Star Wars vs Star Trek

Discussion in 'SciFi & Fantasy' started by Pollux V, May 9, 2002.

?

Which universe would win?

  1. Star Trek

    227 vote(s)
    35.5%
  2. Star Wars

    268 vote(s)
    41.9%
  3. Spaceballs

    47 vote(s)
    7.3%
  4. Farscape

    12 vote(s)
    1.9%
  5. Dune

    50 vote(s)
    7.8%
  6. Stargate

    36 vote(s)
    5.6%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    They creat an actual gravity field. Oddly the projected field is come shaped and of one coruscant gravity 1.1G An Interdictor ahs four projectors however they all fire forwards only and their range is determined by home many generators are used at once.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    TW SCOTT
    I concur. It has to be. No mention of the Xindi or such as the florida cataclysm or the mention of Enterprise NX it'self. The very nature of the show's temporal plot daggers the point that the Trek universe has been altered by interference in the Timeline.

    What does the term kilo ton and mega ton refer to....A relase of energy?

    This has been negated by the prevailing use of physics to explain what doesn't make sense in physics. How can an answered by found this way?

    I'll repeat incase you're not literate in written English. Apparently you think I can't follow an equation. I said. your equations aren't canon.

    Would you like to explain how the word canon fits into your equations if you made up all the varriables? I"ll save you the time...They don't.

    Your equations aren't reliable be cause the variables we subject to your perceptions not facts. Hense...you're wasting your time trying to find the truth in fiction.

    REALY?!! IS that CANNON....?THINK CAREFULLY BECAUSE I WILL PROVE YOU WRONG INSTANTLY WITH MY NEXT POST. And we will see whose delusions have sway and you will have proven you are ignorant of ALL THINGS TREK.

    canon is your concern not mine. But seeing as you've already uttered the epitome of "errors on high" I'm going to sit back and watch your next post.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2007
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    TW Scott:

    If that is the case, then I do believe this would impact Warp's performance. Warp depends on being able to bend space time and it cannot do so in normal gravity, it seems. After all, ships don't warp out of planets.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Actually we can agree here.

    Kiloton and Megaton refer to the equivalent amount of TNT exploded. Little Boy and Fat Man were each roughly equicalnet to 20,000 tons of Dynamite.

    Physics is just a way of explaining what we have observed. Obviously if we suspend our disbelief then we can use what we know of physics to approximate what we saw. Besides vaporizing an asteroid is pretty straight forward. It is actually quite possible if you have the power to acheive it.

    So? And you opinion means what? Oh that's right, nothing. I have based my equations of of direct observation and sound scientific principles. Since they do not conflict with the canon numbers in certain manuals then they hold true.

    How did I make up anything? We all saw the Ship vaprize asteroids of 10m, 20m, 40m all the way up to 50m radii. I was simply giving a low end benchmark based of some common material that were quated as being in the Asteroid book by later novels. The rest was standard heat formula.

    They are the facts of that universe and the principles of physics we adhere to, your continued arguments are pointless. You'll find no support even among the die hard Trekkies. The methodology is flawless, and arguing agianst it just weakens your own position.

    The Defiant class gunship is the fastest of the Mas produced Federation vessels. Certain test vessels of the Federation are faster yes, but these are experiment. Currently the Defiant class has an impulse top end that approaches the same propagation speed of phasers .9875c, however the crew suffers from temporal distortion as the Temporal Drive Coils cannot quite keep up. The Defiant also has a higher top end Warp factor of any other series. It can actually sustain Warp 9.999 for longer period than any mass produced vessel the Federation currently has. Certain test vessels and alternate reality vessels have a higher Warps, but are still also only in the test stages.

    Oh, what was my error on high? Actually correcting your misconception?
     
  8. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Yeah, but I think that has more to do with the atmosphere than the gravity.
     
  9. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    TW Scott:

    Hmmmm.

    Gravity acts on space warps, no? That is how space is normally warped according to Einstein and such, yes? Therefore, it would seem that gravity wells would impact the ability to properly warp space - which means no propulsion under Warp.

    The atomsphere would only confound the issue owing to friction and movement and such. But the Enterprise can go through thick nebulae with no problems, as far as I am aware.
     
  10. Hotspur Registered Member

    Messages:
    51
    Incorrect. One watt equals one joule per second. If you would like, you can corroborate this statement by visiting either dictionary.com or the University of North Carolina website.

    And regardless of your claims about Paramount Studios, the Star Trek episodes have asserted multiple times that the Enterprise’s phaser banks, even those of the NX-01, could produce terawatts of energy (that’s terajoules per second).


    Comparing various science fiction technologies under the context of disbelief suspension is markedly different from reaching a valid scientific conclusion under the context of disbelief suspension. The latter is simply not possible for two reasons:

    1) None of the phenomenon is repeatable under controlled settings.

    2) Far too many assumptions and arbitrary data go into the calculations.


    Hmmm…would you mind demonstrating mathematically how my calculations are “way off?”


    As I explained previously, the torpedo created a visible fireball roughly 300 km across, not a mere flash of light.



    Many of my assumptions are likely flawed, as are yours. We’re both engaging in much conjecture and speculation concerning phenomena that are not repeatable under controlled settings. However, the fact remains: my proof is every bit as valid as yours, even by your stated requirements.



    It’s quite brief when one considers that planetary destruction of such a magnitude would require “thousands of ships with more firepower” than Han Solo had ever witnessed.



    I disagree. As I explained earlier, special effects are limited by both technological and financial constraints, but dialogue is not. As George Lucas stated after release of TPM, he postponed creating the second trilogy because effects technology had not yet caught up with the scenes his mind was envisioning. In fact, special effects limitations constantly hampered Star Trek TOS, creating great confusion over things as simple as phaser beams; often times, they would emanate from the sensor dome underneath the primary hull, while other times they would shoot out from the area just above the sensor dome. Even the appearance of a phaser shot was inconsistent.

    Language and dialogue, however, have no such constraints. They aren't infallible, by any means. But they do allow a writer to express his meaning more precisely.

    And it’s been stated numerous times in the Star Trek universe that the Enterprise is capable of leveling an entire planet. The characters treat this power as a very real threat, not once intimating that it’s merely a bluff, and normally, over the course of an episode, bluff and exaggerations are exposed as such (Scotty’s time estimates; the Corbanite maneuver; Riker’s poker exploits; etc.). And let’s be honest here. Do you really expect the Enterprise to destroy an entire planet? That would be extremely incongruous with the established behaviors of the characters. C’mon!


    You’re forgetting two points here:

    1) Torpedo yields can be adjusted. In Star Trek V, Kirk tells Sulu to “listen carefully” before giving him the order to launch a torpedo onto the planet’s surface. We never hear the actual conversation, but we can reasonably assume that Kirk is telling Sulu to remove the torpedo warhead entirely and allow a simple kinetic discharge. This seems to be the only viable explanation because, as you’ve already conceded, photon torpedoes are capable of traveling at .99c, and given the short distance between Kirk and the point of impact, the entire landing party would’ve been incinerated had the torpedo been traveling at almost the speed of light, even without a warhead. Ergo, the warhead was probably removed and the torpedo was likely slowed to a few hundred meters per second.

    2) The “god creature” emerged from a hole beneath the planet surface. We have no way of gauging the depth of the hole, but we do know that there was a momentary pause between the torpedoes appearance and the explosion.



    I disagree. We engage in these discussions because they’re entertaining, but there is no single right or wrong answer. This is akin to debating literary criticism. Any opinions supported by textual evidence are valid, even if they conflict.
     
  11. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Try MIT or Georgia tech 1 watt second = 1 joule. Joules are not measured in seconds, watts however are.

    No, again you are mistaken they say they can produce terajoules, but they never say in what amount of time.

    1) heating an object is repeatable any time you want.

    2) Arbitrary? I am basing everything on canon.

    FIrst you are saying the fireball is as big as the bright flash of light. Very common mistake among the undereducated.

    The visiable flash of light was 300 km, the fireball was much smaller and lost in that flash.

    No, you are cherry picking your data. You chose one istance of a torpedo with a 300km flash and ignoring the one is Final Frontier that wasn't even 50 meters or all the once that impact on shields and make similair fireballs. or the ones in Wrath of Kahn that barely make 20 meter fireballs.

    At least i am consistant, I chose the asteroid destruction scenes in Empire Strikes Back. I used canon info and created a asteroid much smaller than the ones we saw and I assumed they were of the materials later novels claim they are (minus the traces of nuetronium)

    True, but han was only the Captain of a spice Freigheter and before that served on an Imperial customs frigate. The reason for the required power is that major worlds like Alderaan had Planetary shield you could drop Luna on and they would vaporize Luna.

    Okay do you not get the point that for the purpose of this conversation that they are not considered special effects? For the purposes of this conversation the visuals are the rule. Dialog takes a back seat and the consideration of bad special effects never even crosses our mind. For this conversation Transporters work, blaster hit targets and literally make part of them explode, warp drives function, and hyperspace is real. Out side of this converstaion it is back to reality

    Dialog is by it's vary nature fallible. People make mistakes. We through dialog out the window when it is contradicted by visuals.

    Leveling a planet and destroying it are two vastly different things. Have enough convential explosives and you can level the surface. Blowing it apart is another thing entirely. Even when the Romulans and Cardassians sent a fleet of ships to the Founder homeworld, there 60 plus ships could only level 30 percent of the crust with a full spread of pahsers, diruptors, plasma torpedos, and ionic torpedos. Any one of this would have crushed the older Enterprise 1701 with no effort.


    1)) First of all we did not hear the order. Second If you were facing a being that could possibly destroy your crew and were any sort of a leader would you call for a gimped torpedo or a full strike? So what if you and your two friends died, that is the mark of a true leader.

    2)) Even if the hole was relatively deep, which I doubt there was no real delay between ground strike and explosion. If the strike was in the tunnel, then any decent amount of power should have eiter created an instant magma pit or crater. Instead we see the effect of a 60mm mortar strike.
     
  12. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    How is this even a question?

    The Empire was able to build an energy cannon that could blow up a planet; that would require something on the order of 90,000 billion gigatons minimum. This alone shows that SW weapons technology and power generating ability are far, far beyond anything that the Federation ever imagined.
     
  13. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    Hmmm...that means theres been little evidence of Megaton explosive in Trek and virutally none in normal Star Wars tech. "just by Observation"

    And you don't have the facts to back up the calculations.

    Your observations are irrelevant to the canon you hold so dear.

    So in other words you're making up the varriables.
    Then you're assuming the Asteroid was vaporized without any canon proof.
    I can pull your stupid canon game too and I sure you "observations" will be on the Trek side.

    But please persist in unreason.

    I'm weak? because you're lying to the rest of us?...that's illogical. You're the one making up the variables

    I said before I would prove you wrong.
    Defiant is the slowest Federation vessel in the fleet. Intrepid, specificaly Voyager is the fastest Federation starship. Over three times faster than the Galaxy class starship.

    The evidence agaisnt you. Your canon has failed you. Or is it just arrogance? The following is the script for DS-9 The Sound of her Voice


    Read it and weap, Scott.

    Defiants speed is between Warp 8.5 and Warp 8.9

    So you're less reliable than what's canon....wouldn't it seem?
     
  14. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    Once again, there is a spectacular 90,000 billion gigaton explosion in SW. This shows that they have increadible weapons and power generating technology.

    The asteroids were clearly shown to be vaporized in the movie. One moment they were there, the next they were expanding balls of gas and light. If you don't think that the asteroids were vaporized, watch the movie again.
     
  15. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    Hello Nasor, I don't believe I've spoken to you before.
    You bring up the Death Star, why?

    You say clearly, but it's still debatable. Scott says the books are Canon. The books debate this observation. General Wedge Antillies executed a Base Delta Zero in Wedges Gambit of the New Jedi Order...

    The vessel: Lusankya Super Star Destroyer.
    Total fire power of the Main batteries and fighter defense.
    Effect: The forest and Vong around the main complex were burned to the ground.

    There was no vaporizing ever in the New Jedi Order book series by a Turbo Laser or fighter defense laser turret.

    This calls into question the observation of Empire Strikes Back.
     
  16. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    Because, like I said, it's proof that the SW universe has power generating abilities and weapons technology far, far beyond anything in the Federation. Anyone who can generate something like 10^32 watts has some seriously bad-ass technology.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2007
  17. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    Not really. Power doesn't judge techonology.
    I'm sure if the Federation built a moon size station It too would have the same capablities.

    You'd need to prove that the Federation wouldn't be capable of building such a station. It's not an evil organization bent on Galactic conquest.

    I find the Federation has the ability. The Genesis Device was a incredible piece of technology. I don't the Empire could concieve of such a weapon.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2007
  18. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Almost true on both counts. Star Trek rarely got above the dozens of kilotons and Star Wars consistantly showed much more in starship weaponry.

    Yes, I do starting from canon material books to scaling form visualizations. Then I run them through a very basic heating equation.

    mass*specific heat*temperature change=minimum energy needed

    They are completly relevant for this conversation.

    No, I reduced one variable in order to avoid accusation that my calculations were based on a perfectly solid sphere when the object was obviously oblong and irregular. The Asteroids were from 40 meters to 100 meters across and around half to full as tall and deep, so I provided a safe 10 meter radius sphere as each asteroid would be composed of at the very least two of them.

    Now looking at the visuals the Asteroids hit explosively vaporized turning into brilliant clouds of gas that cooled quickly. I don't know about your world but that fits the definition of vaporization on Earth,

    Well, we'll see who is unreasonable.

    What is funny is everybody else could see what I was doing. Creating a reasonable benchmark that people could look at and figure things out. The asteroids we see vaporized are form 40 meters to 10 meters in radius. I created an equation for a asteroid smaller than the one given and the Light Turbo Laser was still much more powerful that any weapon the federation has a chance of repelling.

    Leave it to you to cherry pick a bit of canon.

    Yes sustainable warp for long stretches of time for the Defiant is warp 8.9, a very impressive number once you consider that maximum sustainable warp for most ships is much much lower. Oh in case you are wonder Maximum sustainable warp is the speed the ship can safely move for long periods of time without straining structural integrity or power generation capabilities. So you are partially right.

    The top speeds for all current TNG models are in following format Ship type, Maximum sustainable warp, emergency warp (12 hours), maximum impulse. The source of this information is Paramount. Paramount also notes that many individual ships break these class benchmarks but rarely for more than a few hours.

    Akira Class, warp 7, warp 9.8, .5c
    Ambassador class, warp 7, warp 9.4, .25c
    Danube class, warp 4, warp 4.7, .25c
    Defiant class, warp 8.9, warp 9.982, .994c
    Excelsior class, warp 7, warp 9.4, .994c
    Galaxy class, warp 6, warp 9.6, .75c
    Intrepid, warp 7.5, warp 9.975, .8c
    Nebula, warp 6, warp 9.6, .994c
    New Orleans, warp 6, warp 9.98, .75c
    Norway class, warp 6.5, warp 9.7, .75c
    Nova class, warp 6, warp 8, .75c
    Saber class, warp 7, warp 9.8, .75c
    Sovereign class, warp 7, warp 9.7, .75c
    Steamrunner class, warp 6.6, warp 9.7, .75c

    As you can see the Intrepid does have the second highest sustainable warp speed but falls to third in maximum warp with the Defiant clearly in the lead and in maximum impulse she is in third as even the Excelsior class is faster than the Intrepid.

    Overall the Defiant is the clear winner in the speed department. She is first in sustainable warp, first in maximum warp, and ties with the Excelsior and Nebula for first in impulse speed. So obviously the little over powered boat is NOT the slowest ship in starfleet, but clearly the fastest.

    By the way for certain notes. the Enterprise D has a few times exceeded 9.9 but usually only for a few minutes and at great risk.


    Well I admit I was a bit off on speeds in my previous posts, but you proved that you were way off.
     
  19. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    He brings it up as nothing in Star Trek has performed a similiar feat. Not even Species 8472 when they blew up a borg world. The Death Star on it's lonesome destroyed a planet that had planetary shields that could protect them from falling moons.

    Two problems:
    1: Movie has higher canon than books. If someone in a book fired a turbolaser and failed to vaporize a humn, ESB trumps that. Rules of the game.
    2: Yuzhan Vong have shown remarkable ability to create energy absorbing and resistant organisms. Case in point the ampistaves that can block a lightsaber and the armor that can deflect light blasters.


    Again the movie is higher canon. Where Movie and books disagree, movie wins.
     
  20. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Doubtable. The Federation hasn't even managed to match the shielding and powerout puts of the Millenium Falcon and she is a modified Frieghter. One of their best warships (Galaxy class) is not even a contender against Slave-One.

    The Death Star manages to produce the power equivalent of 7000 years of sol's output every day from just the Hypermatter reactor dedicated to the Superlaser. It also creates 1 g gravity, particle shields. energy shields, powers for it hundreds of turbolaser emplacements, liffe support, power for the contragravity and ion engines, enough power to jump to hyperspace, and so on. This denotes a level of power generation unheard of in the Star trek universe.

    We don't have to prove they can't, you have to prove they can. It's not possible to prove a negative.


    And you're wrong, the Genesis device would be technology if it was reproduceble. It isn't only the two devices were ever produced and worked at all and the second had such disasterous results it could only be seen as a failure. Think of it, there is no further Genesis development, despite the Federation having all the notes and information. Why? Becuase young Doctor Marcus cheated and used a highly unstable catalyst that has unpredictable results. The Federation could not even use it as a weapon becuase the device itself is even more unstable than a warp core.
     
  21. Starduster3 Registered Member

    Messages:
    24
    Star Trek weapontry

    I do believe that there are better weapontry in other universes than in Star Trek, but you have to admit that for the human technology that exsist right now and what would develope from our technology in the future, that what the Enterprise 1701 through 1701-F has as weapons would more than likely not be must more sophisticated than we are seeing on these programs and movies. Do you not agree? As for one thing I have noticed that bugs me slightly about their shields, is that whenever they really need them, they fail, but they just about always seem to be able to pull power from somewhere to make them stronger. Why can't they just modify what they have while in a space dock to hold up better and then they wouldn't have as many problems with them? same with the weapons. you know? And whenever they get into a bind and there is someone on a planet or another ship and trouble starts, the transporter fails. What damn good is it if everytime something happens the stupid thing leaves them stranded? / Star Wars on the other hand doesn't have transporter technology so they have to depend on their ships to land on planets and other ships, which to me makes more since. Breaking down the molectular structure of a person or an object of any kind always seemed fancinating, but not very real. The name "Fazer" simply meant "space lazer". Did it not occur to any of these people writing these stories that a lazer would or should cut right through a bulkhead light butter given enough power. I mean look at the technology we have now. Lazers are here, but only in test modes. If they were to develope a lazer powerful enough to cut through a 2 foot piece of lead or steel in an oxygen atmospher, then with the use of it in a vaccum it should be even stronger, shouldn't it? And why not nuclear weapons as apposed to protons for torpedos? At least with a nuclear weapon we would know that if it hit something that it would do some serious damage and in the form of a missile, not a torpedo. What do you think?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    TW SCOTT
    You still haven't shown exact cannon variables.

    If reasonable means never admiting when you're wrong then I should inform Webster & Merriam that there definition is WAY OFF.

    [QUOTELeave it to you to cherry pick a bit of canon.

    ][/QUOTE]

    It is FUNNY. THAT's EXACTLY what I do. Like a farmer looking for ripe cherry. The perfectly sweet and juicey pick will never steer you wrong

    And 8.9 is not impressive. It is both top speed and max sustainable speed on any other ship in Star Fleet...save for Prometheus....There is a considerable distance between the two. Defiant thus is standing still on speed performance cause no ship is gonna have a problem sustaining 8.9.

    Big whooop...

    By the way...

    Those stats...are completely "un cannon"

    You're still wrong. Defiant isn't the fastest by any measure. But if you have to be right all the time, knock yourself out. You spouted more uncannon material since your speech on what's canon.

    Defiants top speed is 8.9 (sketchy) ie...you're in error.

    uncanon.

    sure it is. I just proved you can't speak the truth. I proved a negative. You...

    Two problems:
    1: Movie has higher canon than books. If someone in a book fired a turbolaser and failed to vaporize a humn, ESB trumps that. Rules of the game.
    2: Yuzhan Vong have shown remarkable ability to create energy absorbing and resistant organisms. Case in point the ampistaves that can block a lightsaber and the armor that can deflect light blasters.


    and reason has a higher reliablity than whats canon, not to mention numercialy it's in the books favor by all to one.

    If you'd be marching the canon path straight and true....I'd MIGHT agree with you...but you haven't and you haven't proven that logic and reason on your side either. In fact you've proven that the only thing that matters is...

    Your...variables
    Your...opinion
    Your...discretion
    Your...ruling

    You don't need mine or anyone elses consensus...You don't intend to ever be wrong. Of course I'd like to hear you say it. Just once, you know..."I'm never wrong"

    I won't bother responding with any amount of respect on the tech bit on the Genesis Device...It was lame.
     
  23. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    I don't know, dude. It's highly philosophical....and theres a large amount of truth to what you say...These are just terms to hype up the tech. I could jump head first into that if it wasn't a huge tangent...


    On that issue ...that's why I say that Star Gate is more advanced than the other Sci Fi genres. It actually researched in detail and they have Nasa advisors that are consulted.

    Again this is all fictional...with a measure of science.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page