CrossoverManiac's little calculation...

[Connor MacLeod]

Don't sweat it. knowing Crossover Maniac, he never bothered tolook it up himself (either he pulled it out of his ass entirely as he does with most things, or he saw snippets or references of it on SB - his usual troll-hole - and then based most of his arguments on that

[Crossover_Maniac]

This has nothing to do with the negative and positive superlaser particle theory (I'm given up on that).

Ah, so you insulted everyone for being stupid and "mentally impaired" if they didn't agree with it, and then you quietly gave up on it without admitting it was NFG?

The fact is that no matter how much or how little hypermatter there is, there is still both an imaginary mass and a real mass component.
What if they can manipulate the phase angle so that it goes to 90 degrees but the magnitude of the vector stays the same? I've been saying this since the very first post on this subject: is there some problem with your reading comprehension?

The real mass can only travel below the speed of light, the imaginary mass can only travel faster than light. If there was no real mass and only an imaginary mass, it could travel faster than light just like a tachyon unless hyperdrive doesn't work that way.

Which is precisely why I have theorized that it works the way I described. And your responses indicate that you either did not read the posts in question or lacked the mental firepower to comprehend them, since you do not attempt to refute them and instead, simply act as though the ideas were never raised in the first place.

You mean shift the entire mass of the vessel as an imaginary mass. Apparently, you didn't actually read the ICS.

Hyperdrives adjust faster-than-light "hypermatter" particles to allow a jump to light-speed without changing the complex mass and energy of the ship.

That's why I'm being saying that the hypermatter needed a negative mass component. The ship's mass is constant. It's only the hypermatter that changes.

[Darth Wong]

You mean shift the entire mass of the vessel as an imaginary mass. Apparently, you didn't actually read the ICS.

Hyperdrives adjust faster-than-light "hypermatter" particles to allow a jump to light-speed without changing the complex mass and energy of the ship.

That's why I'm being saying that the hypermatter needed a negative mass component. The ship's mass is constant. It's only the hypermatter that changes.

Obviously, you are too stupid to read plain English. What part of "the magnitude of the vector stays the same" do you not understand? Are you so mind-numbingly ignorant that you cannot visualize a polar representation of an imaginary number, something they should have taught you in high school?

[Crossover_Maniac]

Obviously, you are too stupid to read plain English. What part of "the magnitude of the vector stays the same" do you not understand? Are you so mind-numbingly ignorant that you cannot visualize a polar representation of an imaginary number, something they should have taught you in high school?

Read the instruction manual to the ICS, shithead. It said the ship's mass doesn't change only the hypermatter does. If you shift all of the hypermatter into an imaginary value, the ship's real mass stays the same.

[Darth Wong]

Obviously, you are too stupid to read plain English. What part of "the magnitude of the vector stays the same" do you not understand? Are you so mind-numbingly ignorant that you cannot visualize a polar representation of an imaginary number, something they should have taught you in high school?

Read the instruction manual to the ICS, shithead. It said the ship's mass doesn't change only the hypermatter does. If you shift all of the hypermatter into an imaginary value, the ship's real mass stays the same.

It says the ship's COMPLEX MASS doesn't change, dumb-ass. You seem to interpret that as meaning that the phase angle is fixed, not just the magnitude of the vector (and if both the phase angle and magnitude are fixed, then what is being manipulated?)

It's quite obvious that this is going WAY over CM's head by the obtuse nature of his responses and the fact that they don't address my point at all; could somebody please explain complex numbers and polar representations for him? Or at least drag him to some high school math teacher who can try to explain it for him?

[Crossover_Maniac]

Obviously, you are too stupid to read plain English. What part of "the magnitude of the vector stays the same" do you not understand? Are you so mind-numbingly ignorant that you cannot visualize a polar representation of an imaginary number, something they should have taught you in high school?

Read the instruction manual to the ICS, shithead. It said the ship's mass doesn't change only the hypermatter does. If you shift all of the hypermatter into an imaginary value, the ship's real mass stays the same.

It says the ship's COMPLEX MASS doesn't change, dumb-ass. You seem to interpret that as meaning that the phase angle is fixed, not just the magnitude of the vector (and if both the phase angle and magnitude are fixed, then what is being manipulated?)

It's quite obvious that this is going WAY over CM's head by the obtuse nature of his responses and the fact that they don't address my point at all; could somebody please explain complex numbers and polar representations for him? Or at least drag him to some high school math teacher who can try to explain it for him?

I know how vectors work, asshole. So, I'm assuming the hypermatter actually changes the real mass of the ship's structure and payload into an imaginary mass and not just changes its own to shift the overall mass of the ship to an imaginary mass. Is that correct?

[Crossover_Maniac]

Ah, Crossover Maniac... a living, breathing argument both in favor of euthanization and abortion, and against the theory of evolution.

Oh, it's a pig-blowing troll and it followed me from SB.com. I almost forgot about you.

Canon isn't something you cherry-pick

Are you claiming that Dark Empire II is canon? Not even the most rabid of warsies will claim that.

I thought everything from the EU is considered canon. Isn't that the policy? Not if it says something you like, then you pretend it doesn't exist.

Wong doesn't IGNORE the Galaxy Gun, you simpering puddle of congealing swine semen, he just

...hopes no else notices it.

or do we ignore the fact that whenever someone is vaporized by a phaser there is no cloud of steam that appears and pretend it's direct-energy transfer and not an NDF effect.

The fact that there is no cloud of steam is what indicates that a phaser blast isn't a DET.

And the fact that NDF effects do exist in the EU

Either the EU is canon or it isn't. Which one is it going to be?

You've yet to make such a all-or-nothing case. Gonna give it a try, or are you STILL relying on your dinky-brained tactic of "just repeat my arguments all over again, they'll give up eventually!"?

You don't get to cherry-pick what SW material you want, bitch. If you want the EU, then you stuck with all of the baggage that comes with it.

[Darth Wong]

I know how vectors work, asshole.

You haven't given any indication of that so far, asshole.

So, I'm assuming the hypermatter actually changes the real mass of the ship's structure and payload into an imaginary mass and not just changes its own to shift the overall mass of the ship to an imaginary mass. Is that correct?

What the fuck else could it possibly mean, since there is no other form of manipulation which would allow the ship to enter hyperspace? Is there some kind of blockage in your skull? I've only explained this about a half-dozen fucking times so far, and it doesn't appear to be sinking in until now.

[Crossover_Maniac]

I know how vectors work, asshole.

You haven't given any indication of that so far, asshole.

A little hard to apply vectors to a magical substance that transforms slower than light particles into tachyons, which this hypermatter crap does.

[Darth Wong]

I know how vectors work, asshole.

You haven't given any indication of that so far, asshole.

A little hard to apply vectors to a magical substance that transforms slower than light particles into tachyons, which this hypermatter crap does.

Actually, it's quite easy, since we are talking about a polar representation of a complex number. I see that despite your protests, you still don't get it.

[Connor MacLeod]

Oh, it's a pig-blowing troll and it followed me from SB.com. I almost forgot about you.

Thats me you cum-guzzling fucktard. If you weren't so busy fucking that victory sheep you would have noticed it was me insulting you, dumbass.

Or are you just as incompetent at keeping people you debate with straight as you are with logic and tactics?

I thought everything from the EU is considered canon. Isn't that the policy? Not if it says something you like, then you pretend it doesn't exist.

Its second tier canon. And you can't dismiss it by creating contradictions (thats only viable if you possess fewer brain cells than concrete - its possible I'm being overly generous in your case.)

Christ, are you so ignorant of canon policy for the source you are arguing that you have to rely on others telling you? WHy the fuck are oyu using sources you haven't even checked out or verified yourself?

...hopes no else notices it.

Not everyone employs your debating tactics, Jizzboy.

And the fact that NDF effects do exist in the EU

Nope. The GAlaxy gun clearly releases energy in its operation. Its a matter to energy conversion process - we just dont kno whow it does it.

Again, if you bothered checking your fucking sources, you would know the EGW&T indicates that.

You don't get to cherry-pick what SW material you want, bitch. If you want the EU, then you stuck with all of the baggage that comes with it.

Not when you're trying to invent contradictions because you're too inept to peform actual analysis.

[Connor MacLeod]

WTF did he actually try to misues the ICS quote I just provided? Doesnt that mean the fucktard was operating on evidence he had not investigated before he went off and did these dumbass calcs?

[ClaysGhost]

Some guy's briefcase decelerates from its orbit around the station and reappears to make up the missing mass? Must everyone on the DS look forward to periods during which some of their mass decides to wend its merry way around the station faster than the speed of light?

If you've got a better explanation for hyperdrive, then by all means, provide it. And by the way, everyone DOES, in fact, have to look forward to becoming tachyonic during hyperspace travel. It IS a superluminal drive system, in case you haven't been paying attention.

Hyperdrive? I have no problem with the entire station (the whole of the people) converted to tachyons. I do have a problem with bits of it acquiring imaginary mass whilst the rest stays real, for the reasons I stated before. Which bits of the station get circulated?

And if the power fails whilst some of the mass is tachyonic, look out; it'll make the Enterprise towing around antimatter look sensible as regards safety.

You are raising issues of practical application, not mathematics. I could just as easily raise similarly horrendous issues with wormholes, yet I don't.

Many of your criticisms of some franchises appear centred on issues like these. Why not this?

Nobody suggested building a battle-station out of wormholes before. Further, wormholes are valid solutions to the GR field equations. Tachyons are one of several possible interpretations of spacelike momentum vectors. Whilst both are mathematical curiosities, they are certainly not of the same order of sanity.

Bullshit. Wormholes require huge amounts of negative mass, and would induce monstrous tidal forces that annihilate anything trying to move through them. I don't see how they are any less ridiculous than imaginary mass manipulation.

No, not bullshit, unless you have a different understanding of GR to me (in which case, I request that you point out the paper that takes tachyons beyond a possible interpretation of those momentum vectors). There's a great difference in theoretical status.

As for ridiculous, I regard an object with complex mass as ridiculous. All real or all imaginary, I don't mind.

[SPOOFE]

Oh, it's a pig-blowing troll and it followed me from SB.com. I almost forgot about you.

Uh-huh. I must be psychic, since I was in this thread prior to your arrival. If anything, YOU followed ME, genius.

And I seriously doubt that you "almost forgot" about me... I was the guy whipping your ass six ways 'til Sunday. Perhaps you're going a little Palooka on us? Getting a little punch-drunk? Reeling at the ropes, are we?

I thought everything from the EU is considered canon.

The problem with that sentence is the phrase "I thought". You shouldn't think. You lack the capability to "think". Your spinal column ends in a brain stem with no further grey matter to operate your higher functions. You probably have a nest of moths munching away at your skull lining. If you want, shake your head back and forth and listen to them bounce around inside your empty skull.

And no, the EU is NOT considered "canon". It is considered "official". This means, you testicularly-lacking imbecilic poster child, that it is just as valid as canon only if it does not contradict a canon source; furthermore, the criteria for something being excluded are not as strict as they are with canon.

Not if it says something you like, then you pretend it doesn't exist.

And again you are spouting sentences that make no sense. Care to clear up this apparent non sequitor? Or, as I mentioned over at SB.com (but you ignored, for some reason), do you simply want me to GUESS as to your meanings?

...hopes no else notices it.

Right. That's why he mentions it and spends a couple paragraphs - and even includes a general diagram of it - on his webpage. Because he hopes nobody notices it. Because the best thing to hide something is to put it in plain site, right in front of everyone's nose, where anyone can see it at any time, and easily label it for convenient perusal.

Yeah. That's right.

Did you even look at his webpage? (Ooh, that IS fun to say...)

And the fact that NDF effects do exist in the EU

Another non sequitor. Keep your series straight, you simpering primate... phasers - which YOU mentioned, originally - are part of Star Trek. The EU is part of Star Wars. Do you not realize that - gasp! - the two are different series?

Perhaps that's CM's problem... he doesn't realize that Star Trek and Star Wars are two different things! This whole time he's been shambling about the various Vs. debates, his slack-jawed blank-eyed face betraying his utter lack of comprehension, wondering why we're all arguing about Star Trek vs. Star Wars. "Aren't they the same thing?" this wonderful example of in-breeding mumbles, spitting drool and flecks of half-chewed food from his Orifice of Stupidity that's implant into his jaw bone. "Why are people arguing?"

What a specimen. Perhaps we should donate his body to science. Maybe he experienced a genetic regression at some point in his life? Or maybe he was dropped on his head when he was little?

You don't get to cherry-pick what SW material you want, bitch.

Please point out where I've been doing that, you eruption of dripping smegma.

If you want the EU, then you stuck with all of the baggage that comes with it.

On the other hand, if you want to CRITICIZE the EU, you have to be prepared to offer up a reason for it other than "I don't like it". You have yet to do so. Ergo, I dismiss your petulant little whinings with a wave of my hand, the same way I deal with all insignificant, unintelligent, half-bred, troglodyte-wannabe insects that come my way.

Feel free to say something that doesn't betray an IQ equivalent to the square root of 3. It'd be a refreshing change.

[Ingersoll]

There's some neat theories in this thread. But the complex mass of the egos involved has transformed the theories into an idiotic material.

[Darth Wong]

Hyperdrive? I have no problem with the entire station (the whole of the people) converted to tachyons. I do have a problem with bits of it acquiring imaginary mass whilst the rest stays real, for the reasons I stated before. Which bits of the station get circulated?

Who said anything about parts of the station we can see? I'm talking about a hypermatter "ballast" that's not visible. I thought that was obvious. They obviously need some way of manipulating that mass, but that falls into the category of mystery-tech. By the standards of sci-fi, if something works out mathematically, that's actually better than normal and you know it (unless you have some practical, feasible way of explaining all of the other technologies we run into, like artificial gravity "fields", warp drives, etc)

You are raising issues of practical application, not mathematics. I could just as easily raise similarly horrendous issues with wormholes, yet I don't.

Many of your criticisms of some franchises appear centred on issues like these. Why not this?

Hardly the same thing. I grant warp drive and "mass-lightening fields" and stable wormholes even though they're pure bullshit; I just don't accept phenomena which we are not forced to accept through observation and which "exist" only in the sense that the characters interpret events in a certain way (eg- altering the laws of probability, making a crack in an event horizon, using sonic weapons in space, etc).

Bullshit. Wormholes require huge amounts of negative mass, and would induce monstrous tidal forces that annihilate anything trying to move through them. I don't see how they are any less ridiculous than imaginary mass manipulation.

No, not bullshit, unless you have a different understanding of GR to me (in which case, I request that you point out the paper that takes tachyons beyond a possible interpretation of those momentum vectors). There's a great difference in theoretical status.

Tachyons are still highly theoretical, but since I was talking about wormholes, they are also irrelevant. Please try not to change the subject, and please justify your claim that I am wrong in stating that wormholes are no more feasible than complex mass.

As for ridiculous, I regard an object with complex mass as ridiculous. All real or all imaginary, I don't mind.

But naturally occurring stable concentrations of negative and positive masses in vast quantities such as to create a wormhole are OK?

[SirNitram]

On the subject of manipulating the real mass but not the complex mass, could the angle be moved so the real mass goes higher than it starts? Because if so, I think we just explained how an Interdictor can generate a powerful gravity well around itself.

[ClaysGhost]

Who said anything about parts of the station we can see? I'm talking about a hypermatter "ballast" that's not visible. I thought that was obvious. They obviously need some way of manipulating that mass, but that falls into the category of mystery-tech. By the standards of sci-fi, if something works out mathematically, that's actually better than normal and you know it (unless you have some practical, feasible way of explaining all of the other technologies we run into, like artificial gravity "fields", warp drives, etc)

No, not obvious, especially since you started off talking about hyperdrive (which must apply to the whole station). Really, I'm getting tired of the number of theories which "work out mathematically" and therefore must be good. We're getting into a Maxwell's daemons situation with some of them. Sometimes, no theory at all is best, especially when you can't make satisfactory predictions from what you have.

Hardly the same thing. I grant warp drive and "mass-lightening fields" and stable wormholes even though they're pure bullshit; I just don't accept phenomena which we are not forced to accept through observation and which "exist" only in the sense that the characters interpret events in a certain way (eg- altering the laws of probability, making a crack in an event horizon, using sonic weapons in space, etc).

So criticism of antimatter-powered starships from a safety point of view is not on?

Tachyons are still highly theoretical, but since I was talking about wormholes, they are also irrelevant. Please try not to change the subject, and please justify your claim that I am wrong in stating that wormholes are no more feasible than complex mass.

You expressed an opinion on a comparison of two things ("wormholes" and "imaginary mass manipulation"). I commented on the comparison. That's not changing the subject. I detail my opinions about imaginary vs. negative mass below, but for complex mass I'm not sure where the basis comes from - certainly not from tachyons, which wouldn't remain bound to ordinary matter at all.

But naturally occurring stable concentrations of negative and positive masses in vast quantities such as to create a wormhole are OK?

Who said anything about ok?! Better, not good. I regard negative mass as more acceptable from a theoretical standpoint, since at least there is only one interpretation of the mass distribution required for each wormhole solution. Tachyons aren't even a good interpretation of the relevant theoretical basis, coming primarily from a coincidence as far as I can see. Practically, I'm of course extremely unhappy with either. Whilst there is now observational evidence for "dark energy" with a repulsive gravitational action, this doesn't translate into proof that negative mass exists, and the weakness of dark energy even over cosmological distances reinforcess the theoretical argument that huge amounts would still be needed to create a wormhole. You should be aware though that the high tidal forces are only a property of a particular type of wormhole solution. All solutions require very large mass-energy concentrations, as you stated.

As for naturally occuring concentrations, searches have gone on for a while looking for the (unique) signature of negative mass on background light, without detecting any - further worries for wormhole proponents. However, unlike tachyons, at least there's a decent test for this which is practical now. Stable concentrations of postive and negative will not exist naturally, of course (a lesson Voyager could have done with learning), but then neither would complex mass.

[Darth Wong]

No, not obvious, especially since you started off talking about hyperdrive (which must apply to the whole station). Really, I'm getting tired of the number of theories which "work out mathematically" and therefore must be good. We're getting into a Maxwell's daemons situation with some of them. Sometimes, no theory at all is best, especially when you can't make satisfactory predictions from what you have.

Fair enough, but this particular theory is official. Besides, I reiterate that mathematical possibility may be a low standard, but it is a standard in sci-fi nonetheless. Real technological feasibility and sci-fi simply don't mix.

Hardly the same thing. I grant warp drive and "mass-lightening fields" and stable wormholes even though they're pure bullshit; I just don't accept phenomena which we are not forced to accept through observation and which "exist" only in the sense that the characters interpret events in a certain way (eg- altering the laws of probability, making a crack in an event horizon, using sonic weapons in space, etc).

So criticism of antimatter-powered starships from a safety point of view is not on?

Are you deliberately trying to be difficult? One can accept the existence of a sci-fi technology without necessarily accepting that it was competently implemented. The GCS warp core is a perfect example; there is no need to break out of suspension of disbelief in order to discuss its design flaws.

Tachyons are still highly theoretical, but since I was talking about wormholes, they are also irrelevant. Please try not to change the subject, and please justify your claim that I am wrong in stating that wormholes are no more feasible than complex mass.

You expressed an opinion on a comparison of two things ("wormholes" and "imaginary mass manipulation"). I commented on the comparison. That's not changing the subject.

You commented on it by showing that pure tachyons are more realistic than tachyons bound into some kind of containment system which can manipulate imaginary and real masses. You did not show that naturally-occurring wormholes are more realistic, ergo your rebuttal was not a rebuttal.

I detail my opinions about imaginary vs. negative mass below, but for complex mass I'm not sure where the basis comes from - certainly not from tachyons, which wouldn't remain bound to ordinary matter at all.

If you take an imaginary mass and find some way to manipulate it so that you can contain it locally, then you have a complex mass: a real mass which is attached to an imaginary mass. Why do you find this so objectionable? I agree that the technology for performing this confinement is mystery-tech, but there is nothing intrinsically objectionable about it if you accept that imaginary masses exist.

But naturally occurring stable concentrations of negative and positive masses in vast quantities such as to create a wormhole are OK?

Who said anything about ok?! Better, not good. I regard negative mass as more acceptable from a theoretical standpoint, since at least there is only one interpretation of the mass distribution required for each wormhole solution.

No, it is less acceptable. Not only is it not known to exist, but the necessary configurations are shown to occur NATURALLY. At least hyperdrive makes use of some fictional technology which can manipulate imaginary masses; naturally occurring wormholes presume that this happens spontaneously.

Tachyons aren't even a good interpretation of the relevant theoretical basis, coming primarily from a coincidence as far as I can see. Practically, I'm of course extremely unhappy with either. Whilst there is now observational evidence for "dark energy" with a repulsive gravitational action, this doesn't translate into proof that negative mass exists, and the weakness of dark energy even over cosmological distances reinforcess the theoretical argument that huge amounts would still be needed to create a wormhole. You should be aware though that the high tidal forces are only a property of a particular type of wormhole solution. All solutions require very large mass-energy concentrations, as you stated.

Naturally occurring ones in sci-fi. And you somehow think it's OK to accept that without batting an eyelash in sci-fi movies and discussions but jump up and down at the unrealism of complex mass?

As for naturally occuring concentrations, searches have gone on for a while looking for the (unique) signature of negative mass on background light, without detecting any - further worries for wormhole proponents. However, unlike tachyons, at least there's a decent test for this which is practical now. Stable concentrations of postive and negative will not exist naturally, of course (a lesson Voyager could have done with learning), but then neither would complex mass.

No, but at least we're talking about a technologically sustained condition, not a naturally occurring one. For the umpteenth time, you cannot accept naturally occurring wormholes (which permit safe travel of macroscopic objects!) and then turn around in good faith and denigrate complex mass technologies for being less realistic.

[Crossover_Maniac]

And no, the EU is NOT considered "canon". It is considered "official". This means, you testicularly-lacking imbecilic poster child, that it is just as valid as canon only if it does not contradict a canon source; furthermore, the criteria for something being excluded are not as strict as they are with canon.

You surprisely managed to get the first part right. Unfortunately, the criteria for excluding anything from the EU is not your personal taste.

And the fact that NDF effects do exist in the EU

Another non sequitor. Keep your series straight, you simpering primate... phasers - which YOU mentioned, originally - are part of Star Trek. The EU is part of Star Wars. Do you not realize that - gasp! - the two are different series?

From Dark Empire II

KAM SOLUSAR: "Your beams are right on target... but the thing is using full shields!"

LUKE SKYWALKER: "It's going to strike the rebel base! Keep your fingers crossed, Kam. One missile can't do a lot of damage."

But this is no ordinary missile!

Fired from the Emperor's new Galaxy Gun, this weapon carries a particle disintegrator that initiates a massive nucleonic chain reaction!

The reaction builds quickly to catastrophic levels, until every molecule of the moon's rocky core bursts like a miniature exploding sun!

Pinnacle Moon is no more.

If you have a problem with it, take it up with the author. I'm not in the mood to hear your pissing and moaning.

You don't get to cherry-pick what SW material you want, bitch.

Please point out where I've been doing that, you eruption of dripping smegma.

You claimed Dark Empire II wasn't considered canon.

If you want the EU, then you stuck with all of the baggage that comes with it.

On the other hand, if you want to CRITICIZE the EU, you have to be prepared to offer up a reason for it other than "I don't like it".

You're a liar. I made a clear distinction for the reasons I thought the EU was running contradictory to the movies and my own personal tastes.

You have yet to do so. Ergo, I dismiss your petulant little whinings with a wave of my hand, the same way I deal with all insignificant, unintelligent, half-bred, troglodyte-wannabe insects that come my way.

Feel free to say something that doesn't betray an IQ equivalent to the square root of 3. It'd be a refreshing change.

BTW: seeing how you're so much smarter than me, why don't you actually comment on the recoil calculations I made at SB.com instead of hyjacking the thread to gripe about the EU. I'm making some additional calulations and posting them on the same thread.

[ClaysGhost]

Fair enough, but this particular theory is official. Besides, I reiterate that mathematical possibility may be a low standard, but it is a standard in sci-fi nonetheless. Real technological feasibility and sci-fi simply don't mix.

Yes, ok. However, I think that a bad theory is still a bad theory, official or no.

Are you deliberately tying to be difficult? One can accept the existence of a sci-fi technology without necessarily accepting that it was competently implemented. The GCS warp core is a perfect example; there is no need to break out of suspension of disbelief in order to discuss its design flaws.

Fair enough, if we can all agree that maintaining a M/AM reactor could be no more dangerous than maintaining a complex mass if both are sanely built.

You commented on it by showing that pure tachyons are more realistic than tachyons bound into some kind of containment system which can manipulate imaginary and real masses. You did not show that naturally-occurring wormholes are more realistic, ergo your rebuttal was not a rebuttal.

Naturally occurring? Since when?

If you take an imaginary mass and find some way to manipulate it so that you can contain it locally, then you have a complex mass: a real mass which is attached to an imaginary mass. Why do you find this so objectionable? I agree that the technology for performing this confinement is mystery-tech, but there is nothing intrinsically objectionable about it if you accept that imaginary masses exist.

I have no evidence for the existence of imaginary mass, or matter with its properties. So I don't have to accept that it exists. I have evidence for the existence of a force that counteracts gravity on cosmologically decent scales. However, this is not evidence for negative mass, only one of its properties, and the effect is so weak as to most likely be technologically worthless. So we get suspicious and look for compact negative masses based on their expected effect on their background, and find nothing. But that's a test. There's no comparable test for imaginary mass. So I don't like it because a) there's no evidence for it, and b) we haven't got a test we could do to find it.

However. Assuming imaginary mass, there are then problems with complex mass; imaginary masses cannot survive at rest, and do not travel below c. Real masses have almost diametrically opposite properties. I can accept fishes and oranges, but the idea of a fish-orange is not made reasonable to me by both components being reasonable. I could accept a fish (the DS in "real" mode) or an orange (the DS in "imaginary" mode and travelling >c) but not the DS somehow hovering between the two *and* keeping its bits together.

Aside from the two components having such radically differing physical properties and the dubious nature of one of them, there are further problems with a complex mass. In fact, there is no reason I can see why the complex phase angle is arbitrarily restricted to 0...90 degrees. It would appear that you've avoided introducing negative real mass, but in fact you haven't gained anything because you've made another assumption about the complex mass to do it, that the phase angle is restricted in this way. The complex mass by default should have a phase angle free to rotate all the way round, or the complex representation has been truncated and you'd need to explain why it's still a good model.

But naturally occurring stable concentrations of negative and positive masses in vast quantities such as to create a wormhole are OK?

Who said anything about ok?! Better, not good. I regard negative mass as more acceptable from a theoretical standpoint, since at least there is only one interpretation of the mass distribution required for each wormhole solution.

No, it is less acceptable. Not only is it not known to exist, but the necessary configurations are shown to occur NATURALLY.

Is there a "not" missing there? I missed the natural in your first statement, sorry. I find no evidence of naturally occuring wormholes, which was the point of my dig at Voyager (who seemed to find one every other week). The existence or otherwise, technologically induced or otherwise, of negative mass is not the same as the existence of naturally occurring wormholes.

At least hyperdrive makes use of some fictional technology which can manipulate imaginary masses; naturally occurring wormholes presume that this happens spontaneously.

Yes, naturally occuring wormholes are ridiculous.

Naturally occurring ones in sci-fi. And you somehow think it's OK to accept that without batting an eyelash in sci-fi movies and discussions but jump up and down at the unrealism of complex mass?

No. You are stating an argument that I haven't claimed as my own, and one that I do not agree with. As for discussions, I generally only get involved when the level of "magic" required is low or the participants are dealing with interesting physics. I've not seen any interesting wormhole discussions yet.

No, but at least we're talking about a technologically sustained condition, not a naturally occurring one. For the umpteenth time, you cannot accept naturally occurring wormholes (which permit safe travel of macroscopic objects!) and then turn around in good faith and denigrate complex mass technologies for being less realistic.

I am not accepting naturally occuring wormholes. The nature of the mass distribution (and particularly ones that do not exert crippling tidal forces) makes it plain that the probabilities involved are tiny.

[Darth Wong]

Fair enough, if we can all agree that maintaining a M/AM reactor could be no more dangerous than maintaining a complex mass if both are sanely built.

I suppose it would depend on how interactive the imaginary mass is with regular mass; if it was released, would it do any damage?

I have no evidence for the existence of imaginary mass, or matter with its properties. So I don't have to accept that it exists.

You do in SW, since they travel faster than light. You do in any sci-fi universe where tachyons are present. Suspension of disbelief means that we treat observations as if they were real (it does NOT mean that we treat character dialogue or even expert opinions as infallible, since we don't do that in real life).

However. Assuming imaginary mass, there are then problems with complex mass; imaginary masses cannot survive at rest, and do not travel below c. Real masses have almost diametrically opposite properties. I can accept fishes and oranges, but the idea of a fish-orange is not made reasonable to me by both components being reasonable.

How about a fish tied to an orange by a piece of string? Would you find that unreasonable too?

The complex mass by default should have a phase angle free to rotate all the way round, or the complex representation has been truncated and you'd need to explain why it's still a good model.

Even if it is free to rotate all the way around, it's not going to cancel itself, as CM claimed. How does this change anything?

I am not accepting naturally occuring wormholes.

Aye, but there's the rub. If you are capable of suspending disbelief for most sci-fi series, you have little choice but to do so. All I'm saying is that complex masses are more reasonable than many other phenomena that sci-fi fans take for granted.

[Slartibartfast]

And no, the EU is NOT considered "canon". It is considered "official". This means, you testicularly-lacking imbecilic poster child, that it is just as valid as canon only if it does not contradict a canon source; furthermore, the criteria for something being excluded are not as strict as they are with canon.

You surprisely managed to get the first part right. Unfortunately, the criteria for excluding anything from the EU is not your personal taste.

It's the officially accepted criteria. YOURS, on the other hand, is your own personal taste ("whenever official contradicts canon, they're both void and I win! jeepers!").

[Slartibartfast]

Are you deliberately tying to be difficult? One can accept the existence of a sci-fi technology without necessarily accepting that it was competently implemented. The GCS warp core is a perfect example; there is no need to break out of suspension of disbelief in order to discuss its design flaws.

Fair enough, if we can all agree that maintaining a M/AM reactor could be no more dangerous than maintaining a complex mass if both are sanely built.

I don't recall anyone ever saying that the warp core is unstable because of the inherent disadvantages of using M/AM. We say the warp core is unstable and unsafe because that is its OBSERVED performance in the series.

[ClaysGhost]

Fair enough, if we can all agree that maintaining a M/AM reactor could be no more dangerous than maintaining a complex mass if both are sanely built.

I suppose it would depend on how interactive the imaginary mass is with regular mass; if it was released, would it do any damage?

Yes, that's a good point; the recoil absorbing mechanism would be gone, but the ship would be operational. The non-interaction of imaginary and real mass might save it there.

You do in SW, since they travel faster than light. You do in any sci-fi universe where tachyons are present. Suspension of disbelief means that we treat observations as if they were real (it does NOT mean that we treat character dialogue or even expert opinions as infallible, since we don't do that in real life).

Complex mass is an "extra" on top of imaginary mass, though. There are (SW, not RL) observations to support one, but I don't know the (SW) observations that support the other.
There is certainly more than one possible method by which the DS could avoid recoil. It must move at sublight speeds somehow (Yavin), hence it must have engines of some sort even if they're not ion engines. Failing that, I'm not at all convinced that the recoil velocity is a problem that needs explaining. Destroy the planet, get a free kick out of the local system prior to the jump.

How about a fish tied to an orange by a piece of string? Would you find that unreasonable too?

Curses. Hoist by my own analogy. Yes, I'd find that reasonable, if somewhat surreal.

Even if it is free to rotate all the way around, it's not going to cancel itself, as CM claimed. How does this change anything?

Cancel itself? Heh. I didn't read that page of the thread very thoroughly. The point I'm making is that a complex mass implies a possible negative mass (phase angle 180), or it implies an extra reason why the phase angle can't rotate. A model that permits a continuum from real to imaginary rather than just one or the other as a natural property of the mathematics should explain why the continuum from imaginary to negative isn't allowed (when it too is a natural property of the mathematics).

Aye, but there's the rub. If you are capable of suspending disbelief for most sci-fi series, you have little choice but to do so. All I'm saying is that complex masses are more reasonable than many other phenomena that sci-fi fans take for granted.

I can think of plenty of sci-fi phenomena that make me cringe besides complex mass (the way everyone can tow around enough mass-energy to generate normal earth gravity with no apparent curvature was a good example). But (non-natural) wormholes cause me less cringing than complex mass. Perhaps I'm just not too adept at the suspension of disbelief.