How does subspace communication move messages without warping space?

[Citiprime]

If I understand the (fictional) science of how warp drive works within the Star Trek universe, the core creates enough energy through matter-antimatter annihilation of detuerium (an isotope of hydrogen) through a process regulated by dilithium that creates a warp plasma that's shunted to the nacelles where the warp coils (created through a special alloy) is able to warp the fabric of space.

The resulting warp field allows the ship to travel at multiples of the speed of light through subspace.

Now, the communication between ships and planets is made possible through sending messages through subspace as well.

Here's my question; how do subspace communications travel through subspace without a warp field? In order for a message to enter or exit subspace, or for them to be detected either while at warp or in normal space, it doesn't seem to be necessary for it to be contained in a warp field.

Those aspects imply it's not a regular radio message (that would be limited by the speed of light) that's being boosted through subspace. It would also imply subspace is not a result of warp drive, but an entire area of space that exists independent of warp drive which can be accessed and used without the distortion created by going to warp.

So are the messages themselves a manipulation of the elements within subspace that can be used to contain information, data, video, audio, etc., instead of a message that originates in normal space that's being boosted through subspace?

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Transwarp beaming of radio waves from checkpoint to checkpoint?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Warp Field is only needed to create the Warp Bubble to move the vessel that exists in Normal Space.

Subspace messages seem to be sent directly into Subspace from the beginning.

Subspace, occasionally spelled sub-space, is an integral part of the universe, distinct from yet coexistent with normal space and its respective space-time continuum. Subspace has an infinite number of domains. Geordi La Forge likened it to "…a huge honeycomb with an infinite number of cells." (TNG: "Schisms") One of these domains could also be called a subspace spectrum. In 2367, the USS Enterprise-D picked up frequencies across the entire electromagnetic and lower subspace spectrum. (TNG: "The Loss")

No need for Warp Fields to do that since vessels can communicate through Subspace when the vessel is sitting still in Normal Space. Just look at the countless scenes where ships are sitting still in Normal space and having Video Conferences over vast distances.

Those aspects imply it's not a regular radio message (that would be limited by the speed of light) that's being boosted through subspace.

The message was sent through Subspace from the beginning and received from Subspace.
Which part of the SubSpace spectrum, that's up to the end user as to pick.
Similar to what Radio Frequency you pick to communicate on.

It would also imply subspace is not a result of warp drive, but an entire area of space that exists independent of warp drive which can be accessed and used without the distortion created by going to warp.

Yup, it's always been there.

So are the messages themselves a manipulation of the elements within subspace that can be used to contain information, data, video, audio, etc., instead of a message that originates in normal space that's being boosted through subspace?

Think of it as pointing a Communications device that broadcasts into Subspace on the chosen SubSpace Spectrum of your choice.
How fast that message goes is modified by the properties of that spectrum that you picked.

Doesn't matter if it's Radio or Laser communication or Light based communication.

You chose to broadcast on it, somebody on the other end receives it, assuming they know which spectrum to listen on along with what type of encoding you're doing and data structure you choose to employ.

 

[knightgrace]

Problem: Robert Zubin in his non fiction book 'Entering Space', has a chapter on interstellar communications.

First up is power.

It seems that to transmit a distance of one light-year, you need a megawatt of power.

Second up is frequency selection.

The lower the frequency the less data can be sent per unit of time.

To transmit a standard definition broadcast TV signal a distance of ten light-years requires a ten megawatt source, and an optical laser..

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Problem: Robert Zubin in his non fiction book 'Entering Space', has a chapter on interstellar communications.

First up is power.

It seems that to transmit a distance of one light-year, you need a megawatt of power.

Second up is frequency selection.

The lower the frequency the less data can be sent per unit of time.

To transmit a standard definition broadcast TV signal a distance of ten light-years requires a ten megawatt source, and an optical laser..

All those requirements apply to "Normal Space".

Where as in SubSpace, and which layer you use, the requirements will be different for a given amount of Initial Signal Strength needed relative to the Distance you expect the signal to have after it has traveled ___ distance.

That's why SubSpace is used, the method be it Radio or Laser would have different requirements in the various realms of Subspace.

At that point, it's just one more Dial to adjust when transmitting Data.

Heck, the Speed of Light limit will probably be different in the various Domains of Subspace.

There might be odd properties as well depending on which Domain you use, all that has to be tested out by the communications division within StarFleet or other advanced research agencies.

That's probably why there was a massive shift once "Project PathFinder" came about and that allowed Voyager to communicate with StarFleet HQ dispite the vast distance and normal SubSpace Communications wouldn't cut it. So they had to use the newer "Hyper-SubSpace" communications route once they got the specs for it.

This allowed them Real-Time Video Conferencing over vast distances thanks to the properties of whatever SubSpace domain they choose to use for "Hyper-SubSpace" communications to make it work.

 

[Christopher]

Here's my question; how do subspace communications travel through subspace without a warp field? In order for a message to enter or exit subspace, or for them to be detected either while at warp or in normal space, it doesn't seem to be necessary for it to be contained in a warp field.

Those aspects imply it's not a regular radio message (that would be limited by the speed of light) that's being boosted through subspace. It would also imply subspace is not a result of warp drive, but an entire area of space that exists independent of warp drive which can be accessed and used without the distortion created by going to warp.

The concept of "subspace" has evolved over the history of Trek. The term originated, of course, in prose science fiction around the 1930s, referring to an alternate realm allowing faster-than-light travel (interchangeable with "hyperspace") or FTL communication. (The pulp writers of the 1930s-50s also used "sub-ether" or "subetheric" in an equivalent way; Douglas Adams revived the term in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.) TOS used the term "subspace" exclusively in the context of subspace radio. The first person to use it in connection with warp drive in Trek was James Blish in his TOS adaptations, referring to a "bubble of subspace" containing the ship. ST:TMP's technical consultant, NASA propulsion engineer Jesco von Puttkamer, used it much the same way in his production memos, defining a subspace as the pocket of spacetime in which a warp ship was contained, and which was moved effectively faster than light by surfing on a wave of spacetime distortion. It wasn't until TNG that subspace came to be defined as a hyperspace-like alternate realm that both starships and communications passed through, as it had been in earlier SF. (Although Gene Roddenberry's TMP novelization contains multiple references to the Enterprise traveling through hyperspace.)

I could've sworn I'd read a technical work somewhere claiming that subspace radio generated some kind of mini-warp field that carried messages within it the same way a ship travels at warp, but I can't find where that came from. The TNG Technical Manual, which is where I thought I'd read it, just refers to "subspace frequencies" transmitted through subspace, and transceivers generating subspace fields. I checked the booklet that accompanied Star Trek Maps, and it said basically the same thing. So I don't remember where the idea came from.

So they had to use the newer "Hyper-SubSpace" communications route once they got the specs for it.

"Hyper-subspace?" Wouldn't that cancel out and just be, y'know, space?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

"Hyper-subspace?" Wouldn't that cancel out and just be, y'know, space?

Only if you treat it as a Math Symbol.

It's a Label for what Realm of SubSpace to use within StarFleet/UFP.

It's the one that allows faster signal transmission from Sol System to wherever Voyager was in the Delta Quadrant.

Thanks to Project PathFinder, they were able to have "Real Time" Video Conferencing with no significant latency at such vast distances.

Using my "WFS (Warp Factor Scale) 3.0" which takes the TNG era Warp Factor Scale and throw out the hand drawn curve to infinity after Wf 9 and just lets the natural TNG era formula run indefinitely, I've already calculated out roughly how fast normal SubSpace Transmissions travel at & how fast Hyper SubSpace Transmissions travel it.

It's quite the accomplishment IMO since Project PathFinder / Reginald Barclay & his team managed to transform the meaning & usefulness of InterSteller TeleCommunications across the UFP, a foundation that would obviously be improved upon but used in the future by all of the UFP / StarFleet to communicate across vast distances in "Real Time" (That means < 150 ms ping).

---

According to Data, it would take 51 years for their Regular Subspace Transmission to cover 2.7M ly when the Enterprise-D was hurled to the TriAngulum Galaxy.
If you take what he says to be literally accurate:

Normal SubSpace Radio Signals would be moving at WF 26.12991978, that would be ~52,941.17647c

---

If you take what the TNG Technical Manual states and ignore Data's Statement:

Also, worth mentioning: Subspace radio signals propagate at about Warp 9.9999, about 100 times faster than Warp 9.6 (according to Star Trek: The Next Generation; Writer's Technical Manual). It means that subspace communications aren't just faster than speed of light, but much faster than even high-speed Warp vessels.

TNG era WF scale, WF 9.6 = 2017.93c.
100×2017.93c = 201,793.0c
That would be WF 39.03658602 on my WFS 3.0.

---

That's still a far cry from the speeds necessary for "Real Time Communications" with Voyager given it's rough position in the Delta Quadrant at that point in time.
I estimated you need ~WF 11,214 for Hyper-Subspace.
That's ~31,564,712,587,166.7c

That allows you Real Time Video Conferencing with Real Latency equivalent to modern VOIP conferencing with no notice-able lag.

---

What Project PathFinder did was AMAZING for the UFP & InterStellar TeleCommunications.

It allowed "Real-Time Video Conferencing" and "Data Sharing" at such vast distances, to say it's a game changer is under-stating how important of a historic mile-stone that was for all of the UFP and how it would enable the UFP to eventually have 'Satellite Members' in all 4x Quadrants of the Galaxy before "The Burn" happened.

 

[Christopher]

Only if you treat it as a Math Symbol.

Hence the joke.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Hence the joke.

Haha!

 

[Ronald Held]

The concept of "subspace" has evolved over the history of Trek. The term originated, of course, in prose science fiction around the 1930s, referring to an alternate realm allowing faster-than-light travel (interchangeable with "hyperspace") or FTL communication. (The pulp writers of the 1930s-50s also used "sub-ether" or "subetheric" in an equivalent way; Douglas Adams revived the term in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.) TOS used the term "subspace" exclusively in the context of subspace radio. The first person to use it in connection with warp drive in Trek was James Blish in his TOS adaptations, referring to a "bubble of subspace" containing the ship. ST:TMP's technical consultant, NASA propulsion engineer Jesco von Puttkamer, used it much the same way in his production memos, defining a subspace as the pocket of spacetime in which a warp ship was contained, and which was moved effectively faster than light by surfing on a wave of spacetime distortion. It wasn't until TNG that subspace came to be defined as a hyperspace-like alternate realm that both starships and communications passed through, as it had been in earlier SF. (Although Gene Roddenberry's TMP novelization contains multiple references to the Enterprise traveling through hyperspace.)

I could've sworn I'd read a technical work somewhere claiming that subspace radio generated some kind of mini-warp field that carried messages within it the same way a ship travels at warp, but I can't find where that came from. The TNG Technical Manual, which is where I thought I'd read it, just refers to "subspace frequencies" transmitted through subspace, and transceivers generating subspace fields. I checked the booklet that accompanied Star Trek Maps, and it said basically the same thing. So I don't remember where the idea came from.




"Hyper-subspace?" Wouldn't that cancel out and just be, y'know, space.

I vague recall that explanation for subspace radio, but believe I read it in a novel.

 

[Christopher]

I vague recall that explanation for subspace radio, but believe I read it in a novel.

It's conceivable that it could've been one of my older novels, and I've mistaken something I came up with once for something I read.

 

[Ronald Held]

You are the current writer, with the most detailed science and trek science inputs to novels.

 

[Citiprime]

The first person to use it in connection with warp drive in Trek was James Blish in his TOS adaptations, referring to a "bubble of subspace" containing the ship. ST:TMP's technical consultant, NASA propulsion engineer Jesco von Puttkamer, used it much the same way in his production memos, defining a subspace as the pocket of spacetime in which a warp ship was contained, and which was moved effectively faster than light by surfing on a wave of spacetime distortion. It wasn't until TNG that subspace came to be defined as a hyperspace-like alternate realm that both starships and communications passed through, as it had been in earlier SF.

Although, this does open another question.

If subspace exists as an "alternate realm" to be traversed, is the warp drive distorting subspace too? Or is it only warping normal space to access different levels of subspace?

The latter might be a headcanon explanation for the different appearances of warp throughout the different shows (e.g., in Picard season 3, the Enterprise-D still has the TNG warp effect while the newer ships at warp cause a different visual).

 

[Christopher]

If subspace exists as an "alternate realm" to be traversed, is the warp drive distorting subspace too? Or is it only warping normal space to access different levels of subspace?

I think the idea is that a warp is a distortion of 3-dimensional space through the fourth or higher dimensions -- in the same way that, to warp a flat sheet of paper, you have to move parts of it through the third dimension, up or down from the plane of the paper. And subspace (or hyperspace) is a term for those higher dimensions beyond the ones we inhabit. (In mathematical terms, if string theory is right and our universe has 11 dimensions of space and time, then the 4-dimensional spacetime we inhabit is one subspace of that larger 11-D space, and the remaining 7 dimensions are another subspace.)

So your typical hyperspace drive, aka hyperdrive, in science fiction, e.g. in Star Wars or Babylon 5, generally entails a ship leaving our 4D spacetime for an other-dimensional realm, a hyperspace in which the speed of light is faster or distances are smaller or something. But in warp drive, the ship remains in our spacetime continuum but "submerges" a bubble of it into subspace, so that it retains a connection to real space rather than detaching from it entirely. The topology of the warp metric causes space to compress in front of the warp bubble and expand behind it, moving the bubble faster than light while the ship remains stationary within the bubble. To make spacetime distort faster, you'd need a more severe distortion, which would mean dipping "deeper" into subspace.

The latter might be a headcanon explanation for the different appearances of warp throughout the different shows (e.g., in Picard season 3, the Enterprise-D still has the TNG warp effect while the newer ships at warp cause a different visual).

I consider that artistic license, given that, IIRC, ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly" showed the 23rd-century Defiant with the same warp effect used throughout the Berman-era shows, and given that Star Trek Beyond used a completely different warp effect than the first two Kelvin movies even though it was the same ship. (And Beyond's warp effect was the only time it actually looked like a warp bubble, so I'm disappointed that it hasn't been adopted by subsequent productions.) It's not meant to be an in-universe difference any more than the different appearance of Vulcan from orbit in different productions, or the different appearance of Saavik between TWOK & TSFS, or the fact that the Enterprise crew are live-action in TOS and cartoons in TAS. It's just different dramatizations making different artistic choices in representing the in-universe "reality."

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I consider that artistic license, given that, IIRC, ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly" showed the 23rd-century Defiant with the same warp effect used throughout the Berman-era shows, and given that Star Trek Beyond used a completely different warp effect than the first two Kelvin movies even though it was the same ship. (And Beyond's warp effect was the only time it actually looked like a warp bubble, so I'm disappointed that it hasn't been adopted by subsequent productions.) It's not meant to be an in-universe difference any more than the different appearance of Vulcan from orbit in different productions, or the different appearance of Saavik between TWOK & TSFS, or the fact that the Enterprise crew are live-action in TOS and cartoons in TAS. It's just different dramatizations making different artistic choices in representing the in-universe "reality."

I still prefer the TNG-era Warp-Drive effect, it's so simple & beautiful.

The Blue Hyper-Space Tunnel that we see in modern productions more represents "Quantum Slip Stream" IMO than a traditional Warp Drive.

 

[Christopher]

The Blue Hyper-Space Tunnel that we see in modern productions more represents "Quantum Slip Stream" IMO than a traditional Warp Drive.

Both effects seem to borrow from Star Wars's hyperspace effect. And the quantum slipstream effect was just a variation on how Trek had depicted wormhole passage in earlier episodes.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Both effects seem to borrow from Star Wars's hyperspace effect. And the quantum slipstream effect was just a variation on how Trek had depicted wormhole passage in earlier episodes.

More Specifically, it was a variation on the TransWarp Conduits VFX.

Either way, "TransWarp Conduits" & "Quantum SlipStream" seem to better relate in VFX terms to Star Wars Hyper-Space jump/travel then the traditional Star Trek Warp Drive VFX IMO.

There's a place for each "VFX type" IMO, just apply it to the correct FTL Drive/System.

 

[Christopher]

More Specifically, it was a variation on the TransWarp Conduits VFX.

Oh, that's right.

Either way, "TransWarp Conduits" & "Quantum SlipStream" seem to better relate in VFX terms to Star Wars Hyper-Space jump/travel then the traditional Star Trek Warp Drive VFX IMO.

They're all pretty fanciful, though. The traditional Trek approach of showing stars moving past the ship, with or without prismatic streaking, is quite fanciful, because the stars are so far apart that even at high warp, it would take hours at least before there was any noticeable shift in their apparent positions. (In my novels, I handwaved it as the warpfield cycling in a way that swept an image of the stars' light across the ship over and over again like a rotating prism.) It's questionable whether you could see anything at all from inside a warp bubble, and if you could, you'd see nothing but blackness behind you, since of course you'd be outracing the light from behind.

As for your traditional "tunnel" effect for a wormhole or "conduit" or similar business, it wouldn't really look like that either. The usual depiction of a wormhole is a tubular well in a flat plane, an analogy subtracting one dimension so we can understand the visualization. But if space is a flat plane, then a 2-dimensional ship would pass within the edges of the tube rather than through the middle. So they'd be passing through a tubular space with a circular cross-section, and the light they emitted would circle around the space and hit them on the other side. So if you add a dimension, then by analogy, someone inside a wormhole would see a ring-like image of themselves surrounding them, as light from one side of the ship circled around and hit the other side (with increasingly distorted duplicate images ahead and behind as the light followed more angled paths). It would look kind of like passing through a mirrored cylinder, but rotated 180 degrees so that you'd see an image of the far side of your ship rather than a reflection of your own side.

There's a place for each "VFX type" IMO, just apply it to the correct FTL Drive/System.

If they were all being made by a consistent FX crew following consistent assumptions, perhaps. But since different productions use different artists making different design choices, there's no way to break it down consistently, since different teams depicting the same ship in the same era will give it different warp effects (look at the different ways the refit Enterprise's warp is rendered in the TOS movies, or the Berman-era warp effect used on the 23rd-century Defiant in IaMD). Some differences are diegetic, actually changing in-story, while others are extradiegetic, only changing the dramatic depiction of something that's meant to be the same in-story. (For instance, in the 2009 movie, Spock Prime recognizes young Kirk and Scotty on sight, so they're supposed to look the same in-universe even though they're played by different actors.)

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

They're all pretty fanciful, though. The traditional Trek approach of showing stars moving past the ship, with or without prismatic streaking, is quite fanciful, because the stars are so far apart that even at high warp, it would take hours at least before there was any noticeable shift in their apparent positions. (In my novels, I handwaved it as the warpfield cycling in a way that swept an image of the stars' light across the ship over and over again like a rotating prism.) It's questionable whether you could see anything at all from inside a warp bubble, and if you could, you'd see nothing but blackness behind you, since of course you'd be outracing the light from behind.

IMO, those Prismatic Streaking aren't "Stars", but the random Super Low Density Random Particles floating in the Vacuum of Space reacting to the Warp Field & Sparkling as you fly by.
Normally, under STL, you couldn't see them, but as you go to Warp, they react and you can see the Warp Streaks fly right by.

As for your traditional "tunnel" effect for a wormhole or "conduit" or similar business, it wouldn't really look like that either. The usual depiction of a wormhole is a tubular well in a flat plane, an analogy subtracting one dimension so we can understand the visualization. But if space is a flat plane, then a 2-dimensional ship would pass within the edges of the tube rather than through the middle. So they'd be passing through a tubular space with a circular cross-section, and the light they emitted would circle around the space and hit them on the other side. So if you add a dimension, then by analogy, someone inside a wormhole would see a ring-like image of themselves surrounding them, as light from one side of the ship circled around and hit the other side (with increasingly distorted duplicate images ahead and behind as the light followed more angled paths). It would look kind of like passing through a mirrored cylinder, but rotated 180 degrees so that you'd see an image of the far side of your ship rather than a reflection of your own side.

Either way, the concept for a Hyper-Space Tunnel VFX fits better with those TWC & QSS methods of FTL travel IMO.

If they were all being made by a consistent FX crew following consistent assumptions, perhaps. But since different productions use different artists making different design choices, there's no way to break it down consistently, since different teams depicting the same ship in the same era will give it different warp effects (look at the different ways the refit Enterprise's warp is rendered in the TOS movies, or the Berman-era warp effect used on the 23rd-century Defiant in IaMD). Some differences are diegetic, actually changing in-story, while others are extradiegetic, only changing the dramatic depiction of something that's meant to be the same in-story. (For instance, in the 2009 movie, Spock Prime recognizes young Kirk and Scotty on sight, so they're supposed to look the same in-universe even though they're played by different actors.)

This is why you need better coordination from the main Star Trek Art Department for internal consistency to any Sub-Contracting VFX houses as to what to render.
Don't give them "Free Rein" to render whatever they want.

We saw in ST:PIC that it can be updated to rendered accurately, we should maintain internal VFX consistency IMO.
Same with ST:LD.

There will be plenty of time to show different forms of FTL VFX since there are so many FTL Drives in existence within Star Trek alone.

 

[Christopher]

IMO, those Prismatic Streaking aren't "Stars", but the random Super Low Density Random Particles floating in the Vacuum of Space reacting to the Warp Field & Sparkling as you fly by.

I used to consider that as one possible handwave, but it wasn't what I ultimately went with. I suppose it wouldn't be so regular if it were the case, since the density of dust particles varies from place to place. Also, in an Alcubierre warp metric, impinging particles wouldn't "fly by" but would embed in the front of the warp bubble -- and when you came out of warp, they'd blast forward of the ship as high-intensity cosmic rays, so you'd better not come out pointing directly at anything.

Normally, under STL, you couldn't see them, but as you go to Warp, they react and you can see the Warp Streaks fly right by.

Except that the FX crews of TOS and its movies sometimes forgot themselves and did the moving-stars effect when the ship was at sublight.

Either way, the concept for a Hyper-Space Tunnel VFX fits better with those TWC & QSS methods of FTL travel IMO.

A transwarp conduit, yes, but it was never clearly explained what a "quantum slipstream" even was.

This is why you need better coordination from the main Star Trek Art Department for internal consistency to any Sub-Contracting VFX houses as to what to render.
Don't give them "Free Reign" to render whatever they want.

That's a ridiculous thing to say. Fiction is not authoritarian dogma. It's creative expression. Artists have every right to choose to express themselves however they wish. It's absurd to talk about a work of make-believe as if there were some single "right" way of doing it. You're not studying for a test, for pity's sake. There's no "right answer." There are just creative people exercising their imaginations. All you have to do to reconcile their different interpretations is to use your own imagination. (Seriously, I'd think someone who names himself after a Kamen Rider would be fully aware of how flexible fictional reality can be.)

Also, it's spelled "free rein." It's a horse-riding metaphor, meaning to let up on the reins and let the horse go where it wishes.