Star Wars vs Star Trek

Oh this is rich coming from you!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wow... epic link fail - who is this Avernus guy and why does he matter to me?

EDIT - and the best part is, my only comment there at all was a simple statement of Fact - that Ryan has a tendency to MASSIVELY overinflate the capabilities of WH40K, not to mention his penchant for threatening to report anyone who tries to argue against what he says (no matter how insanely wrong he may be)... to be honest, I think his report button must be broken, or else half of vs would be banned by now

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You were banned from posting in the vs forum.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

... And there are so many more areas I can go to (Spacebattles, Non Sci Fi), and it helps me get shit done I couldn't have on VS.

 

None the less, in the most literal sense of the word, you were banned. I never said what you were banned from - just that you were.

:shrug:

Then again, you are desperate to be right no matter what, to the point that you'd cut your nose off to spite your face.

 

I don't go around getting in fights with many individuals. Besides, Mjonir referenced that whenever you don't like the debate, you say that the opposition is wrong. For example, you take their entire quote and just say that they're idiots and leave.

 

Given the observed mechanics of podracers I'm finding it rather dubious that they are fusion powered, even if there is some bit of EU somewhere that says so. Observed movie data takes precedence, after all. Unless that bit can be reconciled, the quote as it stands generally fails. I will again note that the quote is explicitly said to be what children are told on a backwater planet where many people aren't even literate for all we know (kid Anakin wasn't going to school in Ep I, at any rate). Taking it literally to mean this is the whole truth and nothing but is stretching it. You might say it indicates fusion, but saying it's utterly crystal clear proof for it powering everything isn't what I'd consider consistent with good practice for analysis.

Who is it that claims starfighter shots are at hundreds of megatons? Even the most zealous SW debaters I've heard of don't generally go beyond low terajoules/kilotons for those, and usually less. Considering their power reactors are many thousands of times smaller if the ICS books are correct regarding scale, this is just common sense.

 

Lucas wrote a foreword to at least one EU novel ("Shatterpoint") so if he didn't read it, one can at least assume he cared about it and approved it.

 

I see what you're saying, and bear in mind, I'm not saying that this is stand-alone incontrovertible proof. I'm saying that it is one of multiple instances that indicate fusion power. I'm also saying that we cannot just dismiss it out of hand. It is not incontrovertible proof, but it IS a piece of evidence pointing to the Star Wars civilization being powered by fusion reactors.

Nobody, but I was noting that if a light turbolaser cannon on a transport ship could spit out 836.8 exajoules a shot as the AOTC:ICS claims, then even if starfighter weapons are ridiculously weak in comparison, they will still have ridiculously high firepower. If they spit out only 0.025% of that energy per shot, starfighter cannons are going to be spitting out 20,920 petajoules of energy, equivalent to a 5 gigaton bomb. Even at 0.000025% the per-shot energy of a light turbolaser batter, a starfighter laser cannon is still going to be spitting out the energy equivalent, per shot, of a 50 kiloton bomb. This is utterly inconsistent with what we see in the movies. What we see in the movies is more on the order of a 200-240 kg explosion or less from starfighter weaponry, which is 0.0000000001% - 0.00000000012% of the 200 gigaton yield figure listed by the AOTC:ICS. It just does not work with the canon materials.

Maybe; Shatterpoint is supposedly a movie tie-in novel, and Lucas did have some oversight of the movie novelizations (especially the original trilogy), so this may be among that. I'll have to look into it more.

 

There are better sources for that if you want to argue that point. Of course, Anderson doesn't acknowledge the canonicity of the EU, so for him that's a problem. If one uses his methodology and only accepts the novels as sources along the movies, it's definitely too little to say anything for certain, let alone in his words.

In the EU ... Well, it goes from fusion to hypermatter to whatever. Supposedly the Episode III ICS says all starships are powered by hypermatter ... though we have evidence of fusion elsewhere. There's also a bit on fuel in an old WEG book ("Black Ice") that probably contradicts the densities conjectured for hypermatter.

IMHO it's better to measure reactor volume than muzzle size on the guns, since that represents the actual power; the ICs has it an ordinary warship can route most of its available power into its weapons, and that bit hasn't ben overridden AFAIK.

Going by the ICS, an Acclamator's reactors should measure their radius in the tens of meters, at least, as observed here. Scaling roughly I get a sphere on the order of 35 meters in radius; others might improve on that. Assuming for the moment it's correct, that gives a volume of roughly 179,600 cubic meters.

Now, an X-wing can't really have a power generator much larger than perhaps 1 meter radius, assuming it's a sphere. Which works out to some 4.19 cubic meters.

(There might be a picture of it in the OT ICS, but I don't have that one here to look right now.)

If we assume the X-wing and the Acclamator use the same kind of reactor and it scales linearly with volume, it should be roughly 42,762 times more powerful ... which still leaves X-wing firepower in the megatons, assuming I did it right. (All calculations made as we speak). A bit high ... so perhaps it's not the same kind of generator, or it doesn't scale quite linearly.

Another possibility is that the X-wing has lower power to save fuel. The Acclamator fuel tanks are larger compared to total ship volume than I remember from the X-wing diagram in the OT ICS.

 

Sauce?

 

I love how the Trekkies cry that EU isn't canon, whereas George Lucas constantly references it. Coruscant for example, is a EU name, and thus, George Lucas took it for his movies.

 

And yet that same George Lucas (and his neck fat) have stated that it is "not his canon, but a separate entity altogether, it's own story living in the wake of what he created"...

 

:wtf: What does that have to do with anything?

 

Uh huh... prove this.

Notice, the NON CANON part. C Canon is still canon.

 

Mhm, but by your new replaces old ideology:

Notice - my quote is from 2001... yours is from 2000. Thus, mine overrides yours (by your "new overrides old game") and thus the EU is a Parallel Universe, not to be confused with "his" Star Wars.

Or do you want to rescind the "new overrides old" argument... hm? Your choice buddy boy.

EDIT - not to mention

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfDEyLbUSxo

Enjoy

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

actually this video shows further evidence of how pathetic the Death Star is lol

EDIT: Just after 1:30; what they talk about is actually hilarious. Sounds like Bush and his croonies who couldn't find the real Saddam or Bin Laden lol

 

Lol the video is hilarious.

Space traffic lol....