Tags:
General,
science,
Performing Arts,
Mathematics,
Physics,
Astrophysics & Space Science,
Dance,
Astrophysics,
History & Criticism,
working,
Television Plays And Programs,
Physics (Specific Aspects),
Star trek (Television program),
Video games,
Television,
Space sciences,
Television - History & Criticism,
Television - General
to leave the inertial dampers hanging without
at least some concrete description of how they would have to operate. From what I have
argued, they must create an artificial world inside a starship in which the reaction force
that responds to the accelerating force is canceled. The objects inside the ship are
“tricked” into acting as though they were not accelerating. I have described how
accelerating gives you the same feeling as being pulled at by gravity. This connection,
which was the basis of Einstein's general theory of relativity, is much more intimate than
it may at first seem. Thus there is only one choice for the modus operandi of these
gadgets: they must set up an artificial gravitational field inside the ship which “pulls”
in the opposite direction to the reaction force, thereby canceling it out.
Even if you buy such a possibility, other practical issues must be dealt with. For one
thing, it takes some time for the inertial dampers to kick in when unexpected impulses
arise. For example, when the
Enterprise
was bumped into a causality loop by the
Bozeman
as the latter vessel emerged from a temporal distortion, the crew was thrown all about the
bridge (even before the breach in the warp core and the failure of the dampers). I have
read in the
Enterprise's
technical specifications that the response time for the inertial dampers is about 60
milliseconds.
2
Short as this may seem, it would be long enough to kill you if the same delay occurred
during programmed periods of acceleration. To convince yourself, think how long it takes
for a hammer to smash your head open, or how long it takes for the ground to kill you if
you hit it after falling off of a cliff in Yosemite. Just remember that a collision at 10
miles per hour is equivalent to running full speed into a brick wall! The inertial dampers
had better be pretty quick to respond. More than one trekker I know has remarked that
whenever the ship
is
buffeted, no one ever gets thrown more than a few feet.
Before leaving the familiar world of classical physics, I can't help mentioning another
technological marvel that must confront Newton's laws in order to operate: the
Enterprise's
tractor beamhighlighted in the rescue of the Genome colony on Moab IV, when it deflected
an approaching stellar core fragment, and in a similar (but failed) attempt to save Bre'el
IV by pushing an asteroidal moon back into its orbit. On the face of it, the tractor beam
seems simple enoughmore or less like an invisible rope or rodeven if the force exerted may
be exotic. Indeed, just like a strong rope, the tractor beam often does a fine job of
pulling in a shuttle craft, towing another ship, or inhibiting the escape of an enemy
spacecraft. The only problem is that when we pull something with a rope, we must be
anchored to the ground or to something else heavy. Anyone who has ever been skating knows
what happens if you are on the ice and you try to push someone away from you. You do
manage to separate, but at your own expense. Without any firm grounding, you are a
helpless victim of your own inertia.
It was this very principle that prompted Captain Jean-Luc Picard to order Lieutenant Riker
to turn off the tractor beam in the episode “The Battle”; Picard pointed out that the ship
they were towing would be carried along beside them by its own momentumits inertia. By the
same token, if the
Enterprise
were to attempt to use the tractor beam to ward off the
Stargazer,
the resulting force would push the
Enterprise
backward as effectively as it would
push the
Stargazer
forward.
This phenomenon has already dramatically affected the way we work in space at present.
Say, for example, that you are an astronaut