Star Wars vs Star Trek

[Kittamaru]

blah blah

You yourself said that we are utilizing suspension of disbelief - prove to me the asteroids in ESB weren't made of, say, gumdrops. Or that the asteroidal moon the Ent-D was trying to move was made of, say, pure adamantium.

You see why your argument falls flat? It's STUPID and allows for STUPID assumptions... granted, it's the only way you can get your power levels where you want them, but you can't play the game and change the rules for each side just because you don't like it*shrugs*

Oh, and he did provide the calcs, pages ago, during your, ahem, absence.

[Kittamaru]

yes,YES,YES! it works Kit, thanks a lot. finally!

no problem - being a CNIT major, it's what I do

[George1]

mind saying the page with the cals? there's a lot of pages to search for, so just tell which one he provided them.

his is sci-fy.data is scared, and when making a statement that "that's made out of that" you have to bring in "but it might be made out of that,and therefor..." and so on. got what im saying?

take the hypermatter issue i had with Belive:
he keep using uranium as the highest possible figure for the density of hypermatter. one of the main issues here is that hypermatter is an exotic material. just comparing it to uranium doesn't work. the heaviest atomic element ever recorded was not uranium. its called ununoctium, or element 118, and its the very last in the periodic table. so what stops hypermatter from being as heavy, or heavier, as ununoctium?

see where i'm getting? you can not get a precise calculation out of sci-fy, and apparently many think and want complete calculations with complete data. kit, how would you discover what an asteroid is made out, with nothing but some short inaccurate shots of it? you can find out what energy is required to blow it up depending on the material it's made out of,but you don't know what's it made out of. so in your calculations you have to include variables like "if its made out of X, then bla bla bla, but if its made out of Y or Z, bla bla..."!

[Saquist]

interesting. every ship has the firepower of at least a few megatons nukes. so destroying 70% of Earth's surface (with no definition of destroying; turned to lava, just blown up) with apparently millions of ships...interesting.
what series is it again?

This is a Reflex Canon from the Series Robotech: The Macross Saga.
(If you didn't know they are making a movie version staring Tobey McGuire)

Look closely at it George. That coast line shot of the metropolis is around 50 city blocks and the blast radius covered the whole thing and when off the screen...that's like 10 to 20 miles in diameter. While you can't truly tell the fire power from the blast radius the fact the fireball itself was as big as the city when the shot was only a couple of miles wide is...staggering.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7TG9KKweQM
This is the SDF-1's main gun firing for the first time.
The Enemy ships are typically Miles long becuase the Zentradi are 50 ft Giants. Reflex weaponry is ridiculously powerful. The Main Gun can hit one target directly and completely destroy it while nearby targets are disintegrated as is with the video above and the first video.

But even this series wasn't realistic with the firepower.
After the Holocaust there should have been a long decades long nuclear winter and it never happened.

It's a GREAT classic series in english version. I Highly recommend it.

Robotech consist of these three series
The Macross Saga: Which you saw clips of
The Robotech Masters: After the Holocaust
The Invid Invasion:

[George1]

i don't get into these kind of anime. i find them totally not entertaining, but that's just me.
any way, indeed, the beam has a firepower of several VERY big nukes. "Little Boy" was between 13 and 18 kilotons, and it didn't destroy a single city. it seriously damage it, but compared to the explosions seen in that vid, i say every beam is close, if not well withing, the gigaton range. the blasts are even visible from orbit.
still, what is nature of the weapons? cuz the closeups of the explosion shows they are kind of like thermonuclear. some kind of high-energy particle cannon? what are they called?

[Saquist]

i don't get into these kind of anime. i find them totally not entertaining, but that's just me.
any way, indeed, the beam has a firepower of several VERY big nukes. "Little Boy" was between 13 and 18 kilotons, and it didn't destroy a single city.

Indeed the blast radius of those bombs were about a mile (The Fire ball was even smaller)

still, what is nature of the weapons? cuz the closeups of the explosion shows they are kind of like thermonuclear. some kind of high-energy particle cannon? what are they called?

Reflex weapons and Reflex Technology is derived from Protoculture, an extremely power biological power source. That's why the were no ionizing radiation effects from the bombardment of Earth. The Effect of the blast will of course vary on distance. But as usual the first thing you experience is the shock wave. In one of the scenes the cloud layer is blown away before there is even a blast. There is some discontinuity with the close up effect. I think the humans had the most powerful canons the SDF-1 Main Gun and the ground based Grand Canyon. The Zentradi weapons were likely less powerful. Still it as amazing they did with animation in the 80's.

[George1]

Indeed the blast radius of those bombs were about a mile (The Fire ball was even smaller)

Reflex weapons and Reflex Technology is derived from Protoculture, an extremely power biological power source. That's why the were no ionizing radiation effects from the bombardment of Earth. The Effect of the blast will of course vary on distance. But as usual the first thing you experience is the shock wave. In one of the scenes the cloud layer is blown away before there is even a blast. There is some discontinuity with the close up effect. I think the humans had the most powerful canons the SDF-1 Main Gun and the ground based Grand Canyon. The Zentradi weapons were likely less powerful. Still it as amazing they did with animation in the 80's.

yeah, that thing the humans used was the mother of all ground base superweapons! it was ridiculously large! where the fuck do you get a beam that size!

[George1]

any fun loving of person has to listen to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NynQu...eature=related

[Kittamaru]

George - I don't know off hand which page the calcs were on - you'd have to ask Saquist - been too many pages since

[TW Scott]

You yourself said that we are utilizing suspension of disbelief - prove to me the asteroids in ESB weren't made of, say, gumdrops. Or that the asteroidal moon the Ent-D was trying to move was made of, say, pure adamantium.

Alright. Here it is, it's called the rest of canon. In the novelizations and EU the Asteroid field near the HOth system is known to have high percentages of the componenets that make durarmor.

In St they were describes as common asteroid composed of sillicas and low concentration of ferrous substances.

You see why your argument falls flat? It's STUPID and allows for STUPID assumptions... granted, it's the only way you can get your power levels where you want them, but you can't play the game and change the rules for each side just because you don't like it*shrugs*

No, my method requires only that you judge with your eyes the scenes as they are shot. Those things we fully understand stand as is, and those that make little sense we must assume tha they have developed the technology to take care of it. This helps ST far more often than SW.

Oh, and he did provide the calcs, pages ago, during your, ahem, absence.

Really? His first calmis of posting the calculations including all the formula were made WHILE I WAS ACTIVE. He blew off several people who pointed out that he posted nothing. Then he claims he has despite nobody being able to find his equations.

[George1]

ok,Saquist, do you know the page with your calculations? if not, can you post them again?

[fedr808]

wow, page 1131... wasnt there a website that did a news article about the whole star wars vs. star trek and linked to this thread?

[George1]

don't know, but SW wins anyway!
see:

[George1]

i just have to say this, because i just remembered something!
the asteroid in Pegasus. it was hollow! right? so it takes the entire photon torpedo output of the Enterprise to blow it up? i remember the enterprise had almost 300 torpedoes, so what figure do we get for each torpedo if almost 300 of them are needed to blow destroy a hollow asteroid? by using Wong's calculations, the asteroid is about 5 km large. what dose this show?

[Kittamaru]

Alright. Here it is, it's called the rest of canon. In the novelizations and EU the Asteroid field near the HOth system is known to have high percentages of the componenets that make durarmor.

In St they were describes as common asteroid composed of sillicas and low concentration of ferrous substances.

You will, of course, provide references from both, from high-cannon sources, correct? After all, the EU makes a lot of claims that, as we have seen time and again, are bullshit.

No, my method requires only that you judge with your eyes the scenes as they are shot. Those things we fully understand stand as is, and those that make little sense we must assume tha they have developed the technology to take care of it. This helps ST far more often than SW.

So we assume that, despite the fact that the laws of the universe are consistently broken, they must still be applied to other things that we don't yet understand? That makes so much sense! Wait, no it doesn't... you cannot subjectively apply or discard modern theories in sci-fi when, and where, it suits you.

Really? His first calmis of posting the calculations including all the formula were made WHILE I WAS ACTIVE. He blew off several people who pointed out that he posted nothing. Then he claims he has despite nobody being able to find his equations.

1) I saw the math, multiple times, including the autocad and scene analysis posts - they're there. It's on you to find them (though I reckon you skipped them on purpose) and understand them - maybe if you ask nicely, he'll repost them for you (to, I'm sure, ignore again)

[Kittamaru]

i just have to say this, because i just remembered something!
the asteroid in Pegasus. it was hollow! right? so it takes the entire photon torpedo output of the Enterprise to blow it up? i remember the enterprise had almost 300 torpedoes, so what figure do we get for each torpedo if almost 300 of them are needed to blow destroy a hollow asteroid? by using Wong's calculations, the asteroid is about 5 km large. what dose this show?

The problem in Pegasus is just that - the asteroid is hollow. In a vacuum, energy transfers very, very poorly (which is why explosions in space are, well, not explosions). Detonate a photon in one cavern of that asteroid, against one wall, and you'd effect just that - that one wall and maybe the material directly adjacent. It wouldn't have much, if any, effect on material not touching said wall.

Think of it like conducting heat through something - what conducts it better - a dense, solid metal structure, or a highly porous silicon structure? Composition and construction are incredibly important in things like this - unfortunately, people like Wang and Saxton latch only onto the fact of "OH LOLS, it's not that big and they can't blow it up from the inside ROFL", without bothering to look even the slightest bit deeper.

[Saquist]

The asteroid was massive and that was just a fissure...we also don't know it's composition

[George1]

The problem in Pegasus is just that - the asteroid is hollow. In a vacuum, energy transfers very, very poorly (which is why explosions in space are, well, not explosions). Detonate a photon in one cavern of that asteroid, against one wall, and you'd effect just that - that one wall and maybe the material directly adjacent. It wouldn't have much, if any, effect on material not touching said wall.

except that photon torpedoes are supposed to have megatone yields. i saw that claim over and over. the thing is, the asteroid was hollow. so even with what you said in mind, it still makes 300 torpedoes ridiculous, unless they are have a low yield.

Think of it like conducting heat through something - what conducts it better - a dense, solid metal structure, or a highly porous silicon structure? Composition and construction are incredibly important in things like this -

except that we are talking about destruction of the asteroid. conductivity has nothing to do with this really.

unfortunately, people like Wang and Saxton latch only onto the fact of "OH LOLS, it's not that big and they can't blow it up from the inside ROFL", without bothering to look even the slightest bit deeper.

except that attack one think: the claim that trek weapons are stronger. the seismic torpedo is quite a common and easy to obtain weapon. two or three of them would annihilate that asteroid. yet here it is,the enterprise D needing its entire torpedo payload to blow it up. that says a lot about both the yield and effectiveness of the photon torpedo. first, even if its completely ineffective and releases its "explosion" in all directions it would still have a major impact on the asteroid, if we were to take after former claims from various trekkies about the torpedoes being super strong. the 300 torpedoes statement, coming from someone who would know these kind of things, shows that claim to be greatly exaggerated! second, if the yield is indeed that strong as it was former claimed, then it show that a lot of energy is lost in the blast, otherwise less than half that payload would be needed.
for your information, Wong made the calculation based both on a metallic asteroid,and a granite one, which is the correct thing to do as far as i am concerned, and it doesn't show a yield more than 120 kilotones. i saw claims about it being 100 megatones from some trekkies on the internet.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/...&Submit=Submit
this is the page with Wong's statements.
i have yet to see Wong's or Saxton's calculations being falsified, and i have yet to see Saquist calculations.
so until you prove that Riker was referring to the torpedoes as being put on the lowest yield or something like that, his quote proves without question that to put out some 130 megatones, that's how much it would take to destroy a metallic asteroid, the federation needs some 300 photon torpedoes, proving that trek ships don't have the awesome firepower claimed to have.

[George1]

The asteroid was massive and that was just a fissure...we also don't know it's composition

a fissure? the Enterprise was able to enter it quite comfortably. there were also other "fissures", that actually made it unstable. also, Wong's calculations include variables: for a metallic asteroid, or a granite like one. so the statement stands.

[Kittamaru]

except that photon torpedoes are supposed to have megatone yields. i saw that claim over and over. the thing is, the asteroid was hollow. so even with what you said in mind, it still makes 300 torpedoes ridiculous, unless they are have a low yield.
except that we are talking about destruction of the asteroid. conductivity has nothing to do with this really.

except that attack one think: the claim that trek weapons are stronger. the seismic torpedo is quite a common and easy to obtain weapon. two or three of them would annihilate that asteroid. yet here it is,the enterprise D needing its entire torpedo payload to blow it up. that says a lot about both the yield and effectiveness of the photon torpedo. first, even if its completely ineffective and releases its "explosion" in all directions it would still have a major impact on the asteroid, if we were to take after former claims from various trekkies about the torpedoes being super strong. the 300 torpedoes statement, coming from someone who would know these kind of things, shows that claim to be greatly exaggerated! second, if the yield is indeed that strong as it was former claimed, then it show that a lot of energy is lost in the blast, otherwise less than half that payload would be needed.
for your information, Wong made the calculation based both on a metallic asteroid,and a granite one, which is the correct thing to do as far as i am concerned, and it doesn't show a yield more than 120 kilotones. i saw claims about it being 100 megatones from some trekkies on the internet.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/...&Submit=Submit
this is the page with Wong's statements.
i have yet to see Wong's or Saxton's calculations being falsified, and i have yet to see Saquist calculations.
so until you prove that Riker was referring to the torpedoes as being put on the lowest yield or something like that, his quote proves without question that to put out some 130 megatones, that's how much it would take to destroy a metallic asteroid, the federation needs some 300 photon torpedoes, proving that trek ships don't have the awesome firepower claimed to have.

Heh, let me ask you something - if Slave 1 was trapped inside that asteroid, and set off a Seismic Charge like we saw in the movies - what do you suppose would happen to the Slave 1?

It'd be blown to bits, quite simply.

I highly, HIGHLY doubt the Ent-D could launch a volley of full-intensity photon torpedoes in such close quarters without suffering ill effects. Now, as to why they didn't just "phaser bore" their way out, who knows - bad writing perhaps, though that doesn't fly in a debate scenario.