Added: 4 years ago
From: lucifersangel87
Views: 15,530
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (41)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • eu quero !

  • Can they generate weak or decaying warp fields to get away from an exploding core? Seems like I read somewhere that they do something like that to keep their torpedoes going when fired at warp

  • I stand corrected in that Impulse engines are not directly powered by the Warp Core. They are, in fact powered by nuclear fusion reactors, which power a giant magnetocoil, producing thrust.

    However, Impulse speed would not be possible without the Warp Drive negating the relativistic weight of the ship.

    A short blast from the impulse engines before they eject the warp core will see them coast far enough away from the ejected core before it blows.

  • The warp engine does NOT provide power for sub light(or impulse) speeds. The impulse engines do that and they are separate from the warp engine!

  • I believe there are fusion reactors that act as a secondary energy source (or batteries in tos) and a third drive system or docking thrusters.

    Because if the warp core is ejected how would the ship move away from the blast area ?

    I also wonder how the ship can move safely away to a secure distance on thruster power alone ?

    Lastly how do they open the dilithium chamber going at warp speed and I noticed on some old ships they didn't even have casing covers LOL!

    Peak Performance -TNG

  • @Curas1

    Oh my mistake, there was a cover plate. But oddly where the dilithium crystals were wasn't where the main engine plate was ...hummm

  • Time to geek out!

  • Now I know the U.S. Government is capable of pulling off the reaction part. The problem is we don't have an alloy near sdtrong enough to with stand the stresses.

  • @ewtng Nor do we have forcefield technology yet

  • yeah yeah yeah.... but are warp engines green? :P

  • @AlfaMadDog11 of course they are green they are not real. but matter and antimatter which is real would be the fuel. and it gives off 100% energy with no loss or byproducts. producing antimatter has been the biggest headache for scientists at the particle accelerators. they have been making it for over 30 years and its still only a tiny amount produced

  • @cyllocybin I thought you lose half the energy to the emission of neutrinos after matter and antimatter annihilate each other.

  • @jutau well it wouldnt be a very good energy source if you do lose half of the energy. but its like it says on the tin. 1 particle of matter + 1 particle of anti matter = particle annihilation. if neutrinos do come into it im guessing they can be syphoned off as extra energy. but the main blast is pure energy. it all comes down to einstein really, if i take what he said correctly that matter and energy are interchangeable, im not a scientist im a builder lol. so i really dont know. cont

  • @jutau cont, are you talking about practical physics? or are you bringing it direct from what they say on star trek? as i said before anti matter is sparse. i have never heard of neutrino emissions from scientists at particle accelerators, maybe it does happen and i just dont know about it lol. but im just stating that as far as i knew matter/antimatter annihilation was meant to give 100% energy with nothing being wasted and no bi products. but time and science changes like the wind.

  • @cyllocybin Not that I read physics papers regularly on this topic, but i do recall reading something about matter/ antimatter reactions do release 100% energy but in a variety of forms. Not all the forms of energy are readily usable so its only as efficient as what we can extract and use. I do remember reading that most of the energy is released as neutrino emission and since we can't use it, it's consider a lost.

  • @jutau No, matter-antimatter annihilation does not produce 100% energy. It also produces several particles. Neutrinos are particles, not pure energy. They do conduct energy away from the reaction.

  • @Pooua I know. I think you agree with me about how M-AM reaction isn't 100% efficient. But you're right about neutrino 'particles'. In reading back what I wrote, I think I was trying to state that energy isn't the only product that comes out of the reaction so it can't be 100% efficient.

  • so where do the di-lithium crystals come into it?

  • @ValorUnlimited yeah he says they are used to contain and focus the reaction. what i meant was is there such a thing as dilithium crystals? i know we have matter and antimatter. how about the dilithium crystals?

  • @cyllocybin Dilithium, which is a real structure of two lithium atoms covalently bonded together, does exist. However it would need some other element to bind to it, to form a coherent crystal structure. I'm assuming Trek assumes Dilithium is just shorthand for the actual scientific name which is harder to say in conversation, and it's the synergistic combination of the dilithium and the other elements involved which makes it such an efficient focuser for a matter/antimatter reaction.

  • lol

  • Pretty good program, actually. Couple minor technical details (such as the M/AM Drive doesn't have anything to do with sublight velocity), but you did make that disclaimer. And I'm sure your prof didn't know the difference, either.

  • Y is your name lucifersangel87?? hmm..

  • Awesome video. So then, as this is more of an illustration of Galaxy/Sovereign class warp cores, how does Voyager's warp core differ? It had no visible intermix chamber and no magnetic constrictors creating the effect talked about here - just the swirly blue effect (which granted did look cool, but doesn't seem to follow this explanation of warp mechanics).

  • I read somewhere that in some setups

    like voyager and the refit constitution,

    the entire cylinder is the chamber with the constrictors hidden above, below and inside the power transfer tubes.

  • Voyager, enterprise refit, and several others cores shown in the series, had a circumferential plasma coolant tank

  • nice job

  • dude your 'a living legend' like Admiral Cain, brilliant im always using warp drive as an expression ha ha, i just gota share this with my friends

    thanks

  • Awesome O_o Actually useful :P

  • u should make more!! feels like i went to Starfleet Academy lol

  • voyagers warp core is like the only core thats been ejected successfully........ on several occasions. coz tht ship is legend. coz i remember another episode of tng where data tried to eject the core coz one of the nacelles had been hit but it failed resulting in the destruction of the enterprise. luckily they were cought in a time loop (convenient) and survived. at least i think thts the episode

  • there's an easy and a hard answer to that. the easy one being that it had to blow up for the plot...

    the hard answer is more of a guess, as there's been no official documented evidence about this incident. However, i believe that a catastrophic cascade failure ocurred, possibly overloading or fusing the ejection control system. Of course, the computer had already raised forcefields, but no forcefield is strong enough to contain an antimatter explosion!

  • Considering that this is a Galaxy Class Starship Warp Core this only leaves one question:Why did 1701-d core wasnot automatically contained and ejected in order to save the ship itself?.

  • rofl

  • wow that was awesome... now i know why there were three arms under the enterprise in first contact, or at least i assume that's what they were... the maglocks?

  • the three arms you're referring to, maglocks, are the magnetic locking devices for the primary deflector dish. Again, more of a plot device, really. I guess they were designed for exactly this purpose - should something go critically wrong with the primary deflector, maglocks would be released and the dish would part from the ship. Obviously this would all be automatic under normal circumstances. So it has nothing to do with warp core ejection.

  • Well done !

  • did u make that?

  • That was animated very well. Excellent work.

  • Good job, congratulations!

  • That was very, very cool! Nicely done.  Hope you got an "A!"

  • Agreed! Very creative! =)

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more