Star Wars vs Star Trek

[Apocalypse2001]

In the ST EU Terran vs Galactic Empire thread. You were claiming that the CCS's (not the ICS's) errors on ships were proof that it wasn't accurate at all.


Oh my, an empire with vessels that have to pump out hundreds of petatons of fuel per second to travel, million C FTL, and megajoule handguns aren't a sign of even gigaton weapons?

uh huh...It doesn't matter because all of that is not accepted by Lucas. Period. The interviews are all over the 'net. So sit down, and shut up. And you're 'oooh googooplex this, boom boom universe that' calculations have been disproved constantly. I know you're slow, but that's no excuse to constantly state idiodic ideas that are not even in Lucas' universe.

[Kittamaru]

In the ST EU Terran vs Galactic Empire thread. You were claiming that the CCS's (not the ICS's) errors on ships were proof that it wasn't accurate at all.



Oh my, an empire with vessels that have to pump out hundreds of petatons of fuel per second to travel, million C FTL, and megajoule handguns aren't a sign of even gigaton weapons?

1) You will, again, provide proof - you saying I did it does not constitute proof, as per your own sentiments earlier. Please note - even posting a screen capture or link is not proof, as I can simply dismiss it as being "a different thread" - or is that a power only you can exercise Yes, I called you out on your bullshit - now what?

2) Oh my, you will of course PROVE that it takes hundreds of petatons of fuel per second to travel (which makes no sense... petatons of fuel per second... where exactly do they store it?), much less that it takes that much power to get to lightspeed. You will also prove million c light speed speeds and megajoule handguns.

Otherwise, I accept your concession.

[ricrery]

1) You will, again, provide proof - you saying I did it does not constitute proof, as per your own sentiments earlier. Please note - even posting a screen capture or link is not proof, as I can simply dismiss it as being "a different thread" - or is that a power only you can exercise Yes, I called you out on your bullshit - now what?

Alright

http://forums.spacebattles.com/showt...=170511&page=6

2) Oh my, you will of course PROVE that it takes hundreds of petatons of fuel per second to travel (which makes no sense... petatons of fuel per second... where exactly do they store it?), much less that it takes that much power to get to lightspeed.

Alright. The Death Star I has a diameter of 160 kilometers. Let's say it is only 10% metal and 90% hollow, and has the density of iron. To move at, say, 1 kilometer, it would need to exert 200 teratons of fuel each second. However, at that velocity, it would take forever for it to get anywhere. 100 km/s would require 2 exatons of fuel each second, and 670 km/s would require 90 exatons of fuel per second

You will also prove million c light speed speeds

Ep. I, Darth Maul travels from one side of the galaxy to the other in less than a day. Ep. II, Yoda travels from the core worlds to the outer rim in less than a day. Anymore?

and megajoule handguns.

The massive damage one did in Ep. IV. The way one destroyed CP0. The grape sized holes one created on the Death Star. The novels show megajoules of destruction themselves.

Otherwise, I accept your concession.

[Kittamaru]

Alright

http://forums.spacebattles.com/showt...=170511&page=6

More of your taking things out of context... not unexpected. It was an example as to how things can get screwed up and they don't get reviewed... as such, how can we trust a totally unrevised source?

Alright. The Death Star I has a diameter of 160 kilometers. Let's say it is only 10% metal and 90% hollow, and has the density of iron. To move at, say, 1 kilometer, it would need to exert 200 teratons of fuel each second. However, at that velocity, it would take forever for it to get anywhere. 100 km/s would require 2 exatons of fuel each second, and 670 km/s would require 90 exatons of fuel per second

Uhm, and you come up with these numbers from where exactly? For starters, I thought durasteel was supposed to be incredibly dense and strong (stronger than diamond supposedly, according to the Young Jedi Knights series). Not to mention the fact that if 90% of it is hollow... yeah. This pushes your figures from the "obscene" to the "stupidly impossible" area... thus, as was already asked - where would they store that fuel?

Ep. I, Darth Maul travels from one side of the galaxy to the other in less than a day. Ep. II, Yoda travels from the core worlds to the outer rim in less than a day. Anymore?

Sure - you could also argue that it is an incredibly small galaxy. Have any high-canon figures on its size?

The massive damage one did in Ep. IV. The way one destroyed CP0. The grape sized holes one created on the Death Star. The novels show megajoules of destruction themselves.

None of those are nearly "massive damage", nor are they evidence of anything other than shoddy construction materials.

Keep smiling - you remind me of my wife's Shitzu in that respect - even when he hasn't a clue, he grins happily

[ricrery]

[QUOTE=Kittamaru;2647860]More of your taking things out of context... not unexpected. It was an example as to how things can get screwed up and they don't get reviewed... as such, how can we trust a totally unrevised source?

And so an error that was the editor's fault is sufficient to show that the book is debunked?

Uhm, and you come up with these numbers from where exactly?

Star Wars Visual Dictionary says the Death Star I is 160 kilometers in diameter.

For starters, I thought durasteel was supposed to be incredibly dense and strong (stronger than diamond supposedly, according to the Young Jedi
Knights series).

And just what IS the density of durasteel? That's right, you don't know. I have to give the DS a density, so I chose iron.

Not to mention the fact that if 90% of it is hollow... yeah. This pushes your
figures from the "obscene" to the "stupidly impossible" area...

Christ. Have you heard of 10 percent density calculation?

thus, as was already asked - where would they store that fuel?

Hypermatter is really, really concentrated, and can be crammed into a small space.

Sure - you could also argue that it is an incredibly small galaxy. Have any high-canon figures on its size?

I don't need to. The EU says that the GFFA is 120,000 light years in diameter, and we see two dwarf galaxies near the GFFA.

None of those are nearly "massive damage", nor are they evidence of anything other than shoddy construction materials.

Really?



That wall can resist heat from ships taking off, yet a blaster hit turns it red-hot and causes it to explode, knocking back nearby soldiers.

Keep smiling - you remind me of my wife's Shitzu in that respect - even when he hasn't a clue, he grins happily

Have you conceded at Spacebattles in the GE vs UFP thread?

[Kittamaru]

Well, to snipe one of your "points" - thermal energy from a ship taking off =/= energetic input from a blaster bolt... unless of course a blaster is a glorified thermal projector...

As for the EU saying the galaxy's size - that's easy. The EU is contradicted by the speed figures in the movies (as they are given in times, not distances or speeds). Unless you have evidence to the contrary of course (which you don't)

And the 10% density calculation bit shows you don't have the slightest idea what I meant... if hypermatter is really that dense and concentrated, then it would be extremely massive, to the point of having its own gravitational well in small quantities, and the point of weighing more than the ship its in at higher quantities... so either Star Wars defies basic physics in terms of energy production/expenditure, or you are wrong on their energy levels. I prefer to side with science myself

[TW Scott]

Well, to snipe one of your "points" - thermal energy from a ship taking off =/= energetic input from a blaster bolt... unless of course a blaster is a glorified thermal projector...

Any idiot knows that there is a great deal of thrust involved in launching a spacecraft. Even one that is contragravity. The fact that a hand blaster blew chucks of reinforced material out of the wall just shows how powerfult he handguns are.

As for the EU saying the galaxy's size - that's easy. The EU is contradicted by the speed figures in the movies (as they are given in times, not distances or speeds). Unless you have evidence to the contrary of course (which you don't)

Actually, the movies do not conflict with EU. Eu expains the reason for the travel times. Since the movies do not dispute this and in fact support it your argument is completely incorrect.

And the 10% density calculation bit shows you don't have the slightest idea what I meant... if hypermatter is really that dense and concentrated, then it would be extremely massive, to the point of having its own gravitational well in small quantities, and the point of weighing more than the ship its in at higher quantities... so either Star Wars defies basic physics in terms of energy production/expenditure, or you are wrong on their energy levels. I prefer to side with science myself

But the Hypermatter would be kept in antigravity fields thus reducing the weight a bit. Mass would still be there, of course and would effect acceleration, decellration and gravity. However 10% is a reasonable density figure. Actually given the density of durasteel and the presence of hypermatter double the figures would be good.

[ricrery]

*snip*

Why don't we take this up at Spacebattles? I might get in trouble here because of what I'm currently doing and will be unable to respond here later.

[Kittamaru]

Any idiot knows that there is a great deal of thrust involved in launching a spacecraft. Even one that is contragravity. The fact that a hand blaster blew chucks of reinforced material out of the wall just shows how powerful the handguns are.

So, you are saying in effect that a modern .357 is super powerful because it can punch through a backblast deflector mounted on a modern day carrier... yes, that's what you are claiming.

Actually, the movies do not conflict with EU. Eu expains the reason for the travel times. Since the movies do not dispute this and in fact support it your argument is completely incorrect.

Except the movies do dispute it; TESB: the Falcon's hyperdrive isn't working, yet they still go from Hoth to Anoat and then to Bespin in a matter of a few weeks, not a few months/years.

Also, taken from another site: The fastest quoted speed in the Star Wars Universe has been 20'000 light years being travelled in three hours (LOTF: Bloodlines). That should make Millennium Falcon speeds be about 6666.7 light years an hour.

And from the same place:

Which would make Han's statement of the Falcon making the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs make sense. Since a parsec is a measure of distance and not time.

Rather silly of Han to say it can make a trip of a set distance in less than a specific distance... this implies Hyperspace has some weird attributes other than plain speed.


Even more evidence:

ESB Admiral Piett comments that the Falcon could be "on the other side of the galaxy by now". And this was very soon after the Falcon had eluded the imperials.

But the Hypermatter would be kept in antigravity fields thus reducing the weight a bit. Mass would still be there, of course and would effect acceleration, decellration and gravity. However 10% is a reasonable density figure. Actually given the density of durasteel and the presence of hypermatter double the figures would be good.

Any proof of this assumption? Or even circumstantial evidence?

[TW Scott]

So, you are saying in effect that a modern .357 is super powerful because it can punch through a backblast deflector mounted on a modern day carrier... yes, that's what you are claiming.

No, I did not make such a claim. Not even remotely. The Spaceship ports on Tatooine are nothing like back blast protectors on a Air Craft Carrier. Also the thrust one must use to launch a modern fighter would be miniscule compared to the trust used to launch a starship that has a 100 ton cargo hold. Also punching through a thin bit of metal is not the same as blowling human torso sized chunks out of a thick wall.

Please abstain form reducto absurdium you just make yourself look absurd.

Except the movies do dispute it; TESB: the Falcon's hyperdrive isn't working, yet they still go from Hoth to Anoat and then to Bespin in a matter of a few weeks, not a few months/years.

The Falcon's main Hyperdrive is not working. Starships often have back up Hyperdrives that are much slower than the main one. Also the Hoth and Anoat starsystems are notoriusly close together. Also note that it may have been more than a few weeks as Luke was almost complete with his training when he left. That is not a few week endeavor.

As for why not use the back up Hyper-drive, Han is a former Imperial Lieutenant. He is quite aware that the imperials can catch him in hyperspace if he uses his x8 drive which is 4 times slower than the Imperial x2 drive in a Star Destroyer.

Any proof of this assumption? Or even circumstantial evidence?

The fact that Hypermatter is essentially a blackhole and the ship would need to be shielded from it.

[Kittamaru]

Why don't we take this up at Spacebattles? I might get in trouble here because of what I'm currently doing and will be unable to respond here later.

... and why would I follow you there? This sounds like a cop out to me (especially since you consider me having to go to bed at as "early" a time as 4am to be a cop out or me running away)...

[Kittamaru]

No, I did not make such a claim. Not even remotely. The Spaceship ports on Tatooine are nothing like back blast protectors on a Air Craft Carrier. Also the thrust one must use to launch a modern fighter would be miniscule compared to the trust used to launch a starship that has a 100 ton cargo hold. Also punching through a thin bit of metal is not the an

But obviously they're scaled to match, right? I mean, if the ship is using anti-gravity (which would indicate the nullification of gravity) it shouldn't take much of anything to lift it off, right?

lol

The Falcon's main Hyperdrive is not working. Starships often have back up Hyperdrives that are much slower than the main one. Also the Hoth and Anoat starsystems are notoriusly close together. Also note that it may have been more than a few weeks as Luke was almost complete with his training when he left. That is not a few week endeavor.

As for why not use the back up Hyper-drive, Han is a former Imperial Lieutenant. He is quite aware that the imperials can catch him in hyperspace if he uses his x8 drive which is 4 times slower than the Imperial x2 drive in a Star Destroyer.

Any proof that there is a backup hyperdrive on that boat? And where was this backup hyperdrive when his primary was sabotaged, hm?

The fact that Hypermatter is essentially a blackhole and the ship would need to be shielded from it.

So Hypermatter = Black Hole now... dear me, dear me... this is getting more and more silly as time drags on.

[ricrery]

... and why would I follow you there? This sounds like a cop out to me (especially since you consider me having to go to bed at as "early" a time as 4am to be a cop out or me running away)...

Are you paying attention? I said that I could get banned here and not debate. It would be much better to debate there to stop any inconveniences like that.

[TW Scott]

But obviously they're scaled to match, right? I mean, if the ship is using anti-gravity (which would indicate the nullification of gravity) it shouldn't take much of anything to lift it off, right?

lol

Contragravity Drive is not nullification of gravity it's using gravity to push against materials and gravity fields around you. Still an object with no weight would still have great mass and you would need to over come inertia, even with inertial dampeners. thus you would still need the same initial outlay of thrust and energy and maintian until you had accelerated to your escape speed. Even then you need to still lay in more power to overcome friction of atmosphere and such as well.

Any proof that there is a backup hyperdrive on that boat? And where was this backup hyperdrive when his primary was sabotaged, hm?

Actually, there is plenty of evidence including novelizations and novels written with George Lucas's knowledge. As for why it was not activated after bbespin, if you were gona sabotage a ship wouldn;t you turn off the secondary.

I also noticed you made no mention of the timing thing I mentioned. It doesn't take a genous to figure out Luke was on Dagobah for more than just a few weeks. I'd even say upwards of six month or a year. Either would fit the official timeline.

So Hypermatter = Black Hole now... dear me, dear me... this is getting more and more silly as time drags on.

You do know that the romulan singularity engine is a microblackhole about the size of a mitochondria and exerting gravity about equal to 2 or 3 Jupiters. Thus why it was confused tfor a young new star by that race that needed gravity well to incubate their young.

[Kittamaru]

Are you paying attention? I said that I could get banned here and not debate. It would be much better to debate there to stop any inconveniences like that.

Why would you be banned if you debate here, unless of course you plan to use false premises' like fallacies and other such illegitimate methods... makes me wonder what kind of BS you're trying to pull here.

[Kittamaru]

Contragravity Drive is not nullification of gravity it's using gravity to push against materials and gravity fields around you. Still an object with no weight would still have great mass and you would need to over come inertia, even with inertial dampeners. thus you would still need the same initial outlay of thrust and energy and maintian until you had accelerated to your escape speed. Even then you need to still lay in more power to overcome friction of atmosphere and such as well.

Anti-Gravity's name implies just that - the opposite of gravity. You are proposing that it is, instead, a drive that uses gravity to push against something... which makes little sense since gravity is, in itself, a pulling force, not a pushing one. (gravity - attraction between two objects). What you are suggesting is just another type of thrust based engine.

If an object had no weight due to a simple lack of gravity, then yes, it would have to deal with inertia. Now, it's possible SW ships don't use any form of mass-lightening field (which would be rather stupid to begin with, as then how do you deal with the massive inertial forces from acceleration to light speed?), which means it would indeed need all that thrust.

Also, atmospheric friction wouldn't really be an issue at initial takeoff... unless the ship just instantly goes from zero to batshit (after all, atmospheric resistance has velocity as a major factor)

Also - they never seem to actually reach any kind of "escape velocity" when leaving a planet, which seems to imply that they use some other method (anti-gravity being the likely one).

Actually, there is plenty of evidence including novelizations and novels written with George Lucas's knowledge. As for why it was not activated after bbespin, if you were gona sabotage a ship wouldn;t you turn off the secondary.

Written with his knowledge, but with his understanding? He said it himself - he doesn't read most of the novels. None the less, in the movie, Han never even made mention of trying the secondary hyperdrive and, if it were as slow as you say, why would they need to, as they could simply outrun it's slower drive.

I also noticed you made no mention of the timing thing I mentioned. It doesn't take a genous to figure out Luke was on Dagobah for more than just a few weeks. I'd even say upwards of six month or a year. Either would fit the official timeline.

How does their length of stay on a planet matter when it comes to their (short) time between solar systems? Also, if their journey took so long... where did they get all the supplies for such a trip (such as food), considering we never see mention of any form of replication technology on the Falcon.

You do know that the romulan singularity engine is a microblackhole about the size of a mitochondria and exerting gravity about equal to 2 or 3 Jupiters. Thus why it was confused tfor a young new star by that race that needed gravity well to incubate their young.

And this is relevant... how? Last I checked, the Romulans weren't using their singularity as fuel (which is, you know, usually burned in some form). They actually derived power directly from it (which is rather odd in itself, but they aren't the subject now)

[TW Scott]

Anti-Gravity's name implies just that - the opposite of gravity. You are proposing that it is, instead, a drive that uses gravity to push against something... which makes little sense since gravity is, in itself, a pulling force, not a pushing one. (gravity - attraction between two objects). What you are suggesting is just another type of thrust based engine.

If an object had no weight due to a simple lack of gravity, then yes, it would have to deal with inertia. Now, it's possible SW ships don't use any form of mass-lightening field (which would be rather stupid to begin with, as then how do you deal with the massive inertial forces from acceleration to light speed?), which means it would indeed need all that thrust.

Also, atmospheric friction wouldn't really be an issue at initial takeoff... unless the ship just instantly goes from zero to batshit (after all, atmospheric resistance has velocity as a major factor)

Okay fiorst of all I said CONTRAGRAVITY. Not Anti-Gravity. Contragravity uses reverse polarity gravitons in an effort to push against other objects and gravity fields. Think of it as the reverse of gravity not the nullification of it.

Second, Mass reduction is only needed if you are doing FTL in an Einsteinian universe. Hyperspace is the complete opposite of our reality. In Hyperspace it is impossible to stand still. Everything is accelerating all the time. Mass is not an issue there.

Seocndly saying airfristion and air pressure is not an issues is ludicrous int he extreme givien the sahpe of said space craft and theor method of launch.

Also - they never seem to actually reach any kind of "escape velocity" when leaving a planet, which seems to imply that they use some other method (anti-gravity being the likely one).

We never actually see them acheiving escape velocity, then again we never see them leave the atmosphere. It's always lauch formt he ground then cut to already outside the atmosphere.

Written with his knowledge, but with his understanding? He said it himself - he doesn't read most of the novels. None the less, in the movie, Han never even made mention of trying the secondary hyperdrive and, if it were as slow as you say, why would they need to, as they could simply outrun it's slower drive.

First of all he sad he doesn;t concern himself with the other novels, not that he NEVER read them. Second why would you not just take the time to folip one more switch rather than do a hyperspace chase.

How does their length of stay on a planet matter when it comes to their (short) time between solar systems? Also, if their journey took so long... where did they get all the supplies for such a trip (such as food), considering we never see mention of any form of replication technology on the Falcon.

First of all it is common for even vessels like the Falcon to care six months of consumables. The Falcon is a large ship and while were never shown any replication technology, it doesnpt mean they didn't have food stores, autochefs or even something like a replicator. Food assembled by nanites form stock matierials would be just as impressive.

And this is relevant... how? Last I checked, the Romulans weren't using their singularity as fuel (which is, you know, usually burned in some form). They actually derived power directly from it (which is rather odd in itself, but they aren't the subject now)

Actually if you think about it the singularity in itself is fuel. Also not all fuel is burnt, nobody believes nuclear fuel is burnt, Matter and Anitmatter are the fuel of a Warp Core, and so on.

[Kittamaru]

There are massive amounts of supposition in that post Scott... none of which anything I've read supports.

Also, look for contra-gravity on wookipedia... you won't find it. Anti-gravity is prevalent though.

The repulsorlift or repulsorlift engine, often referred to simply as a repulsor, was an anti-gravity technology capable of levitating an object.

So it seems Repulsorlifts are Anti-Gravity, not Contra-Gravity.

[ricrery]

So it seems Repulsorlifts are Anti-Gravity, not Contra-Gravity.

So, an UNSOURCED Wikipedia page is your proof?

[Stray Dog5]

Okay then ricery explain the difference between contra and anti gravity