StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Rye wrote:
No einstein put the constant in it to keep the universe static (as was the idea at the time). He said it was the biggest mistake of his life. So they removed it, and regained the term later to explain the apparent accelleration of the universe. (The spacecraft that have now left our system started to show accelleration before they stopped transmitting IIRC).

Also if there wasn't enough matter in the universe, that would explain why its still expanding, but not accellerating.

ok I went and did some more digging and your right but , how we understand these repuslive gravity particals to work doesn't explain what was being said about there space. since the theory as I understand it needs a big gravity mass where the gravity particals are tightly compressed in order to create the repulsive gravity particals.

so there would have to be some thing creating the repusive gravity in there universe for it to work like that.

the tear was probably some super wormhole to another dimension/universe that just so happened to have a giant very dense nebula in the place of Borg Space

DocMoriartty wrote:Like I said before the easiest solution is that fluidic space is merely a very dense nebula which blocked Voyagers sensors so that she could not detect objects outside the nebula.

IIRC the fluid in fluidic space was organic in nature, can't remember though. gotta go fid that episode.

DocMoriartty wrote: It has to be a part of our galaxy. How else could the Borg be patroling the border of Fluidic space?

The Borg have to use those portals to reach fluidic space. It's not part of our own galaxy.

Axum's scout ship went to an area far away from Borg territory--say, in the Gamma Quadrant.

Once there, the ship opened a gate to fluidic space. It enters the gate.

While inside fluidic space, the ship takes a position near its periphery, presumably as to not invite the Eights' attention.

The simplest explantion for the "location" of fluidic space would be that it is some manner of deep subspace domain that maps to a certain area of normal space, or a tertiary subspace manifold with the same realspace correspndence. Admittedly, that's still meaningless technobabble, but it meshes well with established canon without having to resort to yet more bizarre dimensional gynmastics.

A localized deep subspace domain would be one of those things like the place where the Voyager Caretaker's shipmate lived in the company of a bunch of superpowered members of Kes's species. Accessing it, even to send a signal to it, required travel to a specific area of space.

A tertiary subspace domain, one displaying differing laws of physics from real space, would be typified by the solonagen-(or something-like that)based aliens who abducted Enterprise-D crewmembers to perform medical experiments on them.

Subspace is the answer to everything Trek.

If you think that is simple, what the fuck is complicated?

Patrick Ogaard wrote:The simplest explantion for the "location" of fluidic space would be that it is some manner of deep subspace domain that maps to a certain area of normal space, or a tertiary subspace manifold with the same realspace correspndence. Admittedly, that's still meaningless technobabble, but it meshes well with established canon without having to resort to yet more bizarre dimensional gynmastics.

A localized deep subspace domain would be one of those things like the place where the Voyager Caretaker's shipmate lived in the company of a bunch of superpowered members of Kes's species. Accessing it, even to send a signal to it, required travel to a specific area of space.

A tertiary subspace domain, one displaying differing laws of physics from real space, would be typified by the solonagen-(or something-like that)based aliens who abducted Enterprise-D crewmembers to perform medical experiments on them.

Subspace is the answer to everything Trek.

The simplest explanation is that it is a nebula. Nie whole words as opposed to your technobabble. Of course being Trek your technobabble answer would be the right one.

I though prefer one that makes a bit of sense even if its a very small bit.

Ender wrote:If you think that is simple, what the fuck is complicated?

Trying to justify "fluidic space" in terms of real-world physics. That's complicated.

All my little idea requires is that fluidic space be a remote/distant/whatever part of subspace that happens to correlate to a specific area of the Trek galaxy.

It's already canon that weird and/or remote bits of subspace can operate under different laws of physics than the real world.

Yes, it requires stupid technobabble. But it requires much less handwaving than trying to shoehorn it into a galaxy at least nominally operating within the constraints of real-world physics except where the almighty plot dictates otherwise.

DocMoriartty wrote: The simplest explanation is that it is a nebula. Nie whole words as opposed to your technobabble. Of course being Trek your technobabble answer would be the right one.

I though prefer one that makes a bit of sense even if its a very small bit.

In this case, though, I suspect the goofy technobabble answer actually makes more sense.

Saying it's a matter of fluidic space simply being located in some remote subspace domain removes the need to justify all that fluidic space crap in terms of real world physics. It merely becomes a subspace domain subject to slightly different laws of physics.

A nebula, on the other hand, requires really energetic handwaving. No matter how thin the liquid of fluidic space as a nebula, that liquid will have mass. That mass automatically brings gravity with it, some kind of center of mass in the direction of which the density and thus the pressure of the liquid would have to increase dramatically the "deeper" one gets into the nebula. Unless there is some mechanism that produces an antigravitational or mass-lightening effect that could counteract the density and pressure increase, that nebula would have to have a staggering mass. That begs the question of why the whole thing is not collapsed into a titanic congerie of supermassive stars orbiting a monstrously huge black hole, or at least doing something vaguely along those lines.

That being said, mine is one possible interpretation, one I like as being much less complex than the nebula interpretation.