I love sci-fi and just had to travel here to irritate ricrery since he's brutally losing the debate over on youtube. But yes, FTL (faster than light) travel has been theorised and is believed to be possible. Warp 1 is the speed of light in Star Trek. That is stated somewhere though I forget. Warp 1.1 if I remember is 2 times the speed of light or some such thing. And yes, some of the devices used in Star Trek are most likely going to exist sometime in the future. The IPOD was concieved from a next generation episode, Steve Jobs could tell you that. Transparent Aluminum, though highly unstable was mentioned in Star Trek 4, an wow look at today, it exists in a highly unstable form. Transporter technology is also theoretically possible. I fail to see why you're so anti-Star Trek. It gives people something to shoot for.
And predates Trek by several decades. It was a "staple" in Golden Age SciFi novels. Only if by "theoretically possible" you mean "not in a million years as a practicality".
Didn't know the first part, intriguing. But what as a result of popularity will be credited by it? Star Trek. As for transporters, it was in an article on CNN about a month or so ago that it was claimed within a hundred years or so we will have them.
well for starters FTL travel is possible, just the other day scientists actually managed to accelerate photons beyond the speed of light. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-475587/Scientists-break-speed-light.html
Only by the know-nothing masses. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! True geeks try to keep up with everything. Oh yeah like a TV channel ever got science right. Try reading Lawrence Kraus's Physics of Star Trek for a genuine physicist's take on what's possible and what isn't. The transporting that's been done was with a photon (IIRC), NOT a physical object. And never will be. TV (especially news) is tailored (as I've said before) to the limited-attention-span couch potato and likes "gee whiz" sound bites. They go over so much better than facts.
Just the other day? Check the date tag - "Last updated at 22:43 15 August 2007", old news, didn't pan out quite like they thought. And also read the article - "But a few appeared to "tunnel" through a gap separating them as if the prisms were still held together." They tunnelled, they didn't travel. And FYI that's the Mail, a newspaper that reports "science" in two paragraphs and gives a regular double-page spread on how the stars dictate your life... IOW whatever sells but don't actually say anything technical, the astrology freaks won't understand it.
Waffen... you are losing fool. You have been ignoring me, Perion, Blacksun and etc. You bring up phasers that do 1/1000th of a low level turbolaser and think that the phaser is better? Fool, 1 30 year old transport can slag a ship in less than an hour depending on how it wants to do it.
Ricrery, first off the only thing we count as canon in here are the first 6 episodes, cuz out of the thousand or so books, practically none of them are true SW and emrely add their own petty facts. The fact is that an iSD CANNOT glass a planet and the whole command came from some random book, face it, why build a death star if you dont even need it? Second, phasers are better than lasers, its elementary physics and it is a fact. Second, the power system in an ISD is incapable of producing an output of a few hundred gigatons, namely because the empire doesnt have the kind of technology to produce that amount of power. And Ill explain it in simple terms. The disruptor is slightly better than a phaser, the disruptors of the romulans are powered by a black hole, and if a turbolaser is 1000 times more powerful than that, than WHAT IN G-D'S NAME COULD POWER THAT?!?!?!? THE BIG BANG....if your lucky?!?!?!?!?! And get this, it's powered by a miniature sun, and a sun runs off of fusion power. So you are telling me that your primitive fusion reactor can put out more power than a black *explitive that rhymes with trucking* hole?!?!?! And even the alliance said that the ISD has 174,000 design flaws, 174 fucking thousand?!?! Jesus im surprised that ship doesnt fall apart through simple transit
I don't care much for the original trilogy in terms of canon, but EU suggests that they have the resources to make 3 Death Stars, plus the Sun Crusher that makes stars go boom and destroys the system, then the Galaxy Gun which can turn an entire system into energy. Then the Eclipse with a gun that has 3/4 of the power of the DS gun. Besides, in the SW book it states Acclamators (which are 30 year old transport ships) do 200 gigs on medium turbolasers, and that means their high power turbolasers would do 400-800 gigatons, hilarious right? Then the Venator which does 4-8 teratons on 1 turbolaser, then the ISD that does 20 teratons on 1 turbolaser (and it has 120 turbolasers) which comes up to 2.4 petatons. Impressive right? Each ISD has 2.4 petatons worth. That's not counting the SSD. You see why ST is outgunned now?
BS, first off, a small star produces around a similar amount of power and 2.4 pentatons. So for starters a laser cannot be that powerful. Second, if that were right, why is it that the aluminum falcon (robo chicken joke) survived a direct hit with NO adverse effects. A turbolaser cannot do that much damage, when luke was hit by one, all that happened was the engine on his practically unshielded X-wing went out, if your power claims are anywhere near accurate, not only should most of his ship been destroyed, but a sizable chunk of the DS should have been taken out by the ensuing explosion. Plus, nowhere in the trilogy does it state the power of a turbolaser.
Well, I'm talking about EU. Besides in the games the OR ships can BDZ a planet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6aY0mz5m-4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIM0ReXhenc&feature=related See that? Those looked like small turbolasers to me! Yet, they destroyed buildings made of a special thing called "durasteel". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQegn6GtUMg&feature=related That ship isn't that strong and it's lesser turbolasers can be seen from above the planet. Impressive? Compare that to 80 Romulan ships requiring chain reaction attacks.
that is the nerdiest shit i've ever heard, and i've scrolled through the old st vs sw threads a few times. warhammers sick, but for coolness nothing beats jedis having a kickass lightsaber battle.
I didn't ignore anyone. You continually ignored the statements I made or brought up comic book characters into the debate. As the other guy stated, SW is severely flawed within its realm. If your BDZ can destroy a planet for all intensive purposes, why did they ever bother with the Death Star? It's pointless. And he raised a good point about the Star Destroyer shooting Luke's X-Wing. Or how the Falcon took multiple hits. For the amount of damage you say they dish out, for having a Titanium hull that's rather inpressive than. Oh wait, if they dished out the amount of damage that is claimed nothing would survive. Obviously they don't seeing as how the hulls are Titanium. They'd be ripped to shreds.
lol Sword fights get old. Real quick. And in fact there was nothing fantastic about the SW sword fights except for when they slice thru railing or some metal post or something. The sound and glow - its cool but it wasn't until... Why the hell are we on this stupid thread?!! There's already a SW vs ST thread!!
Just go to the SW vs ST thread and debate about it there. It doesnt take much of a brain to figure that out.
i agree, i watched the old sw trilogy recently, the saber fights in that suck. i was referring more to the new movies, esp. the animated series, as well as jedi games like kotor and jedi academy.
Warhammer would win out of all of them. First off, weve got a few million ships, each one the size of around 9 km on average witht he max being 14. And a space marine is basically immortal through his biological enhancements. Each space marine while being a scout fought in hundreds of campaigns and as a space marine, hundreds more. They have seriously got some experiance Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
