Re: FT Taskforce and Fleet Actions

At 10:16 AM -0400 8/7/01, Jerry Acord wrote:

>
>Consider two scenarios: 1) the Earth orbiting the Sun at 1 AU; 2) the
Earth
>orbiting a 1-solar mass black hole at 1 AU.  The orbit is the same in
both
>scenarios.  Replacing the Sun with a b.h. will not magically suck all
the
>planets into it.  1 solar mass is 1 solar mass.  However, close in you

Course getting the Sun to become a black hole when it isn't over the 
Chandrakar (sp?)
limit is of course impossible. Thats the nice thing about a main 
sequence dwarf.

>_will_ get weird effects and spacetime _is_ warped much more severely
close
>to the b.h. than it is near the Sun.  It's just further out that the
severe
>warping smooths out.  That's why a b.h. will have an event horizon, but
the
>Sun obviously doesn't...

Ok, I see, the slope is sooner for the gravity well in the case of 
the larger star. But is the well as deep since it's spread out?

>(SImilar argument, but in the opposite direction, for G2V vs. red
giant)
>
>So as far as FTL / hyperspace travel is concerned, you could say the
"higher
>order spacetime perturbations" of the denser object lead to a
relatively
>further stand-off distance for safe hyperspace entry etc. etc. etc.
(hands
>waving vigorously...)

Yeah, it'd be easier in my mind to base it off of total mass of the 
star/system. The safe region of a Moderate to distant binary system 
(or even a trinary with a 2 dwarfs and a compact main sequence) would 
be nasty.

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill		 ----------	      SW1025 H -
-   Internet Technologies  --  Data Center Manager (3N &10S)   -
- ryan.gill@turner.com			 rmgill@mindspring.com -
-		   www.mindspring.com/~rmgill		       -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
- C&R-FFL -	Toronto, Gun down some squeegee kids,	 - NRA -
-		 Then you can host the Olympics too!	       -