Scifi "Tech"

[JTM³]

Ok, I used the search funtion, and this hasn't been posted before.

 

Just a few comments/questions about scifi tech.

 

On Warp Drive:

 

The DK Space Encyclopeida talks about Star Trek and 'antimatter engines' as being rocket like. This is not explicitly stated but it is implied; as that's the only conclusion, at least in my eyes.

 

Disambiguation: From what I understand, this is the process of warp as used by the Enterprise:

 

Inside the warp core' date=' liquid dueterium and anti-hydrogen (liquid or gas?) collide. Now here's the tricky part; the substance dilithium is used to regulate the reactions, which is a fictional substance. So unless something like this exists, everything breaks down....

 

The dueterium/anti-hydrogen collisions generate superheated plasma. This plasma is transported through the ships wiring; the "Electro Plasma System" or EPS. (I think that's right; its been a while...) This plasma is so powerful apparantly that it provides enough energy, along with the fusion reactors that drive the impulse engines, to power the ship, including life support, sublight drive, warp drive, phasars, and the process that encompasses photon torpedoes in energy. And whatever other systems need energy....

 

Anyway, some of this plasma is funneled into the warp nacelles through the EPS system. Plasma "injectors" (you guessed it) inject the plasma into the nacelles; which are hollow inside. They are surrounded by torodial shaped rings of metal, and this is where the warp process occurs.

 

These rings (also known as "warp field generators") create a subspace field when they are charged with plasma (which means its quite an exotic metal...) . This subspace bubble (or "warp bubble") shifst the ship slightly into another dimension where warp drive is "legal". (Blast you Einstein!! ) And perhaps its something like the number of consecutive warp fields is equal to the the warp factor; e.g.; 6 warp fields=warp 6. [/quote']

 

^My understanding of warp.

 

Its not a straight antimatter "rocket" or anything else.

 

What we need is a science of 'fields'; is there anything in quantum mechanics to indicate the possibility of some sort of subspace and such? Or various other fields?

 

I've heard of scalar fields and such, but we're probably looking for something different....

 

Next Question:

 

What about scifi-like lasers? Will our lasers ever resemble star trek phasers? Or the pulses of star wars weapons?

For instance' date=' modern lasers are invisible for the most part. But what about the weapons we see in science fiction? Like Go'auld staff blasters and such? More imagination? Or actual possibility?[/quote']

 

And also what about photon torpedoes? I've read on here that antimatter isn't economcial enough to make a weapon out of...so I won't persue that. But if you read the DS9 Techincal Manual, it says that "Quantum Torpdedoes" are made by splitting a super string. Assuming that strings are real, is there any possibility of extracting energy from them?

 

And what about encassing missiles and such in energy? If you read any of the Star Wars dictionaries and such, for instance when they talk about the Trade Federation Battle Tank (not sure which book exactly), it has a cuttaway view of it and it carries shells like real tanks, but in the movie they come out in energy pulses, and it says that the shells are 'encased' in energy. The same goes for Star Trek torpedoes and Stargate drones.

[[Tycho?]]

There may be something to bending space around a ship in order to move faster than light. But its a maybe, a very large maybe. Most Star Trek stuff is just pure fiction; with little to no basis in real life.

 

For instance, modern lasers are invisible for the most part. But what about the weapons we see in science fiction? Like Go'auld staff blasters and such? More imagination? Or actual possibility?

 

They would be less interesting if you couldn't see the beams. But lasers are only visible if some of the light is being reflected; which would decrease the effectiveness of the weapon. So its not like it would be good to make future lasers more visible.

 

About the splitting strings? I dont know. I'm not personally a fan of string theory, but I'm sure someone here would be able to give you info on it.

 

Last question is again one of asthetics. The torpedoes glow so the audience can see where they are moving, no other reason.

[Sisyphus]

Agreed with Tycho on everything. Those are all pretty much "magic" machines, in that they do things that shouldn't be possible with no explanation.

 

Additionally:

 

A laser that's visible is just an inefficient laser that's reflecting off something in its path. A "laser" that moves slowly enough to be seen (like in "bolts" or whatever) is not a laser at all.

 

Plasma is just ionized gas (which makes up 99% of the matter in the universe), but is nonetheless one of the most absurdly misused words in science fiction. A "plasma weapon" is silly. So is using it to transfer energy, which would basically just be steam pipes, as you describe them.

 

"Encased in energy" doesn't mean anything. "Energy" is not some glowy substance. There's only kinetic energy, potential energy, etc.

[Klaynos]

well put guys... There's a reason it's called science Fiction...

 

On the warp engine, there was an interesting article in new scientist about hyperspace a few months ago, there's a couple of threads on the forums about it, I'm quite skeptical at this time though...

[JTM³]

Indeed-science 'ficition'.

 

Sometimes I this universe........

 

But, if the alternative is the Borg threat, than I personally hope aliens don't exist

 

As for string theory, than that requiers that there be alternate dimensions (if we assume string thoery to be correct).

 

Therefore, assuming string theory is correct, could you have a universe as whacked out as something in Star Trek? Or Stargate?

 

And I know about potential energy and such...as for it not being glowy, what about lightning, that's glowy..... ,

[Klaynos]

Indeed-science 'ficition'.

 

Sometimes I this universe........

 

But' date=' if the alternative is the Borg threat, than I personally hope aliens don't exist

 

As for string theory, than that requiers that there be alternate dimensions (if we assume string thoery to be correct).

 

Therefore, assuming string theory is correct, could you have a universe as whacked out as something in Star Trek? Or Stargate?

 

And I know about potential energy and such...as for it not being glowy, what about lightning, that's glowy..... ,[/quote']

 

The other dimentions are very tightly curled up, or something like that I can't remember the exact terminology. But basically the answsers no

[Anjruu]

"As for string theory, than that requiers that there be alternate dimensions"

 

Not quite. At least, not in the way I think you are thinking of them. When people say "dimensions" in scifi, most of the time they are talking about stepping through a portal to go someplace weird. When people say "dimensions" in relation to string theory, they are talking about dimensions along the lines of height, length and width. They are tightly folded and warped into the "normal" dimensions, so that, while we move and exist a tiny bit in the higher dimensions, we don't notice it.

 

For more on dimensions, you might want to check out "Flatland" by Abbot. Great for all levels of math.

 

The thing that you might be thinking about is alternate universes, a topic of which I know jack.

[JTM³]

"As for string theory' date=' than that requiers that there be alternate dimensions"

 

Not quite. At least, not in the way I think you are thinking of them. When people say "dimensions" in scifi, most of the time they are talking about stepping through a portal to go someplace weird. When people say "dimensions" in relation to string theory, they are talking about dimensions along the lines of height, length and width. They are tightly folded and warped into the "normal" dimensions, so that, while we move and exist a tiny bit in the higher dimensions, we don't notice it.

 

For more on dimensions, you might want to check out "Flatland" by Abbot. Great for all levels of math.

 

The thing that you might be thinking about is alternate universes, a topic of which I know jack.[/quote']

 

 

Yeah...that's what I meant.

That said, could you have a universe as whacked out as Star Trek? If string theory says there can be multiple unverses, in fact an infinite number of universes.

 

The question is...can they vary in every conceivable way? If that were so...we could have everything from the Lord of the Rings to Star Trek....and worse...

 

On an odd note; given the fanciful nature of Star Trek technology, am I right in saying that, technologically wise and such, magic aside, that Lord of the Rings is more accurate than Star Trek?!

 

Next question: This has always been really irritating to me:

 

What's the difference between dimensions and universes? Science fiction irrtatingly enough seems to use those terms interchangeably.

 

I'm guessing that dimensions compose a universe right?

[s pepperchin]

I think that the idea of more than three spacial dimensions is possible, however this does not mean that there could not also be other dimensions on the same scale as our three spacial dimensions. There is nothing that disproves their existance.

 

Of course there is also nothing that proves their existance either.

[JTM³]

']There may be something to bending space around a ship in order to move faster than light. But its a maybe' date=' a very large maybe. Most Star Trek stuff is just pure fiction; with little to no basis in real life.

 

 

 

They would be less interesting if you couldn't see the beams. But lasers are only visible if some of the light is being reflected; which would decrease the effectiveness of the weapon. So its not like it would be good to make future lasers more visible.

 

About the splitting strings? I dont know. I'm not personally a fan of string theory, but I'm sure someone here would be able to give you info on it.

 

But yeah; aesthetics makes sense. Who wants to see a stormtrooper shoot 'nothing' and the rebel instantly falls down dead?

 

Last question is again one of asthetics. The torpedoes glow so the audience can see where they are moving, no other reason.[/quote']

 

A note on the lasers: Star Wars Dictionary states that the lasers actually are invisible, and that they reach their targets instantly, and that the 'bolt' is actually radiation...

 

If we are to objectively consider these universes, I think the common thread is that its a lot easier to get energy in their universes than it is here...

[swansont]

A note on the lasers: Star Wars Dictionary states that the lasers actually are invisible' date=' and that they reach their targets instantly, and that the 'bolt' is actually radiation...

[/quote']

 

They are only visible if the light scatters in your direction, i.e. you won't see them unless the were aimed at you; nothing from the side, unless there were particles along the path scattering the light. And they reach their target at the speed of light. The R in LASER (and MASER) stands for radiation.

[[Tycho?]]

A note on the lasers: Star Wars Dictionary states that the lasers actually are invisible' date=' and that they reach their targets instantly, and that the 'bolt' is actually radiation...

 

If we are to objectively consider these universes, I think the common thread is that its a lot easier to get energy in their universes than it is here...[/quote']

 

Actually it says that the things shot in star wars are not actually lasers, they are bolts of excited gas. That they are glowing is just a coincidence. I used to be very, very into star wars when I was a kid.

 

It wouldn't make sense to say that the lasers hit their targets instantly, since just by watching the movies one can see this to be obviously not true.

[JTM³]

']Actually it says that the things shot in star wars are not actually lasers' date=' they are bolts of excited gas. That they are glowing is just a coincidence. I used to be very, very into star wars when I was a kid.

 

It wouldn't make sense to say that the lasers hit their targets instantly, since just by watching the movies one can see this to be obviously not true.[/quote']

 

True lol...I was thinking about that when I posted-but I posted anyway;)

 

Also, I was thinking of some way around what you said about lasers; while effective, they're rather boring really...I mean, an invisible gun? Granted, you can't see bullets here, but we're sort of talking about another epoch of weapon design...

 

So would excited gas work? Somehow? Like I said, its obviously extremely hard to get energy in this universe, unless there are better ways that we just haven't discovered yet (Zero point energy...)....

[bombus]

A "plasma weapon" is silly.

 

Just to be pedantic, lightning is plasma - the electric charge heats the air so much it becomes plasma, expands and gives us thunder. If one could 'shoot' lightning (static electricity) it would be a very effective weapon! Although maybe one could just wear rubber boots...

[alt_f13]

"Quantum Torpdedoes" are made by splitting a super string

 

LOL