RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,152
Posts: 5,343,907
Members: 24,597
Currently online: 671
Newest member: novacharter

TrekToday headlines

New Funko Trek Figure
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Saldana As A Role Model
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

San Diego Comic-Con Trek Fan Guide
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Cumberbatch As Turing
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Retro Review: In the Pale Moonlight
By: Michelle on Jul 19

Trek Beach Towel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 18

Two New Starships Collection Releases
By: T'Bonz on Jul 17

Giacchino Tour Arrives In North America
By: T'Bonz on Jul 17

IDW Publishing October Star Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Jul 16

Cho As Romantic Lead
By: T'Bonz on Jul 16


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 TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 25 2013, 02:19 AM   #76
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
^^ I'm vague on this, but were there ever any references onscreen regarding where Auxiliary Control might be? Could you have two Auxiliary Control rooms, one in the saucer and one in the support hull? And Auxiliary Control is certainly something that could be depicted in more detail in the tech manual.
From "I, Mudd" for the Enterprise:
KIRK: Intruder alert, deck eight, auxiliary control.
Dialogue from other episodes seems to point to only one aux control but like the "one" transporter room, it could be just a matter of which one is active at the time of the episode if you want to interpret as two control rooms.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 02:25 AM   #77
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

Well if you separate the saucer than having a second Auxiliary Control in the support hull could be useful.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 02:57 AM   #78
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

TIN_MAN wrote: View Post
Agreed; the AC is a stumbling block for me as well. Although this is really just a problem for his plans and not the tech manual so much, even so, using "the Constellation is not the Enterprise" argument, I think FJ should have made some provision for it in his plans. It's unclear though, whether this was an intentional omission or just an oversight, but most likely the former?

While one gets the sense that FJ felt he had more leeway, and understandably so, with the “redress of the week” sets that appeared just once, like the phaser room for example; the AC was however, repeatedly seen and clearly intended to look the way we saw it, so FJ should have honored MJ’s intentions here. The same goes for the emergency manual monitor in engineering and the decompression chamber in the medical lab, although the latter was most likely omitted by mistake.

Still, I think the best way to “correct” this is to make one of FJ’s “emergency bridges” into an AC instead?
I'm not sure I understand "the Constellation is not the Enterprise" argument in this case. Auxiliary control is repeatedly seen (as you said?) on the Enterprise, in episodes such as The Way to Eden.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 04:16 AM   #79
GSchnitzer
Co-Executive Producer
 
GSchnitzer's Avatar
 
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, Terra
Send a message via AIM to GSchnitzer Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to GSchnitzer Send a message via Yahoo to GSchnitzer
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
TIN_MAN wrote: View Post
Agreed; the AC is a stumbling block for me as well. Although this is really just a problem for his plans and not the tech manual so much, even so, using "the Constellation is not the Enterprise" argument, I think FJ should have made some provision for it in his plans. It's unclear though, whether this was an intentional omission or just an oversight, but most likely the former?

While one gets the sense that FJ felt he had more leeway, and understandably so, with the “redress of the week” sets that appeared just once, like the phaser room for example; the AC was however, repeatedly seen and clearly intended to look the way we saw it, so FJ should have honored MJ’s intentions here. The same goes for the emergency manual monitor in engineering and the decompression chamber in the medical lab, although the latter was most likely omitted by mistake.

Still, I think the best way to “correct” this is to make one of FJ’s “emergency bridges” into an AC instead?
I'm not sure I understand "the Constellation is not the Enterprise" argument in this case. Auxiliary control is repeatedly seen (as you said?) on the Enterprise, in episodes such as The Way to Eden.
I may be putting words in TIN_MAN's mouth, but I think he meant to say the "Constitution is not the Enterprise." Meaning that the Constitution blueprints that Franz Joseph drew which don't show Auxiliary Control might not be truly reflective of the Enterprise's layout.
__________________
Greg Schnitzer
Co-Executive Producer
Star Trek Phase II
http://www.startrekphase2.com
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3348883/
GSchnitzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 04:20 AM   #80
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

And that doesn't even address the scientific "absurdities" where TOS science is different from real life science. Start to draw the line here and there, make a judgement call to ignore certain onscreen stuff we find "absurd" and we'll be back probably where FJ arrived at, IMHO.
Yeah. One of my favorite examples in this case is the idea that there's a booster for the Enterprise computer's ability to hear sounds that "can increase that capability on the order of one to the fourth power". Ridiculous, since 1^4 equals 1.
There might be more to that than the mistake Nimoy made. It might result in an opportunity to hint at something going on that while not making immediate sense to our 20th century ears could have meaning to a technology or physics we don't yet understand. For example, if he is saying "one to the fourth" and you read it as "one to the 1/4" you end up with factors of 1,-1,i, -i. That is more interesting than just one - particularly the imaginary numbers.

http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=86266

A possible application- Base one algebra (versor algebra):
http://www.conspiracy.co/forums/main...d-retweet.html
http://aetherforce.com/eric-creates-...algebra-video/

Last edited by aridas sofia; May 25 2013 at 04:39 AM.
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 04:32 AM   #81
GSchnitzer
Co-Executive Producer
 
GSchnitzer's Avatar
 
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, Terra
Send a message via AIM to GSchnitzer Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to GSchnitzer Send a message via Yahoo to GSchnitzer
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
There might be more to that than the mistake Nimoy made. It might result in an opportunity to hint at something going on that while not making immediate sense to our 20th century ears could have meaning to a technology or physics we don't yet understand. For example, if he is saying "one to the fourth" and you read it as "one to the 1/4" you end up with factors of 1,-1,i, -i. That is more interesting than just one - particularly the imaginary numbers.

http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=86266
Interestingly, the actual scripted line in "Court Martial" (it's Kirk's line, not Spock's) was "one to the tenth power"--which, scientific notation-wise, isn't really any better. But all in all, it seems to be a scripting error, not any actor delivery error.
__________________
Greg Schnitzer
Co-Executive Producer
Star Trek Phase II
http://www.startrekphase2.com
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3348883/
GSchnitzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 04:41 AM   #82
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
For example, if he is saying "one to the fourth" and you read it as "one to the 1/4" you end up with factors of 1,-1,i, -i. That is more interesting than just one - particularly the imaginary numbers.

http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=86266
No, that would still be wrong.

By the convention of principle values, whereby one branch of a multi-valued function is selected to avoid ambiguities, exponentiation is a single-valued function.

Under that convention, one raised to any power, fractional or otherwise, is still one.

On the other hand, negative one, when raised to a fractional power, is complex and can be purely imaginary. For example, negative one raised to the one-half power is the imaginary unit, but positive one raised to the one-half power is still just plain old one.

(Note that (-i)^2=-1 also, but the selection of principle square root means that (-1)^(1/2)=+i unambiguously.)

Besides, he (and, it was Kirk/Shatner) still said one to the fourth and not one to the one-fourth. But even if he had said one to the one-fourth, the value would still be one (by the convention of principle values).

Interesting idea, actually, but there's just no (reasonable) way to make lemonade out of these particular lemons. It's really just Treknobabbly gobbledygook in this case, I believe.

GSchnitzer wrote: View Post
Constitution
Ah, yeah, that would make perfect sense. Yeah, making the blueprints out to be plans of the Constitution was a perfect loophole.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 04:44 AM   #83
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

What if he is referring to a base one calculation using the versor algebra I linked to above?
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 05:06 AM   #84
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
What if he is referring to a base one calculation using the versor algebra I linked to above?
Dollard's just adopting a multi-valued convention, with quaternions. In this context, of sound amplification, it's still just gobbledygook.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 05:10 AM   #85
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

This is the spoken dialogue: "By installing a booster, we can increase that capability on the order of one to the fourth power."

Since "one to the fourth power" equals "one", here is the translated dialogue: "By installing a booster, we can increase that capability on the order of one."

"An order of one" magnitude is a x10 increase in capability, if we assume Kirk meant an "order of magnitude".
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 05:13 AM   #86
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
This is the spoken dialogue: "By installing a booster, we can increase that capability on the order of one to the fourth power."

Since "one to the fourth power" equals "one", here is the translated dialogue: "By installing a booster, we can increase that capability on the order of one."

"An order of one" magnitude is a x10 increase in capability, if we assume Kirk meant an "order of magnitude".
If you're going to bend over backwards to read it that way, then "to the fourth power" is still completely superfluous.

Which is the point. It's only there to sound technical. It's like a prop, but in dialog.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 05:16 AM   #87
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
This is the spoken dialogue: "By installing a booster, we can increase that capability on the order of one to the fourth power."

Since "one to the fourth power" equals "one", here is the translated dialogue: "By installing a booster, we can increase that capability on the order of one."

"An order of one" magnitude is a x10 increase in capability, if we assume Kirk meant an "order of magnitude".
If you're going to bend over backwards to read it that way, then "to the fourth power" is still completely superfluous.
The translation seemed obvious to me <shrugs>. The only bending over backwards was quoting the text in several easy to follow steps to see where the dialogue ended up going. I only wish I looked at this earlier instead of assuming this was an absurd bit of dialogue Bad, as in clunky, yeah.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Which is the point. It's only there to sound technical. It's like a prop, but in dialog.
So does that mean the dialogue went from not absurd to a prop? Maybe he just wanted impress his old girlfriend.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 05:28 AM   #88
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
So does that mean the dialogue went from not absurd to a prop?
No. I'll repeat with explicit emphasis:
It's only there to sound technical.
It is meaningless.

Props are there to make the scene look like it takes place in the future, even though the props aren't from the future.

This dialog is there to make it sound like technical jargon is being spoken, even though none is. The average viewer probably isn't very good at math (not that good) and can't tell the difference, anyway. From that point of view, the dialog's perfectly effective and isn't something the writers, actors, or director need to sweat.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 05:32 AM   #89
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
It's only there to sound technical.
It is meaningless.
The double-speak is meaningless since it only equals one.

But the dialogue itself still indicates an increase in capability - so it isn't completely meaningless. Just sayin'

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Props are there to make the scene look like it takes place in the future, even though the props aren't from the future.

This dialog is there to make it sound like technical jargon is being spoken, even though none is. The average viewer probably isn't very good at math (not that good) and can't tell the difference, anyway. From that point of view, the dialog's perfectly effective and isn't something the writers, actors, or director need to sweat.
Yes, why were we even focusing on this dialogue anyway?
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2013, 05:43 AM   #90
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
It's only there to sound technical.
It is meaningless.
The double-speak is meaningless since it only equals one.

But the dialogue itself still indicates an increase in capability - so it isn't completely meaningless. Just sayin'

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Props are there to make the scene look like it takes place in the future, even though the props aren't from the future.

This dialog is there to make it sound like technical jargon is being spoken, even though none is. The average viewer probably isn't very good at math (not that good) and can't tell the difference, anyway. From that point of view, the dialog's perfectly effective and isn't something the writers, actors, or director need to sweat.
Yes, why were we even focusing on this dialogue anyway?
I brought it up as an example of what canon to filter out/tweak, when compiling a TM.

The intent is, as you say, clearly that the sound is amplified. They simply needed to say something like this:

Gentlemen, this computer has an auditory sensor. It can, in effect, hear sounds. We've installed a booster, to increase that capability. The computer should bring us every sound occurring on the ship.
Perhaps the intent was to increase the sound by four orders of magnitude, but that's not at all what came out. Really, the actual number should have been irrelevant.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain 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 04:52 PM.

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