Star Wars vs Star Trek

[Believe]

It's like I said, the more you talk, the more you disprove/discredit yourself.

[Believe]

Also, your only argument is till "Wong said" Wong is no-body. He is just some random person with a website.

[George1]

Actually that is the real video from the remastered editions of SW.

no, it isn't. i have watched the actual movie both original and the Special Edition (remastered is what you call the episodes of ST) and that explosion at the end is not from SW. for the last time, its from stargate. know what that is? ever watched it? i did, every episode of SG1 and SGA. so get it in your head, and go watch the real movie and not some Youtube fan made video.

[George1]

Also, your only argument is till "Wong said" Wong is no-body. He is just some random person with a website.

no, hes a guy with a proven degree in science, and is more you are. obviously you have zero intention of reading his site, or listening to evidence, or watch the movies for that matter, so by by, you have proven yourself to be nobody but an average trekkie who has no idea on the real matter.

[Kittamaru]

i just want to say, that you Kit and you Belive have obviously no interest in the actual canon, nor the truth.
Belive: we saw the planet blow up, and the energy i said it has to make is obviously obtained. therefor, they do it. we see NO DS with tanks bigger than 9.6 times itself, so they don't have them. end of story.
and Kit, you also really don't give a shit about the actual facts. so you to have zero authority on this site.
the only one who brings real things on this site among you is Saquist. he brought real evidence. yes, Saquist, i admit that those pictures do show what you claim. but i did not analyzed the width of the bolt, but the length. if you look at he explosion, and the radiated energy, you will see that is an accurate measuring point of what distance was the bolt from the ship right before it hit. and considering the length of the ship, 150 meters, the asteroid in TESB is way bigger than 4 meters. you don't need pixel measuring for that. can you accept that? the bolt is at least half the ship, when you look right at the beginning of the film and you see the other bolts from a distance. then you go to TESB and you see an asteroid hit by approximate the same bolt,fired from approximate the same area of the ship. don't need a genious for that, just picture by picture analysis. what do you get? not a 4 meter asteroid. as i said before, what reason would they have to fire on a four meter asteroid? seriously now, your opinion on this. what reason do you think they could have? dose it make logic to you?

And so because you are unable to defeat the arguments we present, you proceed to attack us, stating in no uncertain terms that we "do not care about the truth"...

Pathetic George... seriously pathetic. Either debate like a man, or go home to mom. Stop acting like a child and throwing a tantrum when you're numbers are torn to shreds, alright?

[Kittamaru]

there is NO such thing as any "chain reaction" mentioned, ANYWHERE. ANYWHERE! you have absolutely nothing for that statement. and get the concept of NOTHING in your head.

Prove to me there was no chain reaction.

Cite me anything, from the books or the movies, that show it was done through pure energetic forces.

Go on, do it.

I'm waiting...

[Kittamaru]

again you prove no understanding of the matter. when they say that, it means that a part of the mass is trowed IN hyperspace, quite literally. hyperspace is a tachyonic environment, and when the planets explodes it creates small singularities that act like instantaneous hyperdrives and throw some of the mass into the environment of hyperspace.

sure, well if ignorance and the lack of understanding would be funny, the only ones remaining on debate would be you and your friends, who wouldn't understand why were laughing our shit out and dieing from the lack of oxygen.

Wow... the scientific fail here is astronomical...

You cannot be accelerated INTO hyperspace, period. To do so would violate relativity and, unless the pieces of the planet have some sort of "temporal shielding" or a "mass lightening field" or some other techno-babble to prevent it, they would reach infinite mass and thus stop in their tracks. Yes, ships do it all the time - they have equipment ON BOARD to circumvent the laws of physics... pieces of an exploding planet DO NOT.

Oh, and a "small singularity" would not act like a Hyperdrive... how'd you pull that one outa your ass?

*facepalm*

[George1]

And so because you are unable to defeat the arguments we present, you proceed to attack us, stating in no uncertain terms that we "do not care about the truth"...

well you and Belive pretty obvious don't give a dam.

Pathetic George... seriously pathetic. Either debate like a man, or go home to mom. Stop acting like a child and throwing a tantrum when you're numbers are torn to shreds, alright?

as far as this goes, i don't give a fuck what you think about me or the numbers, cuz i have supported them and brought proof, that you deny and throw away.
just get lost, i am done with you, all you do now is "bla bla bla, i am right cuz i denied it so you lose and your a kid and i'm mister perfect so i'll take on your grammar and tell you your a kid.." just get lost already or admit defeat.

[Kittamaru]

well you and Belive pretty obvious don't give a dam.


as far as this goes, i don't give a fuck what you think about me or the numbers, cuz i have supported them and brought proof, that you deny and throw away.
just get lost, i am done with you, all you do now is "bla bla bla, i am right cuz i denied it so you lose and your a kid and i'm mister perfect so i'll take on your grammar and tell you your a kid.." just get lost already or admit defeat.

No, you haven't. You haven't supported anything, you cry "foul" every time you are proven wrong, your ICS has been torn to shreds with the HIGHEST CANNON (on screen) evidence (which you deny), and to top it off your grammar and your spelling still makes me want to smack you upside the head with a fourth grade English textbook...

I'm sorry, but as far as participants in this debate go, you are about on level with Ricrery - not as annoying or insulting as he is, but you know far far less about either side you are debating...

[Kittamaru]

no, hes a guy with a proven degree in science, and is more you are. obviously you have zero intention of reading his site, or listening to evidence, or watch the movies for that matter, so by by, you have proven yourself to be nobody but an average trekkie who has no idea on the real matter.

Again, a silly little appeal to authority fallacy...

Tell me something, George - if a federal judge said it was okay for a man to play with your penis, would that actually make it okay, despite the fact he was in a position of authority?

If a doctor told you you had a broken arm, despite the fact that nothing was wrong with it, would that make it broken?

No? These are examples to prove a point.

Further...

If an astrophysicist tried to give you psychological counseling, would you take it?

What if someone with a doctorate in education attempted to show you how to build a nuclear reactor? Would you trust them?

For your sake, I hope not.

Just because someone is a "figure of authority", it does NOT mean they are QUALIFIED to speak about anything and everything as though they are masters.

Again, science fiction IS NOT astrophysics. PERIOD. Thus, that degree means JACK SHIT.

I cannot comprehend how you fail to understand such a simple and obviously true statement...

[George1]

You cannot be accelerated INTO hyperspace, period. To do so would violate relativity and, unless the pieces of the planet have some sort of "temporal shielding" or a "mass lightening field" or some other techno-babble to prevent it, they would reach infinite mass and thus stop in their tracks. Yes, ships do it all the time - they have equipment ON BOARD to circumvent the laws of physics... pieces of an exploding planet DO NOT.

no, its just impossible in real physics, this is ScyFy. ships have all kind of techno-babble (interestingly that you use them, since ST practically invented that) because they have people on board. they do no ACCELERATE, they are absorbed into the singularity and into hyperspace, and no further information is available to happens to it further. it probably is annihilated just as hypermatter is when constrained in real space, since the two matters are on the opposite side of the speed limit, they would act alike when constrained in the other' environment. so before jumping to conclusions, do some research. and i compared the singularity to a hyperdrive because they both "push" normal matter into hyperspace, a thing you failed to understand.

[Kittamaru]

no, its just impossible in real physics, this is ScyFy. ships have all kind of techno-babble (interestingly that you use them, since ST practically invented that) because they have people on board. they do no ACCELERATE, they are absorbed into the singularity and into hyperspace, and no further information is available to happens to it further. it probably is annihilated just as hypermatter is when constrained in real space, since the two matters are on the opposite side of the speed limit, they would act alike when constrained in the other' environment. so before jumping to conclusions, do some research. and i compared the singularity to a hyperdrive because they both "push" normal matter into hyperspace, a thing you failed to understand.

wow... just ... just shut up okay?

Even science fiction has physics... why do you think that ships in Star Wars have to protect themselves from the effects of kinetic energy (inertia), time-dilation, and other forces? Why do you think they jump to "hyperspace" as opposed to going to lightspeed in realspace?

BECAUSE IT ISN'T POSSIBLE IN REALSPACE. Simple, right?

So, they use a piece of technobabble (read, NOT REAL) technology to jump to a dimension where they CAN go to lightspeed (and beyond).

Cool, no problem there.

HOWEVER, they also have to contend with the effects of relativity (as evidenced by the one book in which someone went faster than light without temporal shielding and experienced rapid aging).

THUS, an object reaching the speed of light would still experience the infinite mass issue, and be incapable of actually REACHING the speed of light.

Thus, none of the planet could have POSSIBLY been thrown "into hyperspace".

I hope I didn't hurt your brain with the quick physics lesson, as it's obvious you've NEVER taken a physics class before in your life.

Now, I have to go to work, because that's what us "big boys" do George... do yourself a favor and do some damn research of your own before you make yourself look like a bigger fool...

[Believe]

I actually did read Wong's stuff, but I dont think you did, or at least you didn't understand it.

Everying that I have said is based on numbers from SW canon. You cannot deny a canon number. Everything else is just simple extrapolation (also numbers, which don't lie). The actual quote is: " Its main reactor could annihilate up to 40,000 tons of hypermatter fuel per second, producing at maximum 3.6 × 10^24 watts of power" This is pulled from the "Star Wars Incredible Cross Sections" book, which is canon.

Wong however bases his calculations on subjective assumtions that he makes. These assuptions are HIGHLY CONTENTIOUS because the are subjective, unprovable, and unreliable. Almost no one but you agrees with him completely. His calculations may be correct, but he started with the wrong data to make them so they are wrong.

My calcuations start from the ground up. To deny them is to reveal your own lack of math skills. I make no assumptions. All the data points to the death star blowing the planet up with a better mechanism then just brute force.

Just because you don't get it, doesn't mean I'm wrong. At this point your like a parrot. You can repeat what others have said but you don't understand what you are saying.

Which brings me back to the more you talk, the more you disprove/discredit yourself.

[George1]

the "obviously true statement..." you made makes bull-crap of a sense. an astrophysicist has no influenced in psychology, and Saxton didn't said nothing about any psychology. a doctor learns biology and chemistry, not physics.
the correlations you made have no sense whatsoever.

and despite scyfy not being astrophysicist, astrophysicist can be used to describe the scyfy like the destruction of alderaan cuz it explains this kind of energies, which any way would be universal.

Suspension of Disbelief means to put aside the fact that it is a story, and threat it as if it would be real, using real science to try to understand it. obviously this would throw out half of Star Trek and Star Wars, but as Star Trek is supposed to be the scientifically accurate show, it just show how stupid it is. all of ST relies of stupid, ignorant, techno-babble that is pretty much just stuff said in a way to make you think it science.

you fail again to make any dam sense or to understand anything of what i said. so by.

[Believe]

I understand what you've said perfectly, it's wrong. Math doesn't lie.

[George1]

I understand what you've said perfectly, it's wrong. Math doesn't lie.

if you understand, then you have to understand that math is an exact science, and ALWAYS has to be right in the numbers, even if the real that its describing phenomena isn't always the same again and again, while math is gives always the exact same thing.

the DS, by math, would need a tank 9.6 times its size, which contradicts what we saw in the movies, and every schematic.

now, by considering that a 8 km asteroid released 100,000 gigatone and made a 10 km wide crater, the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event crater of Chicxulub, calculate the amout of energy required to completely obliterate the planet into pieces. the come back with the results, and if its not 8,000 years of solar output, then i admit defeat. until then, i don't. i don't get discouraged with plain math, but i do get convinced when plain math is used in correlation with physics and astrophysics, that both Wong and Saxton proved to have a wast understanding of. i admit i do not got ALL of what they said, but i did understand their calculation. i myself admit would not be able to do them, but being unable to do them dose not mean i can't understand them. now Wong made his calculations based on known science, and i believe him, cuz it has math and proof from the ICS that you admitted is canon, and Saxton also made the calculation, and he has a doctorate in astrophysics from the University of Sydney.
appeal to authority as Kit puts it, is applicable here cuz they DO HAVE authority in this kind of stuff. and they never made on other stuff that they don't have ideas on, like psychology. they stick to what they have authority upon, like these kind of stuff.

[Believe]

Are kidding me? It always has to have the right numbers? You effetivly just said that if I say 2+2=10 I'm right. Is Saxton's calculations are about distruction from the outside in, not the inside out. They do not take pressure into account at all. Just full vaporization. Even in the origal release the explosion has chuncks, which would not be there is the planet was fully vaporized as in Saxton's equations.

BTW if you cannot do the math that means that you don't understand it.

[George1]

Are kidding me? It always has to have the right numbers? You effetivly just said that if I say 2+2=10 I'm right. Is Saxton's calculations are about distruction from the outside in, not the inside out. They do not take pressure into account at all. Just full vaporization. Even in the origal release the explosion has chuncks, which would not be there is the planet was fully vaporized as in Saxton's equations.

they do not state full vaporization. 2+2=10 is am incorrect equation, and therefore useless. but if you prove that the equations you do are correct, then i can state your right. as for Saxton, you can see in frame 6 and 7 of this pictures that the outer crust dose begin to be vaporized before the big blast itself.
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a2...K/bd727c36.jpg

BTW if you cannot do the math that means that you don't understand it.

no, the inability to do them dose not make you incapable of understanding them. some retarded people are geniuses in math but they don't really understand them, or just don't show that they can. i saw once a guy who made exact calculation in his head about what day of the week would a said date would be, but that dose not make his Einstein for he doubtfully understand the complex math behind it; his brain simply puled them ou, and when checked, they were extremely precise. just as such i can understand the math, but not actually being able to do it.

[Believe]

If you show you exactly what I did would you get it? I will if you think you'll get it. It's not actually that hard.

[Believe]

For anyone else watching I'll do this anyway.

Lets start with the output of the hypermatter reactor. It's 3.6 × 10^24 watts per second for 40,000 tons (1 ton is 1000kg so 40,000,000kg) of hypermatter or 9x10^16 watts per kilogram per second.

The suns output is about 3.846×10^26 watts per second. Dividing this by the result above gives you 4,273,333,333 kg of hypermatter required to equal the output of the sun per second.

There are 31,536,000 seconds per year giving 1.3476384x10^17 kg of hyper matter per year. 8000 years worth is 1.07811072x10^21 kg of hypermatter for 8000 years of the suns output. This number is already ridiculous.

Now for the volume. According to canon the original death star is 120km in diameter, or 60km in radius. The volume of a sphere is given by (4/3) x pi x radius^3. In this case if the death stars internal volume is about 904,778.6842 km^3. The conversion to m^3 is 1 km^3 = 1,000,000,000 m^3 it is about 9.047786842x10^14 m^3 in volume which is impressive.

Now, hypermatter has to take up space. In this case I am using the density uranium because it is one of the densest things that we know of. It is 19.1 g/m^3 or 19,100kg/m^3. Taking the amount of hypermatter required and dividing it by this gives you its volume which is 5.644558743x10^16 m^3.

The final number is 62.38607122 death star volumes worth of hypermatter for one shot.

Funny thing is that this is WAY MORE THEN I SAID BEFORE. I must have messed it up in my calculator last time or it's from rounding errors. No errors this time however, I double checked it and did not round to make sure.

Kind of takes the wind out of your sails, don't it?