XPost: alt.startrek, rec.arts.startrek.current, rec.arts.tv   
   From: efor6920@bigpond.net.au   
      
   "Anim8rFSK" wrote in message   
   news:ANIM8Rfsk-6A2FB1.09315923092006@news.west.cox.net...   
   > In article ,   
   > "Fozzi" wrote:   
   >   
   >> "David Johnston" wrote in message   
   >> news:2d3s62hb2ohm91qn196mud3toqr89pf0nq@4ax.com...   
   >> > On Fri, 19 May 2006 19:35:03 +0200, "Wouter Valentijn"   
   >> >   
   >> > Actually they did give the time that Enterprise would take to go from   
   >> > Earth to, what was it, Neptune? However they never established that   
   >> > warp speed is a constant so that warp 5 inside the Solar System is the   
   >> > same speed as warp 5 in interstellar space.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> mind you this is still a fairly uncertain figure, given that there are a   
   >> couple of light days distance between its orbital apogee and perogee, it   
   >> isnt really a definiable quantity if we dont know the relative orbital   
   >> positions of neptune and earth or at least the date (which would mean we   
   >> could make a fairly accurate guestimate of those positions)   
   >>   
   >> cheers   
   >> fozzi   
   >   
   > You don't need the distances; Archer said how fast they were going, in   
   > real world numbers. They said how fast Enterprise could go, and how   
   > long it took to get to the Klingon homeworld, and it puts the Klingons   
   > .8 light years from us. It's like a couple guys in a car leaving San   
   > Francisco and saying "This baby will hit 120 mph on the freeway, so   
   > we'll be to New York in an hour!"   
      
   actually you missed my point, which is strange considering that the next   
   post i read after posting mine was your one which specifically answered my   
   point, oh well i said light days instead of light hours so im not in a   
   position to criticise to much   
      
   cheers   
   fozzi   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   
|