kwh@bentley.UUCP (KW Heuer) (02/23/86)
How long is a "starday", i.e. the difference between Stardate 1234.0 and Stardate 1235.0? I suspect it's inconsistent (someone once told me that the first digit is the number of seasons the show has been on), but can someone find an "official" definition? Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!bentley!kwh), The Walking Lint
scco@ur-tut.UUCP (Sean Colbath) (02/25/86)
In article <593@bentley.UUCP> kwh@bentley.UUCP (KW Heuer) writes: >How long is a "starday", i.e. the difference between Stardate 1234.0 >and Stardate 1235.0? I suspect it's inconsistent (someone once told >me that the first digit is the number of seasons the show has been on), >but can someone find an "official" definition? >Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!bentley!kwh), The Walking Lint I don't know about "official" definition (as a matter of fact, I seem to remember several stardates being "re-used"), but an old Star Trek Calendar I have (circa 72-73?) used a neat system: All the dates on the calendar were "stardates" in the format YYMM.DD. Therefore, the stardate today would be 8602.24... Sean Colbath UUCP: ...allegra!rochester!ur-tut!scco BITNET: SCCO@UORVM "Why thank you, CAPTAIN McCoy..."
pmm1920@ritcv.UUCP (02/26/86)
In article <391@ur-tut.UUCP> scco@ur-tut.UUCP (Sean Colbath) writes: >In article <593@bentley.UUCP> kwh@bentley.UUCP (KW Heuer) writes: >>How long is a "starday", i.e. the difference between Stardate 1234.0 >>and Stardate 1235.0? I suspect it's inconsistent (someone once told >>me that the first digit is the number of seasons the show has been on), >>but can someone find an "official" definition? >>Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!bentley!kwh), The Walking Lint > >I don't know about "official" definition (as a matter of fact, I seem >to remember several stardates being "re-used"), but an old Star Trek >Calendar I have (circa 72-73?) used a neat system: All the dates on >the calendar were "stardates" in the format YYMM.DD. Therefore, the >stardate today would be 8602.24... > Then how do you explain when Captain Kirk makes two entries into his log on the same day and they are different (the last two numbers) ? Also, wouldn't it get confusing after the system was around for 100 years or more? Remember, Vulcans live longer and this might confuse them! (PLEASE! No flames on this comment. It is a joke! Ha! Ha!) Paul Meyerhofer
prewitt@unm-la.UUCP (AIDE Mike Prewitt) (02/28/86)
In article <391@ur-tut.UUCP> scco@ur-tut.UUCP (Sean Colbath) writes: >In article <593@bentley.UUCP> kwh@bentley.UUCP (KW Heuer) writes: >>How long is a "starday", i.e. the difference between Stardate 1234.0 >>and Stardate 1235.0? I suspect it's inconsistent (someone once told >>me that the first digit is the number of seasons the show has been on), >>but can someone find an "official" definition? >>Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!bentley!kwh), The Walking Lint > >I don't know about "official" definition (as a matter of fact, I seem >to remember several stardates being "re-used"), but an old Star Trek >Calendar I have (circa 72-73?) used a neat system: All the dates on >the calendar were "stardates" in the format YYMM.DD. Therefore, the >stardate today would be 8602.24... > >Sean Colbath > >"Why thank you, CAPTAIN McCoy..." Stardates were to be used as a standard timescale because of the relitivity laws ( later forgotten ) and because of timescales being different from planet to planet or starsystem to starsystem. When running the series the stardates became out of order because the episodes were shot in a different order then they were shown. ( this is more true today because of local stations messing up in syndication. ) see THE MAKING OF STARTREK. The calanders mentioned by Sean were Paramont studio's way of capitalizing on STARTREK. The system is clean when on earth, but on Vulcan or somewhere else, forget it. Mike Prewitt University of New Mexico, Los Alamos campus.
clyde@reed.UUCP (Clyde Bryja) (02/28/86)
> In article <593@bentley.UUCP> kwh@bentley.UUCP (KW Heuer) writes: > >How long is a "starday", i.e. the difference between Stardate 1234.0 > >and Stardate 1235.0? I suspect it's inconsistent (someone once told > >me that the first digit is the number of seasons the show has been on), > >but can someone find an "official" definition? > >Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!bentley!kwh), The Walking Lint I don't know what the "official" definition is, but I can offer one of my own that I have come to feel fairly comfortable with. I take the stardate to be the last four figures of the Julian date. The Julian date system is used by astronomers world wide to reference astronomical events. Day one was sometime before 4000 B.C. I only know the first four figures of the current Julian date of the top of my head. Astronomers would denote today as JD2446XXX (where the X's are whatever they happen to be). It is not uncommen practice in astronomical writings to drop the first three digits of this after they have been fully given for the first observation. Thus, an observational astronomer may write that "minima of this eclipsing binary system were observed to occur at JD2445720.67, 5721.62, 5722.57, etc." I like to call the latter entries "stardate format." It is, of course, not a good format to use if the interval between events in on the order of decades (10,000 days is somewhat over 30 years), but otherwise it serves very well. It makes sense to me that this would be the "stardate" of the show. The first three digits of the full date would assumed known for each log entry. After all, if I type "March 5" right now, everyone assumes that I mean 1986-- right? Asking the identity of a 10,000 day time span is 1/3 as bad as asking what century it is. If I say that I was born in '64, people assume that I mean 1964-- right? Anyway, that's my interpretation (for what it's worth). -- +++++++++++ "For Easter Day is Christmas time, Clyde Bryja And far away is near, Box 21, Reed College And two and two is more than four, Portland, OR 97202 And over there is here."
sjs4310@wucec2.UUCP (02/28/86)
In article <593@bentley.UUCP> kwh@bentley.UUCP (KW Heuer) writes: >How long is a "starday", i.e. the difference between Stardate 1234.0 >and Stardate 1235.0? I suspect it's inconsistent (someone once told >me that the first digit is the number of seasons the show has been on), >but can someone find an "official" definition? I believe the official explanation is that a "stardate" (never "starday") is of variable length, and, somehow, includes positional as well as temporal information. The variability is a result of warping all over the galaxy at trans-light speeds, if I remember my tech manual correctly. There are those who would say that the variability in stardate lengths is due to carelessly inconsistant scriptwriters and editors, but they are spoil-sports and will not be listened to. -SJS
nessus@nsc.UUCP (Kchula-Rrit) (02/28/86)
In article <391@ur-tut.UUCP>, scco@ur-tut.UUCP (Sean Colbath) writes: > In article <593@bentley.UUCP> kwh@bentley.UUCP (KW Heuer) writes: > >How long is a "starday", ... > >... can someone find an "official" definition? > >Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!bentley!kwh), The Walking Lint > > ... an old Star Trek > Calendar I have (circa 72-73?) used a neat system: All the dates on > the calendar were "stardates" in the format YYMM.DD. Therefore, the > stardate today would be 8602.24... > > Sean Colbath The MOTAS's 1986 Star Trek calendar uses this notation, if I remember correctly. Kchula-Rrit