RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 146,933
Posts: 5,796,849
Members: 26,049
Currently online: 473
Newest member: Butch

TrekToday headlines

Shatner Show Coming To Australia
By: T'Bonz on Jul 27

Star Trek Beyond Wigs
By: T'Bonz on Jul 27

Star Trek Beyond Adds New Cast Member
By: T'Bonz on Jul 27

Pegg: No Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Stewart Snotbot Support
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Ryan Joins Arrow
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Retro Review: Jetrel
By: Michelle on Jul 24

New ThinkGeek Trek-Themed Products
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

Star Trek The Cabin
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

Bikel Passes
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22


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 Fandom > Fan Art

Fan Art Post your Trek fan art here, including hobby models and collectibles.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 16 2009, 02:06 PM   #76
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

GilmourD wrote: View Post
Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
It doesn't matter if you accelerate due to a field interaction, or due to expulsion of mass. You're still accelerating, and you're still subject to relativistic effects. Anything else, no matter how convenient for storytelling, is nothing more or less than "make-believe."
I've always understood it to be a compression of space fore of the vessel and expansion aft, like Juan said. Thus, neither of your Newtonian scenarios fit. You don't have multiple fields interacting but rather space itself changing dimensions, thus allowing the ship traveling at sublight within the confines of the dimension changed space to appear to travel faster than light since the surrounding space hasn't changed dimensions.
That's exactly my point. "Warp drive" isn't a "field drive." It's something else entirely. Warp drive is "none of the above." A "field drive" is still a Newtonian system. It just creates acceleration through the interaction of two fields (one internally generated, one external and, almost always, natural), rather than through expulsion of highly-accelerated mass.

Warp drive is something else entirely. It's just "warp drive," not a subclass of some other category.
Warp drive is all about perspective. It's like if you take a tablecloth and scrunched up the left hand side but left the right hand side fully extended across the table. Take two Matchbox cars and have them travel from one end of the tablecloth to the other on each side at the same rate of speed. While both cars travel over the same amount of cloth, the car on the left side gets from one end to the other more quickly due to the tablecloth being scrunched up.

Now that's an obvious oversimplification of my understanding of it, but it gets the point across. A ship traveling at warp doesn't compress all of space as such but manipulates it as it travels via a subspace field.

It's kinda like you're not really traveling faster than light but rather shortening the distance that you have to travel. It just seems like you're traveling faster than light because light itself can't shorten the distance it has to travel.
That's a fairly good explanation of how my hypothetical "FTL impulse" would work... albeit that everything is based upon local frame-of-reference. You might say that the "local speed of light is greater, relative to 'real space/time'." But, by the same argument, you might say that "real space/time is compressed, relative to your local frame of reference." So a Newtonian propulsion system becomes plausible for interstellar travel, because the distances your "sublight," Newtonian system requires you to move are (effectively) tremendously reduced.

But "warp drive" isn't even like that. It's not about "shortening the effective distance between two points" or "increasing the effective speed of light" or anything like that. The best way to describe "warp drive" is that you're creating a wave in the fabric of the universe, and "surfing on subspace."
Cary L. Brown 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 03:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.