/dilithium crystals is significantly more than the direct output of the M/AM system. It can't be held indefinitely but it can be used for short feats of extreme power output. Examples would be "pushing a moon-sized object with deflectors", "shields stopping 5 hits from Nomad", etc. In combat, this also covers the loss in warp maneuvering in "The Return of the Archons" and "The Changeling" when ALL power is being channeled to the shields. When the crystals are drained, the M/AM system then takes time to recharge them. But if the ship has no respite to do so, this leads to the loss of power because it is unable to channel power to charge back up the crystals. I don't think the TMP engine setup is all that different. More compact but I think it still operated on the same TOS principle. Note that I think that TNG and later engines (including ENT) don't operate like TOS and they aren't on the same tech continuity so I'm not attempting to bridge the differences.
I think you guys have muddied up the waters so much the Loch Ness Monster could swim by and nobody'd notice.
The waters and mud that are in the nacelles and are powered by lithium batteries.. Christ, can't you follow this??? I'm certainly in agreement of reactors being in the main hull of the ship, but nothing powerful enough to enable warp speed. Enough for all other ship functions. I would think just the one main reactor in the secondary hull engineering were we would have the batteries too. Now failing the power from the nacelles, and then the backup reactor in engineering, the batteries would be good for limited functions. Maybe some very temporary defences. limited impulse. Very limited power hungry transporter activites. Maintaining stable planetary orbit for lengthy periods. Though long term life support and food replication.
The water is positive and the mud is negative. Intermix them cold and you get time travel One thing though is that the reactor in the secondary hull must have some influence on the actual use of the warp engines in the nacelles. The sabotage of the secondary hull one in "That Which Survives" and the modification of it in "The Changeling" pushed the warp engines to higher speeds.
Well, let's face it. If we're going to try to incorporate all (or as much as possible) of the TOS onscreen references into one "grand unified theory" then it aint gonna be simple. After all, there's a lot of trivia to account for isn't there. What I consider "muddying up the waters" is when someone tries to add something to the mix that is totally new and uncalled for by the onscreen "evidence". An example would be the idea that Dilithium exists partially in this universe and partially in another universe or subspace or whatever, etc. Or, when those involved in later Trek productions arbitrarily retcon something without doing their homework first, such as saying that Dilithium somehow "magically" is not reactive with antimatter, or that the A-M "pods" are not the nacelles themselves (or at least inside them), but just small tanks for said fuel at the bottom of the M/ARC etc. etc. But what blssdwlf, others, and myself have tried to do is simplify things, as much as is possible, by bringing everything (in TOS) together under one, logical, self consistent explanation. And while this naturally involves extrapolating from known treknical "facts" and throwing a bit of real world physics into the mix on occasion, at least we're not pulling stuff out of our arses, and making up total BS as we go along. And speaking just for myself, trying to retcon or “retrocon” TNG + techno-babble into TOS muddies the water far more than just dealing with TOS tech alone. While I think it can be fun to try to bridge the gap in some cases, if possible, ultimately, more often than not, it just causes more headaches than it solves. IMHO it makes far more sense to treat TOS as a special case unto itself, and ignore the later stuff that was done after Jefferies and Roddenberry etc. were no longer involved, than it does to ignore or “explain away” clear TOS references just for the sake of consistency with the spinoffs made by people who had no connection with the original. Or rather, let’s rethink post TOS Treks’ techno-babble to make it more compatible with that which is the source of its existence in the first place.
One thing we need to address, before we do anything else, is just to determine what we think terms actually used on-screen in TOS mean to us. One term that is used regularly throughout TOS, but which seems to be getting neglected here, is "auxiliary power." We know that auxiliary power is not "the batteries" because these are discussed separately at various times (and, also, because real-world use of this terminology precludes it, but no need to get into that unless someone really thinks "auxiliary power" refers to the batteries, is there?) We also know that "auxiliary power" provides some substantial additional power source... sufficient to make a significant impact during combat operations and the like. What we need to decide, if we're going to try to work through all this, is "what is auxiliary power?" To me, the ship's auxiliary power is provided by a series of fusion reactors located in the main hull of the ship. (six in the primary hull, adjacent to impulse engineering, accessible from outside the ship by the "L" panels above impulse engineering, and four in the secondary hull, below main engineering, accessible from outside the ship by the "T" panel on the underside of that hull). While not capable of producting WARP DRIVE, these can be used to energize the subspace field sufficiently to permit my personally--preferred concept for "FTL subspace-assisted impulse" and can be used to power most ship's systems. But, you could argue, I suppose, that auxiliary power" is an additional m/am reactor, if you wish. There's nothing in TOS that states what "auxiliary power" really is, is there? It's worth looking at the "aerospace model" when you think about this. Most large jet aircraft, today, have an "auxiliary power unit," typically in the tailcone. This is a small gas turbine, similar in concept to the aircraft's main engines but different in implementation. The APU is not designed to product thrust (although it actually does produce a small amount of thrust, it's not sufficient to actually keep the aircraft in the air, much less sufficient to let the aircraft take off!). The APU does, however, directly connect to an internal generator. When at the airport, the aircraft is generally mostly shut down. It may be running off of electrical power provided by umbilicals, or it may be running on battery power. But neither the umbilicals nor the batteries can produce sufficient power to support starting of the main engines, generally speaking. The APU, on the other hand, is quite a bit smaller than those propulsive gas turbines. It can be started using power from the batteries, or supplied through an umbilical. The APU can produce sufficient power to permit the main engines to be started. The APU can also be turned on, in-flight, to provide supplementary power to the aircraft. This is rare, but is less rare than it has been in the past, now that many more aircraft systems are being driven electrically (fuel pumps, actuator systems, etc, etc) which were previously primarily hydraulically-driven. If the electrical load on the aircraft systems exceeds the capacity generated by the main propulsive engines, the APU can be started to provide supplementary electrical power to keep the aircraft systems operating properly. So... for me, the Enterprise's "auxiliary power" system consists of fusion reactors, not m/am reactors. But those who think that there is a third reactor in the secondary hull may be treating that as the ship's auxiliary power system.
I pretty much always thought of the impulse fusion reactors as the "APU's" when they are called upon to power other systems besides the impulse engines, although they can do both at the same time, and there may be, of course, additional fusion reactors dedicated as "APU's".
Well, in my own version of this ship, the impulse drive isn't actually a "fusion rocket," as much as it's an outgrowth of the VASIMIR concept (which is, basically, an electrically-driven rocket), and the fusion reactors are not inherently part of a propulsion mechanism per-se. That's not demonstrated in canon in any way, mind you, it's just my personal perspective. I don't think you were here when I was developing my own Enterprise, were you? If not... here's what my impulse deck looks like (notice two "engineering set" spaces, one to either side, which have spaces for"energizer cathedrals" as well... which are in addition to main engineering in the secondary hull) You can see my six fusion reactors, which are separate from the propulsive (VASIMIR-like) system.That's how I, personally see it. And we have a total of ten of those reactors throughout the hull. That's one thing I've noticed... people tend to hear "reactor" in TOS and automatically assume that this means "matter/antimatter reactor," even in cases when there's no reason to draw that conclusion. If we hear "reactor number three," who's to say that this doesn't mean "fusion reactor number three" rather than "matter/antimatter reactor number three?"
Yeah, I remember that, good stuff there. If the impulse engines are indeed advanced rocket engines (by definition "impulse" = rockets) then it probably is something like you've got there. But I've also been toying around with the Idea that the impulse engines may use a perfected version of the Biefeld-Brown effect, which uses a sharp high voltage "impulse" to produce thrust, which seems to tie into the mysteries of the unified field, as it can produce anti-gravitational effects as well. P.S. Occam's razor would suggest that the 3 reactors mentioned twice in TOS are three M/A-M reactors, but I agree, they could refer to other types. It just seems to segue into the other references to multiple "M/A-M reactor(s)" and helps to reconcile everything.
Agreed- And I've been guilty of not explaining that when I've said reactor, if it wasn't prefaced with m/am, then I wasn't talking about a m/am reactor.
Just coming off of cataract surgery so not much I can add at this point but in the interest of levity this seems obligatory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raP9uVHgfcA&ob=av2n