MrDad Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 What's the differance between normal warp and transwarp? I've seen voyager endgame and transwarp hubs just seem like wormholes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transwarp_domains Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Enigma Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Thanx MrDad. Ok, so it's not impossible in TNG/DS9/VOY to travel faster than warp 10. They just use different methods. ie: alien technolgy, the Traveler, and Q. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 No - it IS impossible to travel faster than warp 10 because 10 is infinite speed, it's a definition thing. Although one that isn't taken too seriously - the fact remains that it is ironclad canon, the wiki entry is not. As queenhank suggests - it seems more reasonable to assume that transwarp is more to do with moving beyond warp drive than the ridiculous notion of exceeding an infinite limit. But on the new warp scale - 9.9-10 represents an infinite amount of speed, all the speeds shown transwarp, slipstream, Q, null space catapult etc fall within that boundry. Hence warp 10 is never exceeded in terms of velocity because it's not a finite limit like the speed of light IT'S INFINITE. Anyway, the only times I can think of them actually claiming to exceed warp 10 is in the TNG episode where Picard gets flung back in time and there is no actual evidence to suggest that was what happened. They merely deduce that because supposedly, exceeding warp 10 sends you back in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mav Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Well, if I recall right, TNG's series finale All Good Things, had the Future Enterprise, commanded by Riker right? It had the third warp nacell placed on the drive portion of the ship, which allowed them to reach speeds as high as warp 13 Of course I'm not quite sure on the rules and context of cannon written in a future sequence that may or may not ever come to pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Ah yes but I think it's fair to say that they weren't going at infinite speed in that episode. And there are ships around the time of DS9 that had FOUR nacelles. No, as has previously been proposed, it seems more likely that technology has advanced to a point where greater velocities can be reached and hence the scale needs to be shifted again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDad Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Ah yes but I think it's fair to say that they weren't going at infinite speed in that episode. And there are ships around the time of DS9 that had FOUR nacelles. No, as has previously been proposed, it seems more likely that technology has advanced to a point where greater velocities can be reached and hence the scale needs to be shifted again. So, it's a relative scale now? You speak as though this warp barrier were some immutable fact carved in stone like Hammurabi's laws. There is no reason the warp barrier can't be breached as the relativistic barrier was breached. It is, after all, science fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 No, no, the Warp Barrier cannot be breached by DEFINITION. It is Infinite speed. You can't go FASTER than infinite speed. What Tenebrae was referring to is the Warp Scale being changed, so that people can say something easy, like "Warp 13" instead of "Warp 9.99999999985463728". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I'm quite certain that they established warp 10 as infinite velocity at least twice though (TNG and VOY). Hence, transwarp is somewhat redundant as you can't go faster than an infinite limit - by definition. So it makes sense that they'd recalibrate the scale again because it would be a real pain to say "We're traveling at warp 9.99997!" Gene Roddenbury was interested in people, not technology? Then why the Dickens did he countenance treknobabble? yeah, what was the speed called in VOY where they went so fast the started to de-evolve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 They were going Warp 10, where you are going at an infinite speed, and thus simultaneously occupying every point in the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 There is no reason the warp barrier can't be breached as the relativistic barrier was breached. It is, after all, science fiction. If you're suggesting that an infinite limit can be "breached", I'm eager to hear how. To suggest you can go faster than infinite speed isn't science fiction - it's just plain wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Even at infinite speeds, it could be said you are not actually traveling at infinite speed. It could, rather, be said that you are completely still, but in a state of quantum flux, as you are simultaneously occupying every point, and not traveling between any two of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mav Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 No' date=' no, the Warp Barrier cannot be breached by DEFINITION. It is Infinite speed. You can't go FASTER than infinite speed. What Tenebrae was referring to is the Warp Scale being changed, so that people can say something easy, like "Warp 13" instead of "Warp 9.99999999985463728".[/quote'] I'm not quite sure how infinite speed would work really, would you be at every point in the universe until you chose a stopping point? I ask cause, the only thing faster than a traveling speed, such as any factor of Warp (including infinite speed or infinite warp) would be teleportation, like Q does. He can snap his fingers and go from alpha centauri to the farthest reaches of the delta quadrant in the time span of like, instantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Ultimate speed is talaportation. Think of it like a sheet of paper being the univers. And ultimate speed, or instant transmition, being another sheet of paper. You the instant transmition paper on the univers paper and then you are occuping all of space at the same time. like you are being streched. and all time stips until you choose a destination then you appear there and time continues. That is how i think of ultimate speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mav Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Ultimate speed is talaportation. Think of it like a sheet of paper being the univers. And ultimate speed, or instant transmition, being another sheet of paper. You the instant transmition paper on the univers paper and then you are occuping all of space at the same time. like you are being streched. and all time stips until you choose a destination then you appear there and time continues. That is how i think of ultimate speed. Well, aside from how they came up with the side effects of "warp 10", how would the human brain handle infinite speed/ultimate speed? If it was just a matter of picking the spot to go to and allowing time to resume how would the brain cope with the "being everywhere" aspect? While the "stretched" analogy works well, it also brings up the point that I don't think the human brain could comprehend it. Obviously, a computer or something would need to do this, as some kind of calculation but as pointed out we have yet to make a technology, that does this, without some inane (not insane just inane..) side effects to the human body. Unless we're the Q, or the Traveler, or that really old guy from that one planet (god I cant remember his name..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDad Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 There is no reason the warp barrier can't be breached as the relativistic barrier was breached. It is, after all, science fiction. If you're suggesting that an infinite limit can be "breached", I'm eager to hear how. To suggest you can go faster than infinite speed isn't science fiction - it's just plain wrong. We are discussing the concept of warp drive from the science fiction television series Star Trek. It is science fiction. If you believe any of this is real, then I apologize for puncturing you fantasy. The speed limit of our universe is the speed of light because it would require infinite energy to go faster, as established by Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Warp drive was invented to get around that problem. The warp barrier presents the same problem, as expressed by Eugene's Limit. There is no reason to assume that something wouldn't be developed to get around the warp barrier also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 The speed limit of our universe is the speed of light because it would require infinite energy to go faster' date=' as established by Einstein's Theory of Relativity.[/quote'] There's a reason they call it a 'Theory', you know ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theaveng Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Relativity is weird. A ship can be moving at 290,000 km/sec, and yet when they measure the speed of light, they still get the exact same result as us - 300,000 km/sec. Not 10,000 as you would expect. How can this be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 There are actually 2 gradiations in relativity theory: -special relativity theory -general relativity theory general relativity theory is very complex, not something you would study in your spare time, special relativity theory is actually not all that hard if you know a little math. special relativity theory was 'invented' by Einstein over 10 years before he came up with general relativity theory and can be considered a part of general relativity theory, but it is valid on its own as well. the question you pose can be explained with special relativity theory, it is mainly a mathematical solution that follows from a set of parameters that are 'defined': correct. if you search for the subject (on google or whatever), you can come up with several interesting pages, that explain the thing in more or less detail, depending on what you like to read... To start and explain it on the forum would take me to much effort, I'm not about to start typing 2 pages of explanations and mathematical equations, but suffice to say that you can quite easily find the answer on the net and that is not very hard to understand, once you accept the 'starting terms'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theaveng Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 I can explain it w/o equations. The spaceship moving at 290,000 km/sec is "standing still" from their frame-of-reference. To their eyes, they are at rest. Not moving. 0. And so the 300,000 km/sec (measured) - 0 km/sec (current velocity) = 300,000 km/sec = the measured speed of the lightwave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Well, that is not scientifically correct, but if you like to simplify things, then it could be considered acceptable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now