Definition[]
are you sure about this? is this real science? you can't make definitions for non-star trek things – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.188.117.9
- No, this is...at least semi-accurate, it could use revising. It's from (VOY: "Caretaker"). The Caretaker's people used a technology that dupleted the nucleogenic particals in their atmostphere, and it couldn't rain. -Halliwell
Planet list[]
There are a lot of planets listed here said to not have Nucleogenic particles. Is there any evidence for these planets other than Ocampa? Surely a lack of nucleogenic particles is not the only reason a planet would not have rain, and unless it is said in canon that these other planets also lacked them, they should not be said here. --OuroborosCobra 04:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- Nucleongenic particles were only mentioned in "Caretaker", where it was stated that they were removed from Ocampa's atmosphere by accident by the Caretaker. The other planets are just desert worlds, that very well might have nugleogenic particles but are just very dry. So I'm removing the other planets listed, as there is no evidence for the lack of nucleogentic particles.
- Oh yeah, and here is some dialogue from Caretaker:
- JANEWAY: That's only one of the mysteries we're dealing with, Mr. Tuvok. Take a look at this. It's virtually a desert. Not one ocean, not one river. It has all the basic characteristics of an M-class planet except there are no nucleogenic particles in the atmosphere.
- TUVOK: That would mean the planet is incapable of producing rain.
- JANEWAY: I've studied thousands of M-class planets. I've never seen an atmosphere without nucleogenics. :There must have been some kind of extraordinary environmental disaster. As soon as repairs are complete, we'll set a course for the fifth planet.
- --Jörg 10:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'll better put the removes tuff here in case someone wants to change it into background information (...speculation).
- Planets with no nucleogenic particles are classified as a Class H planet including Ocampa, Nimbus III, Tau Cygna V, Rigel XII. (TOS: "Mudd's Women"; Star Trek V: The Final Frontier; TNG: "The Ensigns of Command"; VOY: "Caretaker")
- --Jörg 10:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Real World Equivalent[]
In reality, tiny (up to a few nanometers in diameter) aerosol particles, known as cloud condensation nuclei are needed for water vapor to condense into liquid water clouds.
I feel this should be mentioned at the end of the article. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 77.185.168.45
- Perhaps an external link to the WP article is in order, but I don't think it needs a specific mention in the article. 31dot (talk) 01:26, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
Source?[]
The article currently says "Nucleogenic particles are the constituent quantum components of an energy form found in the atmospheres of most M-class planets." But what leads us to say they are "quantum components of an energy form"? Or that ANY M-class planets are without nucleogenics? (Janeway implies through dialogue that non-nucleogenic=non-M-class.) This statement does not seem supported by anything said or seen. It appears more correct to simply say "Nucleogenic particles are found in the atmospheres of M-class planets and are required to produce rain." As an aside it could be added somewhere that "Nucleogenic particles as described could refer to something capable of nucleating a cloud droplet rather than, as we use the term today, a type of isotope." We don't know more, really. Thoughts? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by ARH2 (talk • contribs)
- I've removed it. Not sure where that came from. -- UncertainError (talk) 23:51, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- It came from here , which was apparently from "Equinox, Part II". –Gvsualan (talk) 13:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)