 |
|
 |
 |
 |
hey need help with some math for a mod...
|
 |
|
 |
 |
by Citizen Ichimaru - 4/7/2003 9:37:26 PM
this is for a tech discription that increses speed...
If 'c' is the speed of light and warp 1 = c, warp 2 = 10c, warp 3 = 100c, warp 4=1000c and so on till warp 10,
if at warp 9.9975 it takes 100 years to travel 100,000 light years and at warp 2.2 it would take you 4 months to travel the same distance in 4 days at warp 5 how fast would a ship need to go to travel 1 light year in 2 hours.
dont call me a crack pot, i know the speed increse at a consitant and these figures are solidly consistent with each other. an answer to how fast the ship would be thanked apon. if its not to much i would like to know the 5 decimal place in the warp scale and in km per second. i know this is alot to ask but i realy need to know and my algibra skills arnt the best.
| |
|
[We need a Universal Translator.]
| |
|
If Warp 10 = 1,000,000,000c, or 1 Billion Light Years (LY) per Year, Warp 9.9975 = 10 exp 8.9975 = 994,260,074 LY per Year. This is quite a bit (almost a million times) faster than 100,000 Light Years in 100 years.
For a ship to "travel 1 light year in 2 hours," it would be moving at an average speed of 12 LY per 24 hour day, or 4,383 (12 x 365.25) LY per Year. This would be Warp 4.64177, since 10 ^ 3.64177 = 4,383.
The rest of your problem about Warp 2.2 for 4 months and Warp 5 for 4 days seems to require a more focused question on your part. I can tell you Warp 2.2 (by your definition) is 10 exp 1.2 = 15.84893 LY per Year, or 5.28298 LY in 4 months. Also, Warp 5 = 10 ^ 4 = 10,000 LY per Year, or approximately 109.5 LY in 4 days.
 
| |
|
|
|
#4
by Citizen Ichimaru - 4/8/2003 8:23:54 AM
wow thanks for the help i didn't think anyone would do it.
| |
|
African or European?? I don't knoAAAAAAAAHHHHHHhhhh....
| |
|
|
|
'I would like to point out that if you are talking about warp speeds it only functions at discrete values of warp. (Check the star-trek technical manual).
This means that warp 4=1000c, and warp 5=10000c but warp 4 is only 20c or something. This has to do with the fact that warp-drive is a method where the speed of the ship oscillates between sub-light and super-light speeds. On top of that, warp10 is the absolute limit in the sense that warp 10 means that your speed is so high you would be at the all locations in the universe at the same time.
This wasn't understood in the early 23rd century so people used terms of warp speed higher than 10 but since then warp drive is better understood.'
Except that if you're going to pull out the Star Trek manual, you'll have to reconcile the fact that in the 25th century, you have a ship (the refitted Galaxy-X class Enterprise D) travelling at warp 13, and one in the 24th century (the Soverign class Enterprise E) at warp 12 (not to mention the Q chasing the original Enterprise D at better than warp 10 in the pilot episode, but they might not be subject to physics). Paramount contradicts itself on the matter of Warp speed.
The original scientific definition was a exponential function: (x^x)*c.
| |
|
#8
by Citizen Phaedyme - 4/13/2003 7:30:31 AM
Eh, if you want to use the technical manuals, the warp scale was recalibrated between TOS/movies and TNG. During TOS, you could hypothetically hit any warp speed from 1-infinity because no warp speed was actually infinite.
In TNG, warp 10 is infinite speed, thus making it impossible to reach. The technobabble as to why warp factors work the way they do in TNG is due to (apparently) power efficiency breakpoints - each whole number was more efficient, power-wise, to travel at than, say, 1/10 of a factor slower. You can see it on the chart they provide in the TNG technical manual.
And, yes, the writers end up contradicting the canon. Happens everywhere. 
    
| |
|
Both ships mentioned are post-TNG (the final episonde ['All Good Things...'] and the sixth movie respectively).
| |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
Copyright 1995-2026 Stardock Corporation. All rights reservered.
Site created by Pixtudio and Stardock, designed by Pixtudio.
|
 |
