Protection of the borders of the the United Federation of Planets

[Simon_Jester]

The Cardies not having cloaks doesn't change the problem that any border large enough they can't just go around it is going to require either a ridiculous number of sensor installations or pretty damned impressive sensor range (which admittedly seems to be all over the place).
While I think S-J was being conservative WRT sensor range, I think he was also being so WRT the expanse of the border (both, I very much assume, on purpose).

I figured anyone could do their own math on the probable area of the border region; my job was to come up with a reasonable estimate for the number of sensor platforms required per square kilometer. And yes, I was being deliberately conservative about sensor range.

Ships moving around at high warp in Star Trek seem to be able to see each other when they are at least minutes' flight time apart, often when they are hours' flight time apart. An hour of flight time at 1000c* is about a light-month- thirty times the distances I was throwing around for the detection radius of a sensor platform.

I will note that I don't actually think of covering a border with millions of automated drone platforms as 'unreasonable' for a starfaring civilization; the catch is that this requires a kind of advanced, productive industrial infrastructure that the Federation arguably does not possess.
____________________

*This may not be the top speed of modern ships, but it's a good benchmark for 'moving fast.' The Enterprise-D spent a lot of time moving at Warp 7 or 8 rather than at the riskier and more intense 9 or 9+ settings.

[Prometheus Unbound]

I will note that I don't actually think of covering a border with millions of automated drone platforms as 'unreasonable' for a starfaring civilization; the catch is that this requires a kind of advanced, productive industrial infrastructure that the Federation arguably does not possess.

Self Replicating sensors


Put one in place, press "go" and walk away.

[WATCH-MAN]

Star Trek has a variety of sensors that, however they work, clearly propagate at FTL speeds (because they can, for instance, give you a clear picture on the viewscreem of an object that is moving FTL, not only relative to normal space but relative to you). Some of them appear to be sensors devoted to detecting normal things like light and particles.

I see no reason they wouldn't also be able to detect gravitational distortions in real time over a wide area; it's no more scientifically problematic than any number of other systems aboard the ship. Which makes the question 'how do you think they work' kind of silly, since it's not like we know how the transporters work.

Also- remember, the warp drive is implicitly a distortion of space time (which is what gravity is). By definition, it is an effect that propagates faster than life. There is no reason to assume that other distortions of time and space cannot be entangled with or interacted with from a distance via faster than light mechanisms, at least in the context of Star Trek physics.

If I'm not mistaken, there was a similar argument a few years ago. Some dude claimed that Star Trek sensors are able to detect the gravitational distortions of ships over huge distances (light-minutes, - hours, -days) and in real time. The opinion of the majority of this board was that the dude is a moron because gravitation is the weakest fundamental force and propagates only with light speed. It was regarded as scientifical impossible to detect a ship's gravitational distortions in real time if it is still light-minutes, -hours, -days away. Furthermore it was argued that, as gravitation is such a weak fundamental force and a ship itself has a negligible mass compared to celestial bodies, a ship's gravitational distortion wouldn't be measurable as they are simply disappearing in the gravitational distortions of all celestial bodies. Uncalculable changes on the surface of a planet - e.g. an avalanche, a volcanic eruption, an earthquake or a tsunami would cause higher fluctuations in its gravitational distortion than a ship flying through its gravitational field.

That's why I asked, how these specific mentioned "gravitic sensors" are supposed to work.

[WATCH-MAN]

I will note that I don't actually think of covering a border with millions of automated drone platforms as 'unreasonable' for a starfaring civilization; the catch is that this requires a kind of advanced, productive industrial infrastructure that the Federation arguably does not possess.

That's exactly the problem I was considering.

Either they have super good sensors and do need less buoys to protect their borders.

Or they have less good sensors and do need more buoys to protect their borders.

Or is there another alternative?

And if they do need more buoys to protect their borders, doesn't the conclusion has to be that they have the advanced, productive industrial infrastructure that's necessary to build and station so many buoys and the computational capacity to interpret all the data that is coming in by so many buoys.

[WATCH-MAN]

The Cardies not having cloaks doesn't change the problem that any border large enough they can't just go around it is going to require either a ridiculous number of sensor installations or pretty damned impressive sensor range (which admittedly seems to be all over the place).
While I think S-J was being conservative WRT sensor range, I think he was also being so WRT the expanse of the border (both, I very much assume, on purpose).
A square 1000 ly border would only be 32 ly a side. Even at VOY's 'we can keep this up forever despite investigating every anomaly of the week and going out of our way to piss off the natives' 1,000c, that's about a one week detour to get around,
Given the required number of sensor installations in S_J's scenario is already absurd, imagine what it would look like for a border you really 'can't just go around in a realistic timeframe.

S-J = Simon_Jester

WRT = ?

[Prometheus Unbound]

That's why I asked, how these specific mentioned "gravitic sensors" are supposed to work.

We we have no clue other than their name. Some kind of sensor that detects gravitic "stuff".

Light can't be seen instantly either, yet Trek sensors can pick tat up fine over light years. So why not gravity?

[Simon_Jester]

"WRT" is a standard abbreviation for "with respect to."

If I'm not mistaken, there was a similar argument a few years ago. Some dude claimed that Star Trek sensors are able to detect the gravitational distortions of ships over huge distances (light-minutes, - hours, -days) and in real time. The opinion of the majority of this board was that the dude is a moron because gravitation is the weakest fundamental force and propagates only with light speed. It was regarded as scientifical impossible to detect a ship's gravitational distortions in real time if it is still light-minutes, -hours, -days away. Furthermore it was argued that, as gravitation is such a weak fundamental force and a ship itself has a negligible mass compared to celestial bodies, a ship's gravitational distortion wouldn't be measurable as they are simply disappearing in the gravitational distortions of all celestial bodies. Uncalculable changes on the surface of a planet - e.g. an avalanche, a volcanic eruption, an earthquake or a tsunami would cause higher fluctuations in its gravitational distortion than a ship flying through its gravitational field.

That's why I asked, how these specific mentioned "gravitic sensors" are supposed to work.

A ship with a drive that warps spacetime in order to move faster than light might well create gravitational distortions that are not purely a function of its mass. Moreover, the location of this distortion would be moving rapidly through deep space, at speeds greater than c.

This makes it very easy to detect the difference between a starship and an avalanche, volcano, earthquake, or tsunami, which as a rule do not do those things.

And as to "how would the gravitic sensor work," well, we can't know how it physically functions any more than we can draw blueprints for the transporter. If we accept that it does have the ability to detect distortions in spacetime (that is to say, gravity) at long distances in real time, it would potentially be a useful way to detect moving objects with a warp drive. Plus, Romulan ships have artificial black holes for power cores, which may give them an even more distinctive gravitational signature.

[WATCH-MAN]

A ship with a drive that warps spacetime in order to move faster than light might well create gravitational distortions that are not purely a function of its mass. Moreover, the location of this distortion would be moving rapidly through deep space, at speeds greater than c.

I'm not sure that this assumption is true. While it correct that the warp drive distorts space-time, the distortion seems to be quite localized around the starship.

The natural distortions of a celestial body aren't that localized.

They are effecting even things that are light years away - even if their effect is only minuscule at that distance.

I can't remember that it was ever shown that the warp drive has any effect further away from the starship. I mean the distortions a warp field is creating have to be huge to be able to form a bubble - far greater than the distortions of a planet or even a star. But the distortions of a starship do not effect celestial bodies as the distortions of celestial bodies are effecting starships. As fas as I can remember, it was never shown that a planet was noticeably drawn to a starship - although the starship engaged or disengaged it's warp drive in the orbit of a planet.

[Borgholio]

I'm not sure that this assumption is true. While it correct that the warp drive distorts space-time, the distortion seems to be quite localized around the starship.

Actually that diagram you posted is a perfect example of how easy it should be to tell the difference between an artificial distortion caused by a warp drive vs a natural one caused by a planetary mass. If the sensors can indeed sense spacetime distortions from a great distance, something sharp, abrupt, and moving at FTL speeds should stick out like a sore thumb from the background gravitational waves.

[Prometheus Unbound]

I should point out we don't actually know how Star Trek warp drive works. Other than the warp engines generate a warp field around the ship that lowers its inertial mass (is that even a real thing?).

We know the energy required to do this requires exotic matter / magic - M/AM reactors, cold fusion reactors, .. "artificially forced quantum singularities" (romulan black holes).

Whilst at "warp", they are entering some other sort of layer of space or dimension that they call "sub-space".

"Warp particles" are generated somewhere along the process.


I think, canonically, that's actually all we know about warp drive?

[Simon_Jester]

Basically yes. The point is, it is credible that Star Trek warp drives cause at least slight, detectable spacetime distortions. It is also precedented for Star Trek ships to detect things through "action at a distance-" in other words, they can give you a visual picture of an enemy starship long before they are in position to physically see the light coming off of that ship.

Combining these features it becomes very plausible that they can detect spatial distortions from a distance, and use this to track things that distort spacetime in unnatural ways (such as 'spatial anomalies' or ships traveling under warp drive).

To say "HARD SCIENCE proves this IMPOSSIBLE" is to be willfully obtuse about what technology can and cannot do in Star Trek. Star Trek is a setting where our current understanding of physics is, bluntly, wrong about the limits of the possible. That doesn't mean 'anything is possible,' but it does mean that if we constantly see ships ignoring something we today think of as a basic law, we cannot later assume that those ships are in fact bound by that law.

[Prometheus Unbound]

I agree 100%.


Someone posted previously that gravity only propagates at the speed of light, so how can they detect it?

Well, light propagates at the speed of itself (clue is in the name hehe) and they have no issues detecting that from 10 light years away to get real-time updates of stuff happening.

Sensors that can detect a platinum earring on an entire planet or that can look at you on the quantum level with 100% accuracy - sure, I have no issues believing that, with the correct sensors and in conjunction with other sensors, that they can detect the "gravity" of an object the side of a starship. If they're paying attention.

Clearly not all the time else a cloaked ship would never be a threat. But I think a combination of the tachyeon fields and subspace sensors (Romulan ships can be detected above warp 6 as a "slight subspace variance" that's detectable quite happily by Jem'Hadar, Romulan, Cardassian and Federation sensors) allowing them to get an idea of the general area... and then gravetic sensor sweeps of the area - remove all comets, planets, moons, asteroids etc - and you have a moving subspace thing with a similar gravity / mass to a ship. And bam.


I'm presuming they detect gravity, of course.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Random thought time: it is possible that the reason they can detect gravity signatures (and possibly visible light and other EM stuff) from long range is because the gravity of an object also acts in subspace as well as realspace and thus gravitic effects propagate faster in subspace than in realspace, allowing them to be detectable to ships with subspace sensors. This may, int he ST universes's cosmology, explain why gravity is so weak compared to the other three forces,it's effect is split between realspace and subspace.

As for EM, it is possible that any of these subspace gravity effects may carry an image of the ship in the EM spectrum, sort-of like a hologram, that can also be detected.

Totally random speculation btw. Just to be clear.

[Prometheus Unbound]

yes and there's a reason I put in words like "subspace stuff" in my posts

Subspace is something in Trek that clearly allows for FTL stuff. Whether that's FTL movement (warping into subspace or however it works - we don't know) or FTL communications or sensors - Subspace is always the key word from some TOS, to lots of TNG and in DS9 and Voyager it's in nearly every episode.

In fact, Subspace is required for FTL movement at least - "Omega destroys subspace". Without subspace, Warp isn't possible.

I have zero (literally zero) issues with Federation sensors getting "real-time" data from places up to 20 light years away (I can cite, if you like, I'll need to look it up - but the Ent D can scan "one sector a day" and a sector is 20 by 20 by 20 light years), because of "subspace".

We know comms travel way, way faster than a ship can in FTL.




You want my theory?

To make an obect (even an atom) move at the Speed of light, it requires an absurd amount of energy. To the point it's impossible by known physics. I believe it requires *infinite* energy to propel normal matter - especially a starship - at the speed of light (let alone FTL).

E = MC^2.

Warp drives lower the mass of the vessel.

What if M is now equal to 0.1M (maybe warp 1). What if M is 0.0005M ?

And so forth. We KNOW warp lowers the mass of objects (Deja Q - they wanted to extend the warp field of the ship to the moon/asteroid, to lower its mass and THEN use the tractor beam to push it - it would mean making a big warp field - way bigger than normal - and extending it around all or part of the moon).

I think Warp factors are actually factors of mass lightening. And the higher the warp factor (lower the mass) requires more energy (warp engines / warp drive).

I think they use Impulse engines, as the "go forward", and the warp drive lowers the mass. Allowing the fusion drive impulse engines (which you see glowing when they're at warp, esp in TNG) to go beyond their normal speeds. Which can get to 0.7 or 0.8C by themselves (ST:TMP).

Or maybe they don't use the impulse engines to go forward and the warp engines also have a propulsion bit, idk.

The warp engines either lower mass or they push "deeper into subspace" (which itself could be a lowering of mass - again, we don't know).



we know:

Warp requires subspace (VOY: Omega, TNG, DS9, VOY: nearly any episode)

Warp engines reduce "intertial mass" (Deja Q)

Warp drive requires large (but not insurmountable) amounts of power - M/AM etc.

Real-time FTL comms work on subspace



I say:

Sensors work on subspace. And that's why they detect light / EM spectrum or gravity in real time, in far-out places.

"Subspace antennae" or "subspace array" has been mentioned a few times.

ALL other times comms (and sensors) have been FTL it's been because of a wormhole or similar thing allowing them to "see" the other side of the hole.

Incidently, that's why i think in SW: TFA we could see the 4 planets blow up at once from the surface of the star killer - we were looking "down" the "hyperspace tunnel" that the (quote) "Hyper-light weapon" used to get so far, so quick.




With all the above and the other discussion in the thread - and I'm usually one to stick to canon 100% btw, I'm Trekkie but I'm not rabid hehe - I am 100% happy that the Federation can detect "gravity" in whatever shape or form they choose, because of subspace. And they can do it in real time over FTL distances.


In ST:GEN, Data can say what the destruction of the Amagosa star will do and that Federation (and presumably other) ships have had to make course corrections, lightyears out (they're on other star systems on the map), already, to take account of this.


Federation tech (and most Trek races) can detect gravity fluctuations to varying degrees (we can already do it now, apparently!) FTL and in real time, with "gravetic sensors". Imo.

And whilst some of that is supposition, I think it holds, all things being equal.

[Simon_Jester]

Lowering the mass of an object shouldn't allow you to travel faster than light. Because even insanely low-mass objects (like individual sub-atomic particles) would still require infinite energy to move at the speed of light in space-time as we know it. Infinity multiplied by a very small mass is still infinity, just as infinity times five is still infinity.

Alcubierre's "warp drive" concept* is based on the idea of distorting space itself so that speeds which are locally slower than light within the warp bubble result in you getting to your destination faster than would normally be possible from the point of view of the outside universe. So if you head to Alpha Centauri on Alcubierre drive and someone fires a laser beam along the path followed by your ship, the laser still overtakes you... but you get to Alpha Centauri in one year instead of five, ten, or a hundred.

At least that's my understanding... I don't actually know enough general relativity to be confident I got all the details right.

*(Which probably can't be built but is at least consistent with physics as we know it, if we ever find vast supplies of matter that weighs less than nothing)

[WATCH-MAN]

I'm not sure that this assumption is true. While it correct that the warp drive distorts space-time, the distortion seems to be quite localized around the starship.

Actually that diagram you posted is a perfect example of how easy it should be to tell the difference between an artificial distortion caused by a warp drive vs a natural one caused by a planetary mass. If the sensors can indeed sense spacetime distortions from a great distance, something sharp, abrupt, and moving at FTL speeds should stick out like a sore thumb from the background gravitational waves.

You are putting the card before the horse again. To sense a spacetime distortion that expands to you, may be easy. But how are you sensing a spacetime distortion that does not reach you, that does not affect your sensors?

And how are you scanning spacetime at all?

If we are observing a black hole, we know that spacetime is distorted. But we aren't sensing the distorted spacetime. We are merely observing how light is bended by the distorted spacetime and conclude that spacetime has to be distorted around the black hole to have such an effect on passing light. But even these observations are done thousands and millions years after the light passed the black hole as the light needed so much time to reach us.

[WATCH-MAN]

I should point out we don't actually know how Star Trek warp drive works. Other than the warp engines generate a warp field around the ship that lowers its inertial mass (is that even a real thing?).

We know the energy required to do this requires exotic matter / magic - M/AM reactors, cold fusion reactors, .. "artificially forced quantum singularities" (romulan black holes).

Whilst at "warp", they are entering some other sort of layer of space or dimension that they call "sub-space".

"Warp particles" are generated somewhere along the process.


I think, canonically, that's actually all we know about warp drive?

While this is mostly correct, the fact remains, that we have never seen that the warp field has an effect as if it would distort spacetime as a mass does. The distortions of a starship do not effect celestial bodies as the distortions of celestial bodies are effecting starships. That was the point I was trying to make. Whatever the warp field is doing with space time, it is a very localized effect.

And that makes it difficult to be detected by a sensor that is not in the by the warp field effected area.

[WATCH-MAN]

Basically yes. The point is, it is credible that Star Trek warp drives cause at least slight, detectable spacetime distortions. It is also precedented for Star Trek ships to detect things through "action at a distance-" in other words, they can give you a visual picture of an enemy starship long before they are in position to physically see the light coming off of that ship.

Combining these features it becomes very plausible that they can detect spatial distortions from a distance, and use this to track things that distort spacetime in unnatural ways (such as 'spatial anomalies' or ships traveling under warp drive).

To say "HARD SCIENCE proves this IMPOSSIBLE" is to be willfully obtuse about what technology can and cannot do in Star Trek. Star Trek is a setting where our current understanding of physics is, bluntly, wrong about the limits of the possible. That doesn't mean 'anything is possible,' but it does mean that if we constantly see ships ignoring something we today think of as a basic law, we cannot later assume that those ships are in fact bound by that law.

I have no problem with simply accepting the fact that Star Trek sensors can do that - even if we can not scientifically explain how they are doing it and even if it is supposed to be impossible to our current understanding of science.

But as I have said: "There there was a similar argument a few years ago. Some dude claimed that Star Trek sensors are able to detect the gravitational distortions of ships over huge distances (light-minutes, - hours, -days) and in real time. The opinion of the majority of this board was that the dude is a moron because gravitation is the weakest fundamental force and propagates only with light speed. It was regarded as scientifical impossible to detect a ship's gravitational distortions in real time if it is still light-minutes, -hours, -days away. Furthermore it was argued that, as gravitation is such a weak fundamental force and a ship itself has a negligible mass compared to celestial bodies, a ship's gravitational distortion wouldn't be measurable as they are simply disappearing in the gravitational distortions of all celestial bodies. Uncalculable changes on the surface of a planet - e.g. an avalanche, a volcanic eruption, an earthquake or a tsunami would cause higher fluctuations in its gravitational distortion than a ship flying through its gravitational field."

It seems arbitrary to not accept the argument when it came from this dude - but to bring forward he same argument now and expect that it is accepted.

[WATCH-MAN]

I agree 100%.


Someone posted previously that gravity only propagates at the speed of light, so how can they detect it?

Well, light propagates at the speed of itself (clue is in the name hehe) and they have no issues detecting that from 10 light years away to get real-time updates of stuff happening.

Do they?

Have they ever shown a ship on screen, that was still several light-minutes away?

I remember several times in which they spoke of "visual range".

Insofar it does not seem as if they are using light for their ftl sensors.

Sensors that can detect a platinum earring on an entire planet or that can look at you on the quantum level with 100% accuracy - sure, I have no issues believing that, with the correct sensors and in conjunction with other sensors, that they can detect the "gravity" of an object the side of a starship. If they're paying attention.

Clearly not all the time else a cloaked ship would never be a threat. But I think a combination of the tachyeon fields and subspace sensors (Romulan ships can be detected above warp 6 as a "slight subspace variance" that's detectable quite happily by Jem'Hadar, Romulan, Cardassian and Federation sensors) allowing them to get an idea of the general area... and then gravetic sensor sweeps of the area - remove all comets, planets, moons, asteroids etc - and you have a moving subspace thing with a similar gravity / mass to a ship. And bam.


I'm presuming they detect gravity, of course.

I have no problem with simply accepting the fact that Star Trek sensors can do that - even if we can not scientifically explain how they are doing it and even if it is supposed to be impossible to our current understanding of science.

But as I have said: "There there was a similar argument a few years ago. Some dude claimed that Star Trek sensors are able to detect the gravitational distortions of ships over huge distances (light-minutes, - hours, -days) and in real time. The opinion of the majority of this board was that the dude is a moron because gravitation is the weakest fundamental force and propagates only with light speed. It was regarded as scientifical impossible to detect a ship's gravitational distortions in real time if it is still light-minutes, -hours, -days away. Furthermore it was argued that, as gravitation is such a weak fundamental force and a ship itself has a negligible mass compared to celestial bodies, a ship's gravitational distortion wouldn't be measurable as they are simply disappearing in the gravitational distortions of all celestial bodies. Uncalculable changes on the surface of a planet - e.g. an avalanche, a volcanic eruption, an earthquake or a tsunami would cause higher fluctuations in its gravitational distortion than a ship flying through its gravitational field."

It seems arbitrary to not accept the argument when it came from this dude - but to bring forward he same argument now and expect that it is accepted.

[Prometheus Unbound]

Have they ever shown a ship on screen, that was still several light-minutes away?

I remember several times in which they spoke of "visual range".

Insofar it does not seem as if they are using light for their ftl sensors.

wasn't the picard maneuver specifically designed because the feds did use FTL sensors to detect light and the Ferengi didnt?

I'll go find some examples

[WATCH-MAN]

Random thought time: it is possible that the reason they can detect gravity signatures (and possibly visible light and other EM stuff) from long range is because the gravity of an object also acts in subspace as well as realspace and thus gravitic effects propagate faster in subspace than in realspace, allowing them to be detectable to ships with subspace sensors. This may, int he ST universes's cosmology, explain why gravity is so weak compared to the other three forces,it's effect is split between realspace and subspace.

As for EM, it is possible that any of these subspace gravity effects may carry an image of the ship in the EM spectrum, sort-of like a hologram, that can also be detected.

Totally random speculation btw. Just to be clear.

As far as I can remember, that was exactly what that moron has argued. I believe his argument had anything to do with the Crystalline Entity and that the Enterprise tried to call it with graviton pulses over a distance of several light years. He argued that somehow they to send this pulses through subspace to make them ftl. As I have said: That moron was laughed out for proposing such a nonsense. I believe that moron was even banned.

[Captain Seafort]

wasn't the picard maneuver specifically designed because the feds did use FTL sensors to detect light and the Ferengi didnt?

No, because until Data came up with a solution the PM was expected to be just as effective against the E-D as it had been against the Ferengi.

[Prometheus Unbound]

Praxis - they could see that from light years away, "live".

[Simon_Jester]

Do they?

Have they ever shown a ship on screen, that was still several light-minutes away?

I remember several times in which they spoke of "visual range".

Insofar it does not seem as if they are using light for their ftl sensors.

They've repeatedly tracked moving objects while at warp, while the other object was at warp, or while both were at warp. They've done "life form" scans on distant planets while approaching the planet. They've intercepted radio transmissions while at warp, as I recall.

Doing all this would pretty much inevitably require them to have a variety of sensors that observe things with light speed (or slower) propagation, via action at a distance, in real time.

But as I have said: "There there was a similar argument a few years ago. Some dude claimed that Star Trek sensors are able to detect the gravitational distortions of ships over huge distances (light-minutes, - hours, -days) and in real time. The opinion of the majority of this board was that the dude is a moron because gravitation is the weakest fundamental force and propagates only with light speed. It was regarded as scientifical impossible to detect a ship's gravitational distortions in real time if it is still light-minutes, -hours, -days away...

Well, that can be dealt with using counterexamples. If Starfleet has the ability to detect various physical phenomena at extreme distances where they 'ought' to be invisible for quite some time, at FTL speeds, then they have that ability, plain and simple.

Furthermore it was argued that, as gravitation is such a weak fundamental force and a ship itself has a negligible mass compared to celestial bodies, a ship's gravitational distortion wouldn't be measurable as they are simply disappearing in the gravitational distortions of all celestial bodies. Uncalculable changes on the surface of a planet - e.g. an avalanche, a volcanic eruption, an earthquake or a tsunami would cause higher fluctuations in its gravitational distortion than a ship flying through its gravitational field."

That's a problem for software- ignore the gravitational distortions which appear to be caused by events moving around at speeds of 10 or 100 meters per second, while paying attention to the anomalies that are traveling dozens of times the speed of light in deep space.

It seems arbitrary to not accept the argument when it came from this dude - but to bring forward he same argument now and expect that it is accepted.

Since I don't think I was involved in that argument I don't see how this is arbitrary.

[Batman]

For reference, The thread he's talking about.