Worf gripes about Alexander not cleaning his room. But the episode "Up The Long Ladder" clearly states the Enterprise-D can clean itself. This nit can also be applied to "In Theory."
The self-cleaning would clean small pieces of debris, dirt, germs, bacteria, etc. The ship would not clean up things like books(PADDs), toys or clothes.
Riker seemed convinced the ship could clean large objects in "Up The Long Ladder," though.
It was probably more symbolic, the reason parents today tell kids to clean up there room at least in part is to teach then responsiblity.
Thing is, today you can actually tell if they did it or not...
The test ship just floats there in space and the Soliton Wave hits it and carries it into Warp just a few seconds later. Why wasn't the ship destroyed? The Wave must have been traveling very near the Speed of Light when it hit the ship, since both disappear into Warp just a few seconds afterwards. If the test ship had been traveling at Sub-Warp and then picked up by the Wave at a similar speed, then I could see it surviving, but not the way they showed it. Also if the Wave is solid enough to push a ship to Warp speed, what about asteroids and other examples of space junk? The Enterprise may have kept Lemma II safe from the Soliton Wave, but the planet will probably have one hell of a meteor shower to deal with.
Another problem with this method of travel is that planets move in space. The Soliton Wave is aimed at where they think Lemma II will be when the wave reaches there, but if the wave travels faster or slower than they expect, then it will miss the planet.
Didn't Geordi have a line in here about wondering what it would be like to be with Zephram Cachrane on the first warp test?
Worf Mis-pronounces Kahless in this episode, he's pronounces it "kah-less" , instead of the usual "KAY-less"
Obviously Klingons have never heard of "spanking". The shame of that would straighten out Alexander real quick. (Actually it surpises me with all the slapping and punching in Klingon culture already that they don't practice it)
GREAT SFX: The Soliton Wave...very cool.
Then again, with all the slapping & punching in Klingon culture maybe they like being spanked?
In the book of nits on this show, Phil Farrand notes that Data has a line that says, "The Soliton wave is 450% more efficient than our own warp drive." The Soliton wave is 98% efficient. The warp core is 96% efficient. Phil says this is only 2 percent. The efficiency of the warp drive is an asymtoptic curve. The efficiancy tries to get to 100% but it can't there. In this instace, 450% simply means 4.5 times. The Soliton wave is 4.5 times more efficient than a standard warp drive.
You're gonna have to do better than that, Brannon. (Yeah, the initials gave you away.)
"In this instace, 450% simply means 4.5 times."
:: As opposed to an "instace" where it doesn't?
By my calculation, 4.5 times more than 96% is 528%, an efficiency level that blows past the asymptotic line and could well violate the law of conservation of energy. ("Did I do something wrong, officer?")
Hi there, my name really is Bob. I don't know who Brannon is. The efficiency curve of any reaction is not a straight line. An asypmtote is a line, or value, that cannot be reached. 100% efficiency cannot be reached. You can reach 99.99999999 and so on, but you cannot each 100%. 528% efficiency, by the laws of physics, cannot exist. However, the more efficient a reaction is, the greater the work output is. If graphed, this would be a curve as well. It is called a Bell curve. The Bell curve shows that the work output grows exponentially as the efficiency grows logirythmically. what this means is that the 98% efficiancy of the Soliton wave puts out 4.5 times the work output of the 96% efficiency of the warp core.
By my calculation, 4.5 times more than 96% is 528%
How do you figure?
And I seriously doubt that Brannon Braga has ever even seen this board in his lifetime.
96 * 4.5 = 432
432 more than 96 is 528.
And I know that most people think 4.5 times more means 4.5 times as much. I don't, for two simple reasons: (1) it screws up the conversion to percentages (which is where 4.5 came from here); and (2) it makes the word "more" redundant (except for those misguided souls who believe there's such a thing as "4.5 times less."
And you're right--this board would be a dead letter to Rick and Brannon. I just lost track of which board I was posting to. (Common knowledge that B&B post to the Enterprise board sub nom. Beavis and Butthead.)
Bob Brigham: Hi there . . .
:: Hi yourself. Welcome.
BB: . . . my name really is Bob. I don't know who Brannon is.
:: Go to Keyword Search and look for Brannon in the text of any Next Gen or later ST board. It's a regular Mr. Toad's wild ride.
'Nuff chitchat. I referred to you jokingly as writer/producer Brannon Braga because I find so many of his "explanations" lacking. So help me out here.
I know what efficiency is (energy out/energy in). Likewise, asymptotes, bell curves, exponential and logarithmic functions, and the conservation of energy. I don't know how 98 comes out to be 4.5 times greater than 96.
In a 96% warp engine, 100 joules of mc2 in the reaction chamber yields 96 joules of useful work. If you cut the 4 joule loss in half (by achieving 98% efficiency), you might say you've doubled the MARGINAL (or some such) efficiency, but by no means has it been "fourpled-and-a-half." And the thermodynamic efficiency has still only increased by two-ninety sixths.
Benefit of the Doubt Department: Could Data have been referring to cost efficiency?
I suspect they were talking marginal efficiency, but even so, as TJ pointed out, it only double it.
Common knowledge that B&B post to the Enterprise board sub nom. Beavis and Butthead.
Um, hi... I'm the person who doesn't get this. Say what?
Welcome aboard, Bob Bringham & TJ Flemming!
Anon., I think he's trying to say that Brannon and Braga post to the Enterprise board under the names Beavis and Butthead. Though I may be wrong.
sub nom. = "under the name"
or so I would guess.
Butch, I think you mean Brannon Braga, or Berman and Braga, not "Brannon and Braga."
Yeah, I still doubt that either have ever seen nitcentral.
Yes Luigi, you're right. Shouldn't post when I haven't had enough sleep.
And remember, friends don't let friends drink and post, kids.
Wonderful stuff that Romulan Ale.
Anonymous, Josh--I outed "Beavis" and "Butthead" last month in Enterprise Kitchen Sink/Continuity Porn. THEY NEVER DENIED IT. Proof enough for George W.: proof enough for me.
But seriously, folks: (1) I recall reading somewhere that B&B are aware of NitCentral, perhaps even read it; and (2) Proof of (not "in") the pudding: the first season's out-of-character dialog seems to have dried up. Is it coincidence or is it my gentle guidance?
John A. Lang: Welcome aboard, Bob Bringham & TJ Flemming!
:: Thank you! Welcome aboard, yourself. (Just kidding. I know you've been here 204 times because I ran your name through Keyword Search, as I did Bob's. Trick is, I had to SPELL IT RIGHT.)
ScottN: I suspect they were talking marginal efficiency, but even so, as TJ pointed out, it only double it.
I think it's something else entirely. When referring to the warp engines as 96% efficient, Geordi was referring to the status of HIS engines as compared to a general baseline specification. That is, the baseline spec says that the Enterprise should consume X amount of energy for Y cochranes warp field output. The Enterprise would be currently producing 0.96Y cochranes for X instead of Y for X. Now, of course, efficiency in regards to a machine has a set meaning, but I think TPTB weren't aware of this.
Data's number refers to something else entirely. He was referring to the efficiency of the PROCESS itself, not of the Enterprise's execution of that process. If the soliton wave was at 98% and that was 4.5 times more efficient than standard warp drive, the Enterprise would normally be operating at 22%. However, that factor of 22% efficiency would be a DESIGN criteria; the Enterprise's baseline spec (from which La Forge's 96% was taken) would take this 22% criteria into account.
(2) Proof of (not "in") the pudding: the first season's out-of-character dialog seems to have dried up. Is it coincidence or is it my gentle guidance?
Probably the writers getting to understand the characters more. Most shows early eps have ones where characters act strangely when compaired to later seasons after personality have been better established.
The producers may be aware of this site, I know if I produced a TV show I'd certanly at least look at what kind of fan community surrounded it, but they probably would not read it regulary or post to it. Most legal departments tell creative types within a show to avoid the fan community for legal reasons. For example if a fan posted to a board about what he thinks might happen next season and it happens he might try to claim the writers stole his idea and sue.
Jesse: I think you did it. I can live with your answer. Bob?
It does raise (not "beg") one question, though: since Geordi is constantly modifying--"screwing up (Leah's) engine designs"--the modified engine should be capable of exceeding the 22% baseline, and the nominal efficiency would then exceed 100% (because the crew wouldn't, perhaps couldn't, establish a new baseline). But Geordi never tosses out such a number (as far as I'm aware).
One last thing: Data said 450% MORE efficient, not AS efficient. That would be 550% AS efficient, making the baseline 18.2%. (Yeah, a nit.)
Brian: This kind of nanny lawyering is one good argument for adopting the British system of making the loser pay the costs. Why should artists have to guard against this type of suit when the law provides no remedy whatever for "theft" of an idea.
And no, I don't really believe that "Beavis" and "Butthead" are Braga and Berman. But I can't help thinking that understanding their own characters is at least partly driven by the realization, documented here, that their viewers are paying attention.
I just saw this ep today on the Season 5 DVD set and I haven't seen this since it originally came out (I don't often watch reruns, which is why my memory's so spotty on many Trek things) and it was nice to revisit it cuz I still don't remember it at all, but at least I know it's Brian Bonsall's first foray as Alexander, whom he's played up till that other actor did later in DS9.
Anyway, I caught two nits that Phil never mentioned in his books (I read them before watching each ep to see the nits he's found and sometimes I'll find one or two that neither he nor anyone else did), or that no one's mentioned here, unless it's been lost a few years ago when NC went kerplooey for a short while, and it's when Alexander's shown in close up looking at the Corvan gilvo creature in its cage. It's close to the chicken wire, almost right up next to it and in Al's face but then the exact next shot is from farther away showing the creature back up on top of its perch while Al's still looking at it, and there was no time for the decrepancy. Nice to know chicken wire will be used on otherwise high-tech spaceships in the far future, too.
The other nit was when Riker carries out the two gilvos they don't move at all in the first shot of him holding them (unless I somehow missed it) but then in the next shot one's nose (snout?) slightly moves.
Jennifer Edwards (Miss Kyle) is the daughter of film director Blake Edwards. She was also the star of NBC's 1968 TV-movie version of Heidi. The broadcast of this film triggered the "Heidi Bowl," one of the most infamous moments in both NFL and TV history. More on that here.
Hi there, my name really is Bob. I don't know who Brannon is. The efficiency curve of any reaction is not a straight line. An asypmtote is a line, or value, that cannot be reached. 100% efficiency cannot be reached. You can reach 99.99999999 and so on, but you cannot each 100%. 528% efficiency, by the laws of physics, cannot exist. However, the more efficient a reaction is, the greater the work output is. If graphed, this would be a curve as well. It is called a Bell curve. The Bell curve shows that the work output grows exponentially as the efficiency grows logirythmically. what this means is that the 98% efficiancy of the Soliton wave puts out 4.5 times the work output of the 96% efficiency of the warp core.
That's not a Bell curve, which, as the name says, looks like a bell. The "Normal" probability distribution is a case of the Bell Curve.
I'm not sure what a "soliton wave" is supposed to be, not least because the term is redundant. They are not particles but "solitary waves" which are solutions to nonlinear partial differential equations.
At one point, the teacher asks alexander to spell his last name, the thing is, she just read it off of her screen. Shouldn't she know how to spell it from that?
Maybe his name was written in the Klingon alphabet.
It was obvious from the screen that the question was just a pretext to get him to interact with her, as he was acting distracted.
Well, as I see it, this, along with "Cost Of Living", was one of the "soap opera"-style drama episodes of TNG that Tim McCree was talking about one time, and how they were frequently used in the series' fifth season. I believe it had something to do with whoever was executive producer at the time, either Rick Berman (yucchhh) or Jeri Taylor, who went on to have a big part in creating Voyager. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I will say that I agree with Tim that episodes like this, where family members have personal conflicts between one another, are not my favorite kind of Star Trek episode as a whole.
Anyway, about this particular show. I'm sorry, but I really don't understand why Geordi is so fascinated by Dr. Ja'Dar's soliton wave propulsion technology. As an engineer, and of the Federation flagship to boot, Geordi should already know that it is inherently inferior to the warp engines that he has been in charge of for at least the last four years or so. I just think that Geordi thinking that a form of starship propulsion that wouldn't need to use "bulky warp drives" is a bit out of character for him. Especially after it is revealed that the soliton wave technology is highly flawed and it's use results in the destruction of the test ship, as well as it putting the destination site in danger. And I suppose that was the last time we ever hear about the soliton wave, much like Dr. Apgar's kreiger wave emitter from "A Matter Of Perspective". Of course, the reason we never heard about that again was that due to Apgar's incompetance and desire to gain revenge on Riker for being the target of affections from his wife, the station was destroyed, taking him with it! Oh well.
Another nit I have is about the Corvan gilvos. They, along with the Tellarite face masks from TOS, were obviously fake. I especially noticed that when Riker rescued them from the fire, you can totally see where the puppeteer's hands were supposed to go into. And of course that was before all the CGI that is oversaturating movies and TV nowadays was being used, I wonder if they would have made the gilvos look more convincing that way?
Also, I didn't really care for the fact that Alexander must now live with his father aboard the Enterprise. I noticed that since "When The Bough Breaks" happened, there were very few other episodes that features the kids on board the ship (except for "Brothers".) But then, along came "Disaster" which showcased three for an show subplot, which unfortunatly inspired a third-rate fan-fic author to create an entire universe of truly terrible stories totally centered around the young girl in the said episode, along with an incredibly flawed premise that would never get over with any publishing company, let alone any TV network. But I digress, this post is not about children on board starships. However, we would get one more child who would be the central character of "Imaginary Friend", yet another show in TNG's fifth season. Hmm, I'm beginning to notice a recurring theme here...
Well, that's all I got for this one. I think that the fact that the soliton wave technology bombed was a good thing for the Federation. Give me Transwarp or Quantum Slipstream drive any day!
Well, as I see it, this, along with "Cost Of Living", was one of the "soap opera"-style drama episodes of TNG that Tim McCree was talking about one time, and how they were frequently used in the series' fifth season. I believe it had something to do with whoever was executive producer at the time, either Rick Berman (yucchhh) or Jeri Taylor, who went on to have a big part in creating Voyager. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I will say that I agree with Tim that episodes like this, where family members have personal conflicts between one another, are not my favorite kind of Star Trek episode as a whole.
Rick Berman and Michael Piller were in charge during S5. Jeri Taylor didn't assume the day-to-day running until the beginning of S6 (when TNG moved away from the soap opera stuff).
This is why I generally avoid Season Five in reruns, because 90% of it is soap opera stuff, and the aforementioned kiddie episodes.
Shame, because they had opened up a great can of worms in Unification, the Romulans tried to conquer a Federation planet. That would be like the Soviet Union trying to take over a NATO country!
Yet this was never even mentioned again. The Romulans committed an act of war, yet it's nicely forgotten next week.
Of course, back in 1991, Trek could still get away with this. This was before shows like Babylon Five and Stargate SG1 came along and changed the rules.
Tim:Shame, because they had opened up a great can of worms in Unification, the Romulans tried to conquer a Federation planet. That would be like the Soviet Union trying to take over a NATO country!
Tim-you're missing the true scope of what the Romulans did.
Vulcan isn't just an allied planet--it is one of the FOUNDING WORLDS OF THE UFP!!!!!!
This is better shown as the Soviet Union trying to take over one of the first 13 colonies!!!!!
There is no way the U.S. would allow the U.S.S.R to take New York(or any of the other 12) without there being a huge stink made about it(most likely a major war)--and I think that's how the UFP would also have reacted.
Exactly, the idea that such a thing can be brushed aside is nuts. This needed to be followed up on (the Romulans offering up Sela as a sacraficial lamb, for example). Yet once Unification was over, it was business as usual.
On Babylon Five, when the Centauri attacked the Narn, it wasn't just brushed aside, but continued to be followed up on, until Narn fell. Of course, by then, B5 had changed the rules.
In the teaser, Geordi says something like "witnessing Zefram Cochran make the first warp flight." Little did he know that he and his friends would not only witness, but become an integral part of, that flight.