www.ditl.org

Trek ships routinely undertake procedures that are highly demanding, energy wise. I doubt ramping up the gravity in one small part of the ship is going to overtax the systems.

Mikey wrote:Without getting into the effects or the mechanism of the ID's vs. the plating, there is evidence that the two are not actually one single un-isolated system: how many times have we heard "inertial dampers offline" or some such, yet still seen the AG still in operation?

I find it simplest to think of inertial dampers as the overall system creating any type of acceleration, and the gravity plating is the equipment used by this system. I'm not sure how many times we've heard inertial dampers offline - not many times, I think - but I'm sure if inertial dampers can create millions of gs, leaving 1 spare in backup wouldn't be too hard.

One owuldn't think so. But there it is - even if they work on identical principles - which I agree is likely - they are patently isolated systems.

Wait a minute...

The unit for Gravity is Newtons. This is NOT the same as the units for acceleration (Nkg or m/s²).


Edit: Sorry, correction, Newtons is the force due to gravity, not gravity itself. And Nkg is the acceleration due to gravity. But still, gravity =/= acceleration.

no, they aren't the same but they can be used to simulate eachother.

ie...if your accellerating in a 0g enviroment it will feel to you like there's some force of gravity as the (insert vehicle here) pushes against you.

So. If you get punched you feel an acceleration. Does that mean the punch is an acceleration? No. It causes an acceleration.

Gravity is not an acceleration in any sense. It is a force.

So is the action of the inertial dampers. The end result is that they both cause an acceleration, and so are functionally identical.

I don't have an issue with that anymore. I just have an issue with people saying gravity is an acceleration.

Sorry.

I was agreeing with you Stitch...they aren't the same, but they can feel the same.

Sorry, it was hard to tell.

stitch626 wrote:Wait a minute...

The unit for Gravity is Newtons. This is NOT the same as the units for acceleration (Nkg or m/s²).


Edit: Sorry, correction, Newtons is the force due to gravity, not gravity itself. And Nkg is the acceleration due to gravity. But still, gravity =/= acceleration.

Yes it does. You will find a Newton is not an SI unit. F=MA. Hence [N]=[KG][M/S^2]. As I've already explained. When you convert Newton into SI units, then N/KG = M/S^2.
They are mathematically identical - gravity is measured unless specified otherwise as the gravitational field strength.

When you convert Newton into SI units, then N/KG = M/S^2.

No, when you convert Newtons into SI units you get kgm/s².
N/kg is not the units for gravity. N/kg is the units or gravitational acceleration, NOT the units for gravity.

Ooh, ooh! College fight!

stitch626 wrote:

When you convert Newton into SI units, then N/KG = M/S^2.

No, when you convert Newtons into SI units you get kgm/s².
N/kg is not the units for gravity. N/kg is the units or gravitational acceleration, NOT the units for gravity.

N/KG are the units for gravitational field strength. The mass of the body is irrelevant - ie the strength of attraction is irrelevant because at a unit mass, it's the same for everything. If you want to be pedantic to the extreme, then gravity is a pseudoforce and definitely does not have units of Newtons.

If you want to be pedantic to the extreme, then gravity is a pseudoforce and definitely does not have units of Newtons.

I never said that Newtons were the unit for gravity. I said they were the unit for gravitational force, as they are the unit for all forces.
In reality, gravity has no units, it is the applied effects of gravity that have units.

The mass of the body is irrelevant...

Since when? A gravitational field is formed by a mass, so I fail to see how a mass can be irrelevant.

... the strength of attraction is irrelevant because at a unit mass, it's the same for everything.

No argument there.