View Single Post
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,202
# 15
12-30-2012, 05:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
Without getting insanely complicated, inertial mass deals with how easily you get something moving. It's also another instance where Trek fudges it's own physics for the sake of a plot device.

I'll freely admit there's some overlap between the two concepts (and in the strictest sense one could consider what they pulled in Emissary as a variant of a mass effect), but warp and the warp field are "space" based phenomena, versus "object" based.
Does it really fudge physics for the sake of plot? A decade ago, the 'warp effect' was considured purely fictional. The calculations for the Alcubierre Drive not only prove that to be an incorrect assumption, but also conforms precisely to how the Cochrane Drive 'warps space'... Who is to say that it would be impossible to create a field which had the effect of reducing the mass of the station? By our science, maybe, but see above example... Scientists used to KNOW that the Earth was flat, and that the sun and the stars orbited it...

Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
To Wit: They change the laws of physics within a given area, instead of changing the properties of a given object so that the laws of physics apply differently.

The intent, and observable effect of which, was that the stations inertial mass was reduced...