From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7e8cebf09cf80560
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!novia!news-out.readnews.com!postnews7.readnews.com!postbox2.readnews.com!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:13:58 -0400
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110221 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How would Ariane 5 have behaved if overflow checking were
 notturned
 off?
References: 
 <a8387564-0835-467d-a461-60a093c38133@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vscizsqqlzeukk@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <4d80b140$0$43832$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <op.vsf7vmtblzeukk@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <4d810172$0$4954$a8266bb1@postbox2.readnews.com>
 <d6e065fb-7271-42d5-812c-83912c8721a5@n1g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <4d81231d$0$4966$a8266bb1@postbox2.readnews.com>
 <45a24f37-ca05-44be-b74e-c3d7af894ac5@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <45a24f37-ca05-44be-b74e-c3d7af894ac5@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d812817$0$4950$a8266bb1@postbox2.readnews.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.186.190.52
X-Trace: 1300310039 postbox2.readnews.com 4950 198.186.190.52:47402
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:19232
Date: 2011-03-16T17:13:58-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 3/16/2011 5:09 PM, Shark8 wrote:
> Not quite.
> In the "nudge a fraction more warp factor out of the engines" there is
> indeed a valid range limitation: since we are talking about speeds*
> there can NEVER be a negative value as "speed*" is an absolute-value."
>
> *Velocity, to be more technically correct.

When they are sucked into a quantum singularity, their motion
is so odd with respect to the rest of the universe that the
equations make sense only if their speed is considered negative.
Fortunately, the Enterprise software is written in Forth :-)