Actually, it is very much possible.
Not all wars have to be long-drawn out affairs to be of major historical importance. Although a lot of stuff came before it, the Dominion War itself really only lasted less than two years.
Enterprise's involvement in the Earth-Romulan War
- Thread starter Servo
- Start date
Not all wars have to be long-drawn out affairs to be of major historical importance. Although a lot of stuff came before it, the Dominion War itself really only lasted less than two years.
The thing to remember is that we don't know why the war was fought.
If it was all about the control of a single planet, it might have been over in a forthnight. If it was about striking a decisive Pearl Harbor style blow against the enemy and then telling him that he should yield and cease trying to pester the attacker, who is not interested in territorial expansion or anything like that and only cares about security, it could be over overnight. It might be about more esoteric things, too: perhaps a Helen of Troy style situation where a single person or perhaps a single item was contested, by military means when other means failed.
Might be that we have got the contestants all wrong, too. Perhaps the Romulans were fighting somebody else, and humans got caught in the crossfire? Humans wouldn't need mighty fleets to triumph, then: Romulans could lose to their real enemy, and humans would get the side benefit of "also winning".
Timo Saloniemi
If it was all about the control of a single planet, it might have been over in a forthnight. If it was about striking a decisive Pearl Harbor style blow against the enemy and then telling him that he should yield and cease trying to pester the attacker, who is not interested in territorial expansion or anything like that and only cares about security, it could be over overnight. It might be about more esoteric things, too: perhaps a Helen of Troy style situation where a single person or perhaps a single item was contested, by military means when other means failed.
Might be that we have got the contestants all wrong, too. Perhaps the Romulans were fighting somebody else, and humans got caught in the crossfire? Humans wouldn't need mighty fleets to triumph, then: Romulans could lose to their real enemy, and humans would get the side benefit of "also winning".
Timo Saloniemi
Might be like the first world war. Of the dozen countries making up the Allies, America was only the fifth largest in terms of forces, there were smaller participants still. Maybe in the Romulan war, Earth was Montenegro, contributing about one tenth of one percent of the total forces. From what we saw in the last season of Enterprise, Earth would have only brought a hand full of ships to the fight. Starfleet ships could have been relegated to escort duties in the rear areas.
Plus the contributions by the corpse of Commander Tucker.
Sure they refer to it as "the Earth/Romulan war," but I'm sure if you go to Montenegro today, people will tell you how great-grandpa won the whole war but his damn self.
There no canon evidence that any of the other races that formed the Federation were involve in the war at all. The Romulan might have spent decades or even centuries gradually pissing off the great powers of the galaxy surrounding their territory. If the political states on "this side' of the Empire were weakened or wreaked by the war, the new Federation could have moved into the resulting power vacuum.
.
Plus the contributions by the corpse of Commander Tucker.
Sure they refer to it as "the Earth/Romulan war," but I'm sure if you go to Montenegro today, people will tell you how great-grandpa won the whole war but his damn self.
There no canon evidence that any of the other races that formed the Federation were involve in the war at all. The Romulan might have spent decades or even centuries gradually pissing off the great powers of the galaxy surrounding their territory. If the political states on "this side' of the Empire were weakened or wreaked by the war, the new Federation could have moved into the resulting power vacuum.
.
Saquist
Commodore
I prefer the Star Fleet Chronology Explanation of the 3 year war. (most know that I do) With the limited space and tech and prefer to believe that it did originally happen that way but because of Rick Berman ...er...other worldly force messing with the time line some how Cochrane was able to build a antimatter reactor.
OH CONCUR....
I'm willing to sit through an ENT Movie...(Begrudgingly) but excluding the NX would be very unbelievable in any significant conflict.
Unfortunantly if you look at the controls on the Phoenix it says "Warp Core" and there was an intermix chamber. If it was powered by impulse Fusion there would be no need to mix anything.
So REdun-kulusly Cochrane somehow managed to design and build the first anti-matter /matter supercolider, miniaturized it...somehow gathered enough antimatter from who knows where and stuck over 200 TONS (2 space shuttles masses) of Coils, Fuel, a set of complex motored Arms, Reactor and a 3 person cabin on an ICBM missile designed to deliver a small conical warhead just above the atmosphere.
WELCOME TO FANTASY ISLAND!!!!
Why do you think it would have been the first?
Absolutely nothing in the movie suggests that Cochrane was using high tech to build his test rig. To the very explicit contrary, he was cobbling the thing together from scavenged, off-the-shelf parts. And there is no reason whatsoever to think that the shelves of the Trek 2060s wouldn't have been bending under the weight of commercially available antimatter reactors. It's the future, after all - a future whose past was already more advanced than our present!
It sounds utterly ridiculous that Cochrane in 2063 would have to abide to the "rules" of our technologically retarded 2010. That's as anachronistic as requiring that Ben Hur drive a Prius or Conan the Barbarian have an IPod for googling "two snakes facing", just because those are "real world technologies".
Timo Saloniemi
Unless the intermix chamber in Cochrane's ship involves the integration of two or more energy streams from multiple fusion chambers. Aboard later ships, it would be the integration of energy streams from matter and antimatter injectors.
Saquist
Commodore
10 years after the 3rd World War. 600 million dead. (That's more than the population of everyone of Earth's major cities.) Most Major Governments destroyed.
Less than 20 years earlier was only Earth's 3rd attempt to leave the Solar System. A NASA ship. Since this is before the first warp jump we must presume this ship was sub-light. This seems to establish that even though manned exploration continued it was not particularly advanced considering the ICBM missle, use of Capsule Designs of Ares IV and the primitive nature of the Charybdis "shuttle".
That is exactly the problem.
You need high tech to make that tenuous list of fantasy possible. Only in Trek....
A major Holocaust and a man is "cobbling" together a warp core. The question remains the same. Where did this technology come from? This is no Farmer Astronaut endeavor. This is a project that would have required Billions of Dollars not to mention a myriad of failed attempts all happening in the midst of a nuclear winter. Star Trek history as of late is Horrendously unrealistic.
Apparently the post traumatic horror happens after all this.
Welcome to the ridiculous world of Rick Berman then, who cobbled together Trek's future from our current timeline and current technologies.
May I remind you that the Botany Bay used "transistors"...yet they had artificial gravity and for some reason after 36 years of Fusion Flight then suddenly they don't have artificial gravity and they're using ION Drive to travel to the planets for the first time
Sorry, my friend but it's pure naivety to believe in Trek Tech Timeline.
Then the Phoenix had micro fusion reactors already because the ship isn't big enough to place two fusion reactors (the width of the craft) any where because the the nacelles would take up most of the interior along with the Rockets at the rear.
What would be the point in two small reactors? Just make one large reactor vessel. This isn't a manufactured ship you can't just stuff it full of everything.
As it is it's crammed already...what's the point in "mixing" plasma anyway it's not a bakery.
Which wouldn't really be a problem since presumably shuttlecraft and other impulse craft would also feature fusion reactors as part of their drive system.
What's the point of a ship having two of anything?
Actually, that would be a good reason to have multiple micro fusion chambers if the ship couldn't accommodate one really big one. If onboard space was at premium, pretty much everything would have to be fairly small. But as Cochrane would still require a considerable amount of power for his ship, his solution would be to fit more than one fusion pod. He might have fitted a dozen of them on the ship's hull.
If you've got plasma coming into your engine from different injectors--and likely at different temperatures and pressures--you're going to need something to regulate them and combine them into one stable source for the warp core to use. Essentially, that's what a intermix does, regardless if it's with matter or antimatter or with other energy sources, IMO. I could see the intermix chamber in Cochrane's Phoenix acting to maintain and control the energy going into his warp engines from a ring of fusion pods affixed to the outside his ship (maybe just above that big thruster at the end).
Sounds promising. Before WWI, we didn't have air travel. Immediately after WWI, we did. Before WWII, we didn't have fission power or practical rocketry. Immediately after WWII, we did.
Sublight ships long before that had traveled between planets, or indeed ventured to the stars. Their powerplants must have been fantastically efficient, perhaps centuries ahead of what we have now (and quite possibly infinitely more advanced, because they operate in a parallel universe where certain feats of physics we consider impossible are possible).
After WWII, this is exactly what happened: random farmers were cobbling together advanced aircraft out of war surplus, and making a living in cropdusting and aerobatics.
Most of Cochrane's "advanced" gadgetry could well have been household items, the rest being war surplus.
Why not? Transistors are pretty neat and will probably be around for the next thousand years, while artificial gravity is apparently easy to invent and build in the Trek universe.
What first time? Nowhere in "One Small Step" was it implied that the guest stars would be among the first to reach Mars. Moreover, trips to that planet were said to take only about a week at that point (c.f. the "rescue mission"), which is probably performance on par with DY-100. And "ion drive" is supposedly high tech as late as "Spock's Brain" - and thus probably unrelated to the current drive systems that puff out charged gas.
As for Cochrane's "intermix", we really don't know if it's related to annihilation, fusion, or perhaps chemical propulsion. There's absolutely nothing to say that chemical fuels wouldn't be sufficient for creating a warp field. Indeed, when one needs a rapid burst of power today, mixing of chemicals is the way to go; controlled fission is no good for such stuff, and controlled fusion might be no better.
Timo Saloniemi
That would depend on how many reactants were involved in the fusion process, it doesn't have to be only deuterium-deuterium. A deuterium-tritium fuel mix would release more energy than a single reactant, and is actually easier to achieve. A hydrogen and boron mix is harder to achieve, however results in much less neutron radiation and would require less shielding (and weight) which would have make Lily happier.
If warp coils are powered by high energy charged plasma, then yes chemical fuel, it would not be cheap and it would shoot through it's fuel pretty quick. But if all you need is a twenty second proof of concept flight, sure. For later flights lasting months at a time, then you would need fusion or antimatter.
.
Saquist
Commodore
Which wouldn't really be a problem since presumably shuttlecraft and other impulse craft would also feature fusion reactors as part of their drive system.[/QUOTE]
Yeah...no problem...it's only 200 years in the future.
B
Cochrane's dilapidated lab and scrounging techniques tell me they didn't have a Quadrillion dollar budget after the collapse of the collapse of the world economy. Now it is possible to gather antimatter from Earth's Van Allen Belt produced from GCR bombardment of the upper atmosphere. That would require large orbital skimming platforms. It would still be incredibly expensive but nowhere hear 62 Trillion.
You make it sound so easy. Let's reiterate this once again 600 million dead, major cities destroyed, nuclear winter. What part of the post atomic horror did you find particularly "promising""
What you said has to be one of the most outlandish failures of logic I have personally have ever seen. You're saying that War equals progress. The conditions and events of every War is extremely variable as well as the outcomes. Just because there is War does not therefore necessitate technological progress.
What lead you to that conclusion?
One requires merely speed and lift. Space flight requires life support, avionics, re-entry protection, radiation protection, etc and a high level of precision
"There were remarkable discoveries in civil, electrical, aeronautical and engineering science, as well as rocketry and the development of core technologies that really pushed technology into the industry it is today," he said. "It was perhaps one of the greatest engineering and scientific feats of all time. It was huge. The engineering required to leave Earth and move to another heavenly body required the development of new technologies that before hadn't even been thought of. It has yet to be rivaled."~Daniel Lockney, the editor of Spinoff,
An extremely primitive technology.
Pattern shows the intermix chamber is an annihilation device.
Warp Plasma is regarded as Super-charged. There has to be an efficiency to producing that plasma readily. Part of that efficiency is the amount of space your fuel takes up. Chemical reactions will allows require more mass per reaction than nuclear reactions. FUEL is the largest concern of space flight because is expontially effects the size, speed and design of spacecraft.
We see no external tanks and there is certainly no room on the interior for internal tanks for such reactants. This is foregone conclusion, they aren't using chemical reactions for warp plasma.
Regardless it would only be speculative.
Yeah...no problem...it's only 200 years in the future.
They shouldn't have that technology for 200 more years. So again this isn't a reasonable possibility.
B
If this were to be done logically then the biggest constraint would be the creation of antimatter. It cost around 60 Trillion dollars per gram. At the current production rates in a fully industrialized society antimatter is produced...1 and 10 nanograms per year.
Cochrane's dilapidated lab and scrounging techniques tell me they didn't have a Quadrillion dollar budget after the collapse of the collapse of the world economy. Now it is possible to gather antimatter from Earth's Van Allen Belt produced from GCR bombardment of the upper atmosphere. That would require large orbital skimming platforms. It would still be incredibly expensive but nowhere hear 62 Trillion.
Why does the warp core need High Energy Plasma?
You make it sound so easy. Let's reiterate this once again 600 million dead, major cities destroyed, nuclear winter. What part of the post atomic horror did you find particularly "promising""
What you said has to be one of the most outlandish failures of logic I have personally have ever seen. You're saying that War equals progress. The conditions and events of every War is extremely variable as well as the outcomes. Just because there is War does not therefore necessitate technological progress.
Why fantastically efficient?
What lead you to that conclusion?
Flight is far from space flight.
One requires merely speed and lift. Space flight requires life support, avionics, re-entry protection, radiation protection, etc and a high level of precision
"There were remarkable discoveries in civil, electrical, aeronautical and engineering science, as well as rocketry and the development of core technologies that really pushed technology into the industry it is today," he said. "It was perhaps one of the greatest engineering and scientific feats of all time. It was huge. The engineering required to leave Earth and move to another heavenly body required the development of new technologies that before hadn't even been thought of. It has yet to be rivaled."~Daniel Lockney, the editor of Spinoff,
How do you know this?
Despite their "neatness", they're incapable of high frequency or high power operation (or say I say extremely ineffiicent) and particularly vulnerable Electromagnetic fields such as Earth's or Jupiter's particularly strong field which is more powerful and much larger than the sun's. If the purpose is interplanetary travel then you'd have to avoid the planets.
An extremely primitive technology.
Memory Alpha's words.
Except by Pattern.
Pattern shows the intermix chamber is an annihilation device.
I disagree.
Warp Plasma is regarded as Super-charged. There has to be an efficiency to producing that plasma readily. Part of that efficiency is the amount of space your fuel takes up. Chemical reactions will allows require more mass per reaction than nuclear reactions. FUEL is the largest concern of space flight because is expontially effects the size, speed and design of spacecraft.
We see no external tanks and there is certainly no room on the interior for internal tanks for such reactants. This is foregone conclusion, they aren't using chemical reactions for warp plasma.
Regardless it would only be speculative.
We're talking about planet-rattling World Wars here, though. And the track record of those is clear enough: 100% of them so far (that is, both of them) have been associated with incredible technological progress. It would thus be fully justifiable by historical precedent to follow the dramatic precedent and portray world wars as beneficial to the winning sides (those being defined rather loosely and sometimes counterintuitively - West Germany and Japan in WWII, for example).
Note that the 600 million dead apparently never hurt places like New Orleans, San Francisco, Boston or Paris, which still sport their original, pre-WWIII buildings - in happy mixture with modern ones, which proves that the old ones haven't been rebuilt to preserve a historic milieu. Nor do we have indication that the 600 million dead would have as much as inconvenienced Bozeman, Montana. Perhaps they all died in China (as our only glimpse at the so-called post-atomic horror featured Asiatic faces)?
Simple knowledge of rocketry. Neither Botany Bay nor Ares IV as portrayed would be viable spacecraft for achieving "Mars in a week" unless they managed to squeeze significantly more power out of a kilogram or cubic meter of fuel than today's designs. Moreover, nothing we can even imagine today could do what the engines of the Botany Bay eventually did - propel the ship to distant interstellar space, apparently at such high relativistic speeds that the 270 years of transit time-dilated to mere 200 years of cold sleep for Khan.
Clearly, the Trek mankind has had conquest of the Sol system down pat for twenty years by now, and must be in possession of amazing technologies, quite regardless of the fact that many examples of that mankind still suffer in "sanctuary districts".
All of which are cheap spinoffs of a technologically advanced civilization. A medieval engineer, no doubt just as smart and skilled as his 1950s counterpart, could not have cobbled together a crop-dusting plane because the local drug store didn't sell fuel pumps or high-grade hydraulic fluids. The 1950s engineer couldn't build a tourist rocket because his mail order form didn't feature tick boxes for composite hulls and laser gyros. And Burt Rutan can't get an inertial damper from EBay yet. But the trend is clear, and Cochrane could have preordered long before FedEx got nuked. Assuming it did get nuked, since the track record of devastation is so ambiguous.
I said "could". Which I know because the possibility is inherent in the structure of Star Trek: mankind there is making much faster progress to space and the stars than mankind here. Slightly assisted by the fact that their universe is easier, of course - but probably also assisted by the fact that their universe happened to feature a bunch of supergeniuses in the 1990s, no doubt giving a boost in key military technologies that soon thereafter sept spinoffs to the civilian sector.
Ah, good old Memory "Often Wrong" Alpha...
Never trust that source without checking. Much of the stuff on Ares there is bullshit. Or "not connected to what was seen or heard on screen", to put it more nicely.
But I thought you didn't believe in Pattern? That is, WWIII must be different from WWI and WWII; garage building in the 2050s must be different from garage building in the 1950s and 2000s; and mankind's steady push into space must absolutely have gone retrograde in the 2050s so that not only would the fancy spacecraft all be destroyed in the war, the art of building them would somehow be lost as well.
Don't let Star Trek hijack perfectly commonplace words. Cochrane would know "intermix" from his own context, namely that of the well-equipped bar next to his silo...
Yet you pay no attention to the obvious lack of fuel volume in the DY-100 and Ares designs?
Like T'Girl said, fuel wouldn't be much of a concern for Cochrane because he wasn't going for endurance. Rapid release of energy would be his goal, and the two things that can do that today in a controlled manner are chemical mixers and electric capacitors.
Whether fusion would be up to the task depends on the method of energy tapping utilized in the mid-21st century of Trek. Today, we intend to capture fusion energies by running the heat through steam turbines, just as with fission; that's no way to energize a hungry warp engine. Cochrane's peers may have come up with something better, but it's also possible they haven't. In which case something more akin to how we power high energy lasers today would be Cochrane's first choice.
Timo Saloniemi
There's nothing to suggest that Cochrane couldn't do it 50 years in the future. If anything, those later engines could easily be considered much improved and efficient versions.
Says you. I believe it's very reasonable within the Star Trek universe.
The point of this being...?
As an energy source. But then, like Timo and T'Girl alluded to earlier, Cochrane's ship could have used almost any high energy source for the first warp flight since it presumably wasn't going relatively far (I doubt it even reached Mars before it arced back to Earth).
Saquist
Commodore
I don't deal in negative proof.
It's unlikely. Miniaturization takes many generations like I've said. It's possible there were many many generations in a short period of time but I won't assume that out of the blue I'm going to follow normal Tech trends. Granted Trek has faster Trends in engine evolution but I'm not to jump those kind of grandiose conclusions just because the story wants me to.
Of course says me. It was my my name on the post.
The point of this being...?
An energy source to do what. What is a warp corse suposed to do with High Energy Plasma?
Well both of them are wrong.
They couldn't use just any energy source.
There are limitations in technology we have to assume for the first warp flight. Energy production is the first limitation. We don't know when Fusion technology was established in trek because Trek ignores the achievement as though it made no difference at all.
For instance when Riker says that the most influencial achievement is warp drive in the last 200 years...but Fusion would have been the key that would have allowed warp to be possible as well as transforming Earth's society with clean limitless energy for everyone.
See that's another unrealistic perspective of Trek.
Rattling...as in shake up...trembling?
A nuclear winter is not a "shake up". I hate to break it to you. It's an EXTINCTION LEVEL EVENT.
WWII and The Great War didn't destroy our enviroment and threaten all life on Earth. Not even remotely similar.
Discount Botany Bay Years of acceleration and no destination. At 20 lighters (guess) from Earth at 150 years of travel The Botany Bay could have bee traveling at 10-15% of the speed of light.
Now intrestingly...The Winterberg Fusion Rocket could get 20% Lightspeed sooo that's remarkably realistic of Trek however Trek doesn't show a massive capacity of many Millions of tons of Deuterium. So it's impossible with the vessel they showed in Space Seed.
So if Space Seed is a basis then Nothing about Trek's tech progression is realistic. So I guess fantastic would be the right word.
It doesn't matter how cheap they are. It does matter about the unification of those factors aswell as the advent of new technology and without appropriate funding.
So. conjecture. That's all you had to say.
You give me the choices of prejudice or incredulity. I cannot do either. Until proven otherwise I will remain neutral toward the point of contention as possible.
I need more precise information than hearsay.
I'm also not going to review some six episodes for they sake of this discussion. I will leave it to the realm of belief.
Correction: You thought patterns in events were the same as patterns in language and terms. You made an assumption that was more rigid than the process would deem probable.
I congradulate this logic but I must interject that such thought wasn't present in the producers or writers they were using Trek Terms...so if they hijacked the terms then it is not unreasonable to do the same. These terms were retrograded from 24 century not the other way around.
Now if the trek lineage had been more realistic I would entertain that very logical thought but it (meaning your argument) assumes that all things were equally well devised and they weren't. I love these conversations in genres that manage to maintain (for the most part) it's continuity like Lord of the Rings or Babylon Five. Trek is swiss cheese. You pour in the logic and it leaks out from 50 different orifices.
She's wrong. Her approach was too simple. If antimatter was the Fuel then cost and containment is absolutely a concern. And since "intermix" chamber is a term that's always been used for a warp core I have no proof to overturn in favor of impulse or fusion on top of...intermix makes no sense in a fusion or impulse reactor.
So to entertain the Fusioin plant...I did find that the Phoenix did not enclose the nacelles entirely leaving room for small reactor and tanks so not quite as small as I initially believed. YET the TITAN is only 3 meters wide... I don't know maybe this fictional T-V is double the size.
No need to speculate... the Movie clearly uses the terms Plasma Injectors and Plasma Conduits.
Nah, you just don't have an imagination.
Like I said, no imagination.
Exactly, which means it pertains only to you and nobody else.
You really don't know? A warp core creates high energy plasma (also known as "electroplasma" or simply "warp plasma") for use by the warp drive--at least as far as recent Trek is concerned. Typically, a dilithium-controlled matter/antimatter reaction is used to power the electroplasma system--or EPS grid--but other sources can presumably be used. For example, the Romulans may have used impulse (or fusion) chambers to power the warp drive of the bird of prey in TOS, and then used micro-singularities to do the same with the warbirds in TNG. As such, it's definitely conceivable that Cochrane didn't use a matter/antimatter reaction (which would be difficult to do without dilithium anyway), but some other energy source that was likely more crude and less powerful. I postulated maybe he used fusion pods, but I'm not against the idea that he may have used just whatever was handy on post-World War III Earth.
No, they're not because they're valid ideas within the Star Trek universe. There have been many good ideas presented here. But I have noticed from your various previous posts that you like to tell other posters they're wrong or their ideas are impossible--even if it jibes with onscreen material--but that's just trying to push your view of Trek on others. This is a fictional universe with a fictional science that sometimes matches up with real science, but more often does not. Most people understand that and go forward from there. Yes, there are times when Trek gets the science right, but there probably more times when it gets the science wrong because of dramatic necessity or due to the constraints of television or movie production. Trying to tie Trek in too closely with real science only leads to pointless arguments about the real world versus the workings of an imaginary universe (and that is what Trek is when all is said and done) that frequently acts upon its own laws of physics when a story demands it.
Saquist
Commodore
If it comforts you to say so.
No, I don't know why a Warp core would "NEEDS" High Energy Plasma.
You're not answering the question.
You said, "you're going to need something to regulate them and combine them into one stable source for the warp core to use."
The question was, "why does a warp core need High Energy Plasma?"
Timo's speculations have no constraints. He believes anything and everything goes in Trek. The sad part is that he's right. That's what makes it fantastical and next to impossible for an imperfect society such as ours to create the incredibly efficient form of propulsion of the Botany Bay of 1996 and then regress after another 40 years to capsules and solar cells and no gravity plating and the slow ION drive limitations.
TGirls explanation was too simple. The relationship between antimatter fuel and Chemical fuel is proportional not only with the amount of time for burn but the mass of the vehicle and the task for which to accomplish thrust. I don't believe the ratio to create a highly energetic space warp is the same as a Rocket would need to produce the same thrust. Not by far. I believe it's much, much greater. I believe such a combustion chamber would be required too be quite a bit larger to produce the High Energy Plasma for the amount of time that the Phoenix stayed at warp otherwise ...(and listen closely) an antimatter source which produces 99% energy from the reaction would be nearly relative with Chemical combustion and not proportional.
The Velocity was far Greater
The rate of acceleration was far Greater.
The distance traveled was far Greater
This is not just about the technology of field propulsion, it's about the necessary energy to power it. If what either of them said was true at any point in the future Fusion or impulse reactors could power the warp nacelles to light speed...
and guess what...that NEVER happens..not even once.
Lightspeed even at a few minutes is far more useful than sublight.
And that is the very concept that I expressed.
The history of Trek does not match with real science. It is fantastically optimistic despite the serious obstacles of World War, Global Economic collapse and Nuclear Disaster.
If you knew this then why the resistance to obviously logical statements, with replies such as "you have no imagination". You almost literally imply that I should believe in the impossible and that failure to do so was a lack of vision on my part. Why should I have to believe in the impossible?
Nope, it's just simply the truth.
Actually, I did. You weren't paying attention.
Which is essentially what a warp core does (as I said before). It takes multiple energy sources and converts them into a stable singular source for the warp core to use. Aboard Federation starships, matter and antimatter is used to power the electroplasma for the warp engines and other systems aboard a starship to use. Dilithium serves as the device that regulates the matter/antimatter reaction and uses the energy to power the ship's electroplasma system. High energy plasma is what really drives a starship, and there is presumably more than one way to generate it as I mentioned in my earlier posts. Cochrane may have used something else to power his engine, but if it involved the generation of electroplasma, he may have needed an intermix to regulate whatever it was (be it from fusion pods, a chemical reaction, a hamster running in a wheel, etc.).
Answered more than once already.
Timo's speculations tend to lean in the direction that there's usually multiple possibilities in the lack of direct evidence and it's one that I share myself. I believe the majority of people do understand that Trek is just made up stuff and that it plays by it's own rules most of the time.
Since when is Trek supposed to be an accurate depiction of the future? It's not. It never has been, nor will it ever be. It's always been a fictional universe with it's own history, politics, science & technology, etc., that differs from the real world. Trek may inspire people, but that's more by accident than design.
Which really is irrelevant since Cochrane's ship is more a product of the imagination of a Hollywood scriptwriter than the worked out computations of an actual rocket scientist. You may not like it (and apparently it's your major problem with Trek), but the science of Trek will always fall apart if you look at it closely. There will always be an aspect of Treknology that's more science-fantasy than science-fiction. You're holding Trek to a standard that it doesn't adhere to nor has any aspirations of going to.
You mean Star Trek ain't real? I am totally shocked...
Don't play that Vulcan card with me. I had enough of that from you at the Star Trek XI website.
Yes, you have given me the impression more than a few times that you do have a very low suspension of disbelief and a low tolerance for speculation you disagree with. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but if you take other people to task and start telling them that they're wrong or their ideas are too simple, then that's where the problems start.
Because it's Star Trek.
Nobody is asking you to believe anything, but we are talking about a universe chock full of impossible things. That doesn't stop other people from enjoying it and wondering how things work within that universe, but at some point everyone has to accept that it's mostly imaginary/impossible stuff some people came up with in a Hollywood writer's office...
It's getting a bit snippy in here, folks.
Star Trek is a bunch of TV shows and movies. The Trekverse may be realistic at times, but it isn't real. Dramatic storytelling typically regards plot to be more important than fashioning Treknology (I like that
) that is consistent with our real world.
Declaring that someone's speculative musings about this imaginary universe is "wrong" is a non sequitur, and does nothing to further fruitful discussion or the friendly exchange of ideas. And last time I looked, rudeness and condescension were not necessary components of logical argument.
Lighten up, okay?
Star Trek is a bunch of TV shows and movies. The Trekverse may be realistic at times, but it isn't real. Dramatic storytelling typically regards plot to be more important than fashioning Treknology (I like that
) that is consistent with our real world. Declaring that someone's speculative musings about this imaginary universe is "wrong" is a non sequitur, and does nothing to further fruitful discussion or the friendly exchange of ideas. And last time I looked, rudeness and condescension were not necessary components of logical argument.
Lighten up, okay?
Saquist
Commodore
With all do respect ma'am my assertions were only that it's not scientifically realistic. I will downgrade wrong to extremely gratuitous unlikely hoods.
My current weight is 177 lbs as of 9:17 this morning due to strict regiment of cardiovascular activity and upper body muscle building. I hope it is sufficient.
I know for a fact that I'm not the only one. There are several individuals on the Gateworld forum that know same. So...truth would seem to be at best an exaggeration.
I read every word. You never explained why a warp core needs high energy plasma.
Matter and Antimatter are not energy sources. They are reactants. So that's not correct.
Yes, Timo's speculations require a highly favorable view to unfavorable odds in events and unlikely scientific achievements. Note that the creator of ex astris scientia has made similar conclusions about the development of Trek tech History.
I know that it is called science fiction and implies being supported by science. I know as of late it has become more star wars fantasy like.
Then we're all irrelevant because that was the entire point of contention.
I'm just stating facts. How ever problematic it is with Trek is not my concern.
I don't know why. I told you from the beginning all you've done is attempted to counter that very simple and logical truth.You mean Star Trek ain't real? I am totally shocked...
Do you really expect me suddenly develop another personality just because it's another site?Don't play that Vulcan card with me. I had enough of that from you at the Star Trek XI website.
It's called "canon" for a reason.
I've always noticed I find being wrong...enlightening. Others find being wrong threatening and insulting. Don't as me to understand it. I've tried and failed.
I find that "answer" insufficient.
I've enjoyed trek many times despite the impossibility.
But no one here was discussing enjoyment factor with me.
Only in the 24th century, and then only on starfleet ships after 200 years of engine evolution. There's no evidence that Cochrane's warp core did anything of the kind, and even less for 23rd century engines which may have been designed on entirely different principles. Indeed, it's not even known for sure that the warp engines of the 24th century even work the same way as their 22nd century counterparts; judging by the "blur-out" effect from "Force of Nature" it's just as likely that an IN UNIVERSE reason exists for why the FX for warp drive changes from series to series: it's possible that different ships in different eras actually use entirely different types of space warps to achieve those high FTL velocities (actually, this is partly implied in the changing warp scale as well, and Excelsior's transwarp drive may have been rebranded as simply "new engines").
Cochrane's "intermix" chamber could just as easily be a combustion chamber burning JP-8 and liquid oxygen to drive a giant turbine and charge up the nacelles like a pair of giant batteries (that would seem to explain the presence of the four ullage motors on the side of the Phoenix' main engine; exhaust products being vented propulsively on its way through the generator). We've already seen that there are a dozen different COSMETIC variations on warp engines, so who's to say the technical variations aren't just as extreme?
