From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #265 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/265 Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------" To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain blakes7-d Digest Volume 99 : Issue 265 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Spatials, Standard Speed, Time Distort Re: [B7L] Spatials, Standard Speed, Time Distort [B7L]Spatials, Standard Speed, Time Distort [B7L] B7 auction update ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 00:07:10 -0400 From: "Gary W" <gadam@shore.net> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Spatials, Standard Speed, Time Distort Message-ID: <001e01befa78$cb14a560$d96cf4cf@Pgadam> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Heynow, I always considered the travel speeds to be logarithmic, but I haven't concluded the ratios yet. More when I do :-) It's more likely a progressive scale like a Riemann sum that each gets faster but never faster than a certain limit... defined ironically by limits. If I gander an equation I could mail it out... progressive analysis and all that.. :) Any form of space travel denotes that even if one travels at an acceleration of 1 g (Earth's gravitational field) the total time for the *occupants* might be say 42 years to travel to a quasar in the outermost fringes of the Universe. However, 4 billion years would pass on Earth. Time is relative (a good Doctor Who quote) and the distances for the shipboard crew would not equal the time for real planetary people. And because of the limited space covered... it is likely that space-time in our region of the Universe is not very curved. Time distortion is small, but there is still a difference. Time distort is the best term I've come across rather than the blase 'warp' reckoning... it's a great revelation that the author of that term (does anyone know who coined it?) is about the best for all around description. Standard speed is great IF you know what the standard IS! Otherwise you are in the dark. I always thought of spatials perhaps being reckoned upon the diameter of Earth's Solar System (not the smaller AU), but less trifling than a light-year. It's hard to tell without a standard measurement, again, as the proceeding tidbit. That's all from here... Gary W. "There are atoms and quarks, mice, men and corks... and I know which of those I would most rather be!" ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew Ellis <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 4:51 PM Subject: [B7L] Spatials, Standard Speed, Time Distort > I'm new to the list (one day old). > > > Hi, > > Please forgive me if anything I say is obvious, stupid, or covered before. > I'm sure you'll enjoy disagreeing with me. > > You seem to be finishing a discussion on length scales, so here is my > contribution. > > As regards distance and velocity measurements I have ALWAYS assumed that > they are logarithmic, so I agree with Judith. > > A linear scale just can't cope with star ship, planetary system and > interstellar distances. In C20 we use km, AU's and Light Years respectively. > But in the "real world" of space travel, you can't be doing with three > systems of units where you transfer seamlessly between them, hence spacials. > A useful base scale might be a standard orbit. > > Now, we have spatials, a logarithmic length scale, so velocity or speed > should be also be measured on a logarithmic scale. Consider simply doubling > the "speed" from the pedestrian Standard by 6 to the phenomenally self > destructive Standard by 12, (and Standard by 8 is considered faster than > anything the federation has, and is a good escape speed). On a linear scale > its just does not make sense. But, if we used a logarithmic scale, such as > the decibel scale, then in terms of linear velocity (km/hr), Standard by 9 > is twice as fast as Standard by 6. But an interesting question, for the > mathematically minded is. Is standard speed given by > > a) Log (distance travelled in lightyears) divided by time taken in seconds > = spatials per second > > or > > b) Log (distance in lightyears divided by time in seconds) > > In (b) we have the natural measure of velocity reflecting some degree of > TIME DISTORTION, but (a) is more useful to the human brain, acustommed to > measuring time linearly. > > What does everybody else think ? > > Andrew Ellis > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:30:32 +0100 (BST) From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bsfiles.nerc-bas.ac.uk> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Spatials, Standard Speed, Time Distort Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.990909102642.28763A-100000@bsauasc> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 9 Sep 1999, Gary W wrote: > Any form of space travel denotes that even if one travels at an acceleration > of 1 g (Earth's gravitational field) the total time for the *occupants* > might be say 42 years to travel to a quasar in the outermost fringes of the > Universe. However, 4 billion years would pass on Earth. Time is relative (a > good Doctor Who quote) and the distances for the shipboard crew would not > equal the time for real planetary people. And because of the limited space > covered... it is likely that space-time in our region of the Universe is not > very curved. Time distortion is small, but there is still a difference. If you're going to try to pin down space travel in B7, I'm afraid you're going to have to jettison special and general relativity from the outset. B7 clearly takes place in a strictly Newtonian universe, with instantaneous communication, unlimited velocities (as measured relative to a universal reference frame) and so on. Iain ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 13:39:36 +0100 From: "Julie Horner" <julie.horner@lincolnsoftware.com> To: "Lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: [B7L]Spatials, Standard Speed, Time Distort Message-ID: <001801befac0$60b87a00$170201c0@pc23.Fishnet> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit With all this discussion going on about the exact nature of a spacial, I was quite amused to notice, while watching "Star Drive" last night, that some good old-fashioned imperial units were still being used. At the beginning of the episode Avon wants to use a large and irregularly shaped asteroid as cover to avoid detection by Federation sensors. When asked by one of the others (Vila or Tarrant I can't remember) how close he intends to get to the asteroid, he says "50 yards". Mm. Do you suppose that if he had rounded up to the nearest furlong he might have found it easier to avoid colliding with the thing? Julie ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 21:35:49 EDT From: Bizarro7@aol.com To: freedom-city@blakes-7.org, Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] B7 auction update Message-ID: <f5f8884.250b0bf5@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Annie has put up a whole new batch of completely different B7 items on the eBay auction. These include some rare or unique photos, and the minimum bids are dirt cheap. Scroll down through the entire list on her auctions grouping to catch all the items as she's mixed them together will all the other fandoms and released them as they were scanned. In the meantime, some of the stuff that went up last week is just about to roll off and end, so if you have a bid, check on the status! More to come. Link: <A HREF="http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/ashton7/">eBay View About Me for ashton7</A> (http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/ashton7/) Main eBay page (to register to bid or check on B7 items in general): www.ebay.com -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #265 **************************************