Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!gatech!ut-sally!barnett From: barnett@ut-sally.UUCP (Lewis Barnett) Newsgroups: net.startrek Subject: Enterprise Gravity Message-ID: <2672@ut-sally.UUCP> Date: Tue, 13-Aug-85 17:30:50 EDT Article-I.D.: ut-sally.2672 Posted: Tue Aug 13 17:30:50 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 14-Aug-85 22:53:23 EDT Distribution: net Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas Lines: 26 I'm sitting here watching "Where No Man Has Gone Before," and something Kirk said during the encounter brought to mind a point that has bothered (or maybe amused) me for a long time. Just as they moved into the barrier, he said, "Gravitation on automatic." A bit later, one of the damage reports was, "Gravitation down to 0.8." Now, the folks who gave us Star Trek seemed pretty eager to show us all the wonderful gadgets they had come up with in the 23rd century, such as phasers, transporters, warp drive, etc. Now why wouldn't they talk about something as mind boggling as gravity control? And, even better, in all the times we've seen the Enterprise badly damaged isn't it funny that the gravity never goes out? That'd be a scene of quite some visual impact -- everyone floating about the bridge and corridors. And practically speaking, you'd expect such a failure to be inevitable; if so, you'd also expect the Enterprise's designers to have planned for the possibility. But, to the contrary, the design of the Enterprise seems to have completely ignored the fact that the crew might at times have to deal with zero G. Anyone have any speculations on the subject? Lewis Barnett,CS Dept, Painter Hall 3.28, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 -- barnett@ut-sally.ARPA, barnett@ut-sally.UUCP, {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!barnett