Warp Speed Limit(Star Trek) - why it's even a problem??

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on May, 4 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
The solution(to much higher speed) is simple but first we discuss why there are imposed speed limits:

1. Damage to space-time continuum at a certain high enough warp. This can be mitigated by warp nacelle placement(like variable nacelle geometry of Intrepid class ships) www.geocities.com...

2. Damage to the ship itself at high enough warp speeds. memory-alpha.org...(episode)#Teaser.

The problem:
-Assymetric warp fields due to placement of nacelles
-Non-uniform warp field strength along the ship which causes much stresses as warp speed is increased. Risking damage to the ship and space time - which is mitigated to a limited extent by the structural integrity field. Again this is caused by the warp nacelle placement.

Starfleet's solution:
-Optimized placement of nacelles to reduce warp field assymetry
-Introduced variable nacelle geometry to optimize warp and impulse performance

My solution:
-Design a starship in the shape of sphere.
-The warp coils should be placed in the hull(can be outside or inside(to afford protection of the hull), distributed evenly all over the hull and it should cover the whole hull.

Why a sphere covered all throughout with warp coils? And why a sphere?
-This would create a perfectly symmetrical warp field/bubble
-The warp field will be vastly more uniform along the ship
-Both of which will vastly reduce warp stresses to enable the ship to travel much faster, even reach transwarp speeds and/or reduce damage to space time continuum.

Possible disadvantages:
-None - if you're thinking of battle damage, the coils will definitely NOT escape damage owing to its hull coverage. But there are probably thousands or even millions of these in the hull(what engineer in their right minds would create one whole warp coil and is gone in one 'boom'??) Even if more than half is destroyed, the ship is till capable of warp drive although at a much reduced speed.




posted on May, 4 2009 @ 02:25 AM
link   
So why don't they create Spherical Federation Starships??



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Wasn't there an earlier next generation episode where they tried an experimental warp drive system?

They ended up in some uncharted part of the universe billions of light years away in a matter of seconds.

I think it was the first episode with Q in it.

So it would seem the 'normal' starship can handle hyper-warp



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


It happened so many times in Star Trek series but it always has to be a special warp drive which is otherwise unsustainable or unpredictable.

'Modern' (24th century) normal warp drives can easily reach transwarp or even warp 10(infinite speed) if only the starship would survive the 'warp stresses' at very high warp, which normal Federation Starships can't.

Well they can tolerate warp factors much closer to warp 10 and even cruise at transwarp speeds if they use sphere shape with spherical distribution of warp coils along the hull.

A spherical starship will even have the distinct advantage of improved energy efficiency as they don't need as much structural integrity field as conventional starships during warp cruise and combat. Also the warp bubble in a form of sphere, could easily cover the whole ship. So bubble volume to ship volume can be much smaller and closer to the value of one. Even force fields to ship volume will be closer, thus requiring less shielding energy. The design will not only be effective for exploration but also in combat(Kudos to the Borg for that)

So like Dr Zefram Cochrane would say, "Why not"




[edit on 4-5-2009 by ahnggk]



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I think your talking about a Borg Sphere.

Trans warp capable, de centralized configuration.

Looks to me someone want's to be assimilated.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 


My thoughts exactly. I could have sworn the Excelsior was the first ship with the experimental trans-warp drive installed. I know when I read in sourcebooks back in highschool ( some 25 years ago...lmao) they always made a difference between warp drive and transwarp drive , the latter being able to break the W10 barrier.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by djvexd
My thoughts exactly. I could have sworn the Excelsior was the first ship with the experimental trans-warp drive installed. I know when I read in sourcebooks back in highschool ( some 25 years ago...lmao) they always made a difference between warp drive and transwarp drive , the latter being able to break the W10 barrier.


Someone actually went past transwarp speeds and reached infinite speed using a conventional warp drive, although using a more stable dilithium.

The Voyager could reach Transwarp speeds if only stuctural integrity could be kept even without using a transwarp coil. All this was demonstrated in VOY: Threshold.

The new warp scale btw, puts warp 10 as the absolute maximum because it equates to infinite speed. Using the new scale, transwarp speeds would be around warp 9.99+




I think your talking about a Borg Sphere.

Trans warp capable, de centralized configuration.

Looks to me someone want's to be assimilated.


I would actually expect the next generation of ships to be likewise. But as always, why would anyone want federation ships to look like borg ships or death stars?

I still think they should design some of their vessels in that shape, especially scout classes to have the speed and range advantage.



[edit on 4-5-2009 by ahnggk]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Wasn't there an earlier next generation episode where they tried an experimental warp drive system?

They ended up in some uncharted part of the universe billions of light years away in a matter of seconds.

I think it was the first episode with Q in it.

So it would seem the 'normal' starship can handle hyper-warp


I think this is two different things... Not a big Trekkie or Trekker...but I think the Q episode actually had Q as responsible for taking the Enterprise far away from home to encounter something new and different.

As for experiments, the whole Voyager franchise was based on this, and the ship ended up clear across the galaxy, and is trying to get home.

Let's face it, the whole FTL travel idea (warp speed) brings up all of the concerns you mentioned. As we know it, you'd have to be converted to energy to achieve light speed, let alone go beyond it. While we have good observational evidence that space curves, etc. with gravity...we still don't have a clue on most of the details, so as to what would happen within a created and navigable wormhole (basically the idea of FTL travel)...it is anyone's guess... I would think it would be well beyond the idea of nacelle placement or even hull materials...



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   
This thread has me in stitches. You guys are talking about this topic as if it were real. AWESOME! lol. Loved the discussion. I'm not a big Trekkie, but it still kinda fun to read a discussion like this in this forum.

I think a round ship would be to hard to accomplish, theatrically. That is probably why it wasn't done. Sounds good on paper, but to implement it in a non diabolical way, just wouldn't look right on screen.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


I disagree I think that it would be possible to traverse speeds faster than light without the need to be energy. What you would have to do is essentially reduce your mass to zero.

One could theoretically then ride a spacetime wave to your destination.

The problem would be how far the spacetime wave ripple throughout space? What would happen if the wave intersected an object with mass?



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


So maybe a combination of Transporter and Warp Techs could reduce your mass closely to zero? Not sure how else one would accomplish this.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by arcnaver
 


Well I was thinking more along the lines of some sort of field being projected around the craft thereby making the craft seem as if it has zero mass. Then using Alcubierre's Theory of Warp Dynamics

More information about this can be seen here.

In theory if you can somehow make an object with mass act as if it has zero mass you can then take that object and propel it through spacetime by using a wave. Akin to a surfer riding on a wave in the ocean space moves not the object.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   
Here's a topic I made on how FTL flight may be achieved (non-fiction)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Would seem only two shapes make good candidates for FTL ship designs, the sphere and saucer shapes.



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   
or we could go the Star Wars route and create a motivator to drop us from realspace to hyperspace.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 05:57 AM
link   
they allways say energy is a problem.. so why don't they use energy in a quantum state .. so the energy is there and not at the same time ..
so when it is used the energy is and isnt used at the same time .. and with that effect the energy will remain the same as at the begin of the trip.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
they allways say energy is a problem.. so why don't they use energy in a quantum state .. so the energy is there and not at the same time ..
so when it is used the energy is and isnt used at the same time .. and with that effect the energy will remain the same as at the begin of the trip.


If you mean the quantum vacuum fluctuations/Zero Point Energy...

These are energy fluctuating quite randomly. You might be able to extract 'free' energy from them if you can cause order with less expenditure of energy you did to extract energy from them.

Go figure because nobody has figured that out yet. If someone did, we'll have absolutely no problems with energy. It's possible but it will definitely take a fine stroke of genius and/or extreme luck to find that out.

Extra emphasis on 'free' energy because we're not actually creating energy from nothing in this case, but simply putting the ambient energy left over from the Big Bang or whatever to 'work'





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join