No Such Thing as "Teradynes per second"Edit

There is no such thing as "teradynes per second". According to the article 'one dyne is the force that accelerates a mass of one gram at the rate of one centimeter per second per second', so one dyne per second would be 'the force that accelerates a mass of one gram at the rate of one centimeter per second per second per second. That is nonsense. m/s is a measure of speed, m/s/s is a measure of acceleration, m/s/s/s would be an attempt to measure acceleration per second, when it is already measured per second. "Teradynes per second" belongs to the same family as "Watts per hour" or power in "gigajoules".--Indefatigable 01:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Teradynes per second is a unit of the rate of change of force over time and is perfectly acceptable. The physical quantity is sometimes called 'yank', in fact, much like the rate of change of acceleration is called 'jolt' or 'jerk'. You can measure it by taking differential readings with an accelerometer. In fact, by your argument, you can't measure acceleration either since speed is already 'per second'. It's certainly weird to give an engine specification in terms of 3rd derivatives but relativistic acceleration is weird anyway. Cucumariid 20:58, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
On first glance it sounds like it could be a mistake in the script. But Teradyne/sec is still a valid measurement. The reason this figure of Teradynes/sec sounds intuitively wrong is that it tells you nothing of the peak power output of the ship (presumably a steady power output). This is what first came to mind when I heard the term "maximum output". But it could (possibly) instead be a measure on how quickly you can achieve that maximum power output.
It's possible that acceleration could be expressed in Teradynes per second, if for some reason the ship was not designed to accelerate at a steady rate, and was instead designed to accelerate at a progressively accelerating rate. An example of where this is conceivable might be if the matter-antimatter reaction was such that you could increase the reaction's acceleration rate, the more energy that's in the reaction chamber. It's conceivable that the more energy there is in the system, the more stable the containment of the reaction (for some reason), and therefore the more you can increase the additional power you want to put in. Something similar is also conceivable inside a fusion reactor core. As a result, as more power becomes available from the reactor, the engines will accelerate at a corresponding rate.
An alternative explanation is that it is about warp field dynamics, where it could be more efficient to increase power to a warp field at a progressively increasing rate instead of a steadily increasing rate. Psydev 21:01, March 6, 2012 (UTC)


I’ve redirect kilodyne here – now what the #!!@? is a kilodyne? Serious question, pls let me know as I'm keen to make the addition--Archer4real 15:31, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Oops, meant isodyne. Same question, though--Archer4real 16:40, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

A dyne is a unit of force. A kilodyne = 1,000 dynes. An Isodyne is not at all related. It appears to be a component of a computer system. Psydev 07:08, March 19, 2012 (UTC)

The only info we have is from "Gravity": "B'Elanna, vent three million isodynes of plasma from the nacelles." Not at all convinced a unit of energy isn’t being discussed.--Archer4real 17:09, March 19, 2012 (UTC)

You might be right. I thought you were referring to "isodyne relay" which has been used. Either way, "isodyne" should have a disambiguation page, since it can mean two things.
It seems the prefix "iso" is sometimes used on Star Trek (e.g. "isoton"), but it is not a term we use in the metric system. As a prefix, "iso" means "equal". Pure speculation: "isodyne" could therefore mean "an amount equivalent to a dyne". Psydev 20:47, March 28, 2012 (UTC)