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. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    It's true that Star Trek tends to win most examples of fire power actually observed. Star Wars superiority seems to be entirely dependent ...defeating asteroids and the presumed physics from vaporization.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    It's because they are Trekkers. He only thinks they are good debaters because they support his side. When a debater that actually makes a good debate for Wars, he loses it and claims that they are insane. To him, it doesn't matter who's right or who's wrong, only the one that fits with the truth he only wants.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    Well, this means what exactly? Is this just you dribbling pointless shit again?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I'm afraid that time and time and again, Star Trek has shown that they are far from science fiction. I guess you didn't learn the Laws of Conservation in school I bet? It clearly must be your lack of education that makes you think that Roddenberry understands even an iota of basic physics, and is smarter than actual scientists. You think that because Trek is more "advanced", it will defeat Star Wars based on nothing? It's sad when someone doesn't understand the nonsense they're talking about

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    There you go again. When will you learn?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    Right, Genesis. First Contact. Nemesis. Survivors. Dauphin. Who Watches the Watchers. Conundrum. Etc.

    I guess examples of Trek being far below movie Wars went right over your head, but is this supposed to be surprising?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Alright, vaporizing a 50 meter asteroid in the 8th of a second puts turbolasers at 30 megatons. A 100 meter asteroid in the 8th of a second puts turbolasers at 240 megatons. Must I point out when photon torpedoes have been shown to be in the low kiloton range (and less)?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    I'd like to see you prove it

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    . Though, it won't ever happen

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Saquist has shown himself capable of accepting logical proof in favor of Star Wars (and has done so before), as have most of us here. The problem is, a lot of that "proof" is based on highly suspect information such as, for example, the "iron nickle" asteroid composition... most asteroids aren't actually made out of such things, and many are ice or even just clumps of loosely packed material. Likewise, some are made of much harder materials and shatter easily.

    Also, what would the Laws of Conservation have to do with Star Trek... it's science fiction - who's to say that, should something like the Nadion particle be possible, violating the Laws of Conservation won't be possible? You're trying to quantify a totally fictional particle's effect against a fully realistic theory, and this applies to other things (warp being one more example).



    Sadly, this is a perfect example of low-balling Star Trek and high-rolling Star Wars... you are taking the lowest possible examples from Trek (some of which are only low-end based on very... interesting... interpretation of the Data) while citing some examples from Star Wars that (again, relying on interesting interpretation) show their highest possible abilities.

    For example, Star Trek has been shown capable of obliterating a decent sized asteroid with a single torpedo that wasn't even set to it's maximum yield (stock configuration, no modification). Granted, it didn't work because it wasn't actually an asteroid, but it would have had it been a real, natural asteroid (as they had expected).

    Likewise, in Star Wars we have examples of arrows and rocks defeating Stormtrooper armor, vehicle blasters/laser cannons failing to so much as scorch the ground, and high-tier armored vehicles failing to so much as harm native vegetation.

    You cannot cherry-pick your examples, it simply does not work like that.
     
  10. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    On the same vein, we have no reason to believe Phasers would not have a similar effect on Star Wars materials (which have never seen a phaser and would not be designed to resist it) as they did on the (unadapted) Borg Cube's hull.

    After all, there is a logical process behind that thought - Phasers operate on a principle very alien to Star Wars weapons and armor designers... by all accounts, Star Wars hulls are pretty simple things, made from composite materials to be as tough as possible. However, they are designed to resist weapons of brute force... why would they be capable of resisting nuclear disruption forces?

    At the same time, we have no proof that Trek's phasers WOULD act that way, though the common arguments of "exotic materials would render phasers useless" can be handwaved away with the fact that the Borg ship was an "exotic hull" and phasers worked a treat on them just fine.
     
  11. Apocalypse2001 System Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    693
    Since you like abusing others so much, I'll continue doing it you until you fold-up into the fetal position. You don't know who the fuck you're dealing with....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    my father did that kind of shit, on an even more brutal level, so I know how to handle insignificant germs like you. :spank: Keep doing it. I'll keep pounding you into the ground until you learn you lesson.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2010
  12. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    project much??

    dude you really need some anger management courses.

    there was not one usefull piece of info in that post..
     
  13. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    Except the EU states that the Hoth asteroid field was made up of mostly nickel-iron asteroids, and the visuals actually support this. This is a canonical statement.

    It also goes over Saquist's head that they had shields down much of the time. Really, when a large asteroid traveling at a fast velocity harmlessly shatters against an ISD's hull, how can he assume that they were shielded at all? In canon, ships go down rather quickly without shields, but I guess this is easily ignored, and we must assume they had shields up anyway.

    Because it's a very important law. If they have technobabble that can remove it, how is it anymore fantasy than the Xeelee Starbreaker, or the Culture Minds? Both of these universes are considered hard sci-fi, but you claimed that they were fantasy because of these jewels. How is a gun that functions via gravity destroying a star any less fantasy than a gun that destroys any matter it hits?

    The same applies to Saquist. To him, the EU doesn't exist apparently, and we can only derive yields from the movies. He goes so far as to claim the asteroids weren't vaporized (the visuals support that they were heated to 6,000 K, and while some parts would fly away, it wouldn't be significant enough to change the yield much).

    I'm also not high balling Wars, BTW. If I really wanted to, I'd bring up the EU where it has quad turbolasers melting 1,000 km ice moons after being charged for 45 minutes.

    Only through the weak joints. We even see rocks failing to crack the armor, when it hits point blank.

    And at the same time, they shake up an entire base. It can be concluded that they don't fire a similar yield each time. As for laser cannons, they sound the same as the Ion Cannon used in the same movie.

    You are talking about the AT-ST. It's short for "All Terrain Scout Transport". It's not a combat vehicle at all.
     
  14. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    The idea that Trek is Sci-Fi and Wars is Sci-Fan isn't based on the tech mate - it's based on the premise and the story.

    As for the "weak joints" perhaps... but rocks that hit their helmets killed them all the same (or at least knocked em out) - granted, this is the same helmet that we see fall off when a stormtrooper walks into a door that hasn't gone up the whole way (doh)

    And yes, the lasers shake an entire base - thing is, we dont' know the structural nature of the base itself. Plus, there were soldiers fighting just above/in front of it... and they seemed rather unharmed by the shots used to "shake up" the base IIRC.

    And I'm actually referring to a number of vehicles, from the tanks to the AT-TE's and other such vehicles.
     
  15. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    I haven't seen a complete list of your "examples" that show a superior average over all instances in Trek and Star Wars. You haven't made a scientific determination base on the most common out come. I saw your evidence. Some of it as good but much of it ...especially that...mess on the Voyager striking the glacier was poor reasoning and I think I proved that your understanding of the variables through math was not well thought out to be capable of determining anything from those encounters.

    I offered you a reasonable opportunity to sit down and work out all the cases between Trek and Wars to find out the truth through averages and you just ignored it and threw up a huge number of cases in an attempt to intimidate me or PROOF BY VERBOSITY.


    G2K has addressed this in several examples
    VOY: Rise
    -390 Meter asteroid supposed to be vaporized by a 154 Megaton torpedo blast. (that means it did more than star wars ex. with less force.

    -"Cost of Living"[TNG] Enterprise destroys a asteroid even larger than the VOY Rise asteroid in two shots

    -TMP also shows a larger asteroid and one torpedo
    -"Return to Grace"[DS9])
    -"Skin of Evil"[TNG] 1.4 gigaton

    and Oddly Q-who shows a phaser beam far more powerful destroying some thousands to millions of times similar volumes just as fast.




    Thank you, sir and quite true.
     
  16. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    I made a reply to Apocalypse, but I deleted it. Don't want him to finally snap

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    Que? What are you talking about now?

    LOL. What are you talking about now?

    Really? I encountered an image that it at 150 meters in diameter. 25 (or 100) megatons would be significant enough to vaporize it. Weapons of this yield were one shotting ships in the Dominion war.

    It's funny that you think it would be completely vaporized. They even state that there should be remnants 1 centimeter and below in diameter. So, why should we assume it was completely vaporized? When Star Wars shows an instance of vaporizing asteroids, you claim that they most likely weren't vaporized, but when the script from ST says that they weren't completely vaporized, you throw it out the window and support vaporization? Again, why I should be surprised?

    It was shattered, too. This puts it in the double digit kiloton range.

    I'd love to see this, I really would.

    An asteroid several kilometers in diameter which a fleet couldn't destroy? Really?

    Try 1.4 kilotons.

    And a kiloton-megaton CME completely destroyed an entire Borg vessel.

    You are one to talk.
     
  18. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    Are these supposed to be intelligent responses to my indictment over you argument?



    It was larger than Voyager based on the torpedo. (If I understood your...wording properly)

    Because Chakotay says that the asteroid should have been vaporized. He didn't say completely.

    Correction
    I said you can't tell if the Star Wars asteroids were vaporized and that you were jumping to conclusions. There is no confirmation that all of the rock was turned into vapor.



    The torpedoes completely disappear on approach to the asteroid it was much larger than the Enterprise.
    The asteroid was large enough to have a core. The remains were denser core fragments. I accept G2K's estimates that the core was about as large as the Enterprise's Stardrive and extremely dense according to the script.



    I suggest you look at the movie.



    I have no idea where you're getting your information from.


    No I don't think so. The exposion was so powerful it could be seen from a orbit higher than 3,000 miles and not simple as a flash or dot but have an circumference that took a significant portion of the surface.



    I proved that you had missed your mark last time when you made the massive mistake in trusting MIKE WONG's figures of using Sol's corona to estimate the erupt.

    -I also prove it wasn't a Coronal Mass Ejection and was actually a Super fluid Fusion reaction

    You haven't recalculated the estimate for your error and are not regurgitating the same errors again.




    I am only one person with that happens to have ability to speak, yes that is true.
     
  19. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    Yes, we must presume they had shields up. It is a reasonable conclusion when the Captain are wary of entering the field from the damage and from losing a ship they would indeed have their shields up.


    RICERY
    I offered you a reasonable opportunity to sit down and work out all the cases between Trek and Wars to find out the truth through averages and you just ignored it and threw up a huge number of cases in an attempt to intimidate me or PROOF BY VERBOSITY.
     
  20. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    How about you answer both?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It was 200 meters in height, and 130 meters in length, going by my picture.

    And no one is arguing that some pieces survived and fly away at several KM/s. We do know that they were heated to 6,500 K (above iron's boiling point), though.

    SO WHAT?

    AND THAT'S STILL BELOW A MEGATON.

    Or how about you provide evidence?

    They couldn't destroy the asteroid with an entire fleet with their weapons.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    And did you know that a weapon of such a yield would be seen GROWING in size and lasting for over a minute? Plus, look at the atmosphere. It's incredibly dense. The photon torpedo impacting would cause particles to hit each other quickly, causing friction, causing plasma, causing a bright flash. The plasma wouldn't be visible for long though, and would dissipate shortly afterwords. 1.4 gigatons my ass.

    LOL. Large CMEs (trillions of kilograms in mass) traveling at fast velocities (hundreds of thousands of meters per second) have high yields. Larger CMEs (quadrillions of kilograms in mass) traveling at faster velocities (millions of meters per second) have higher yields. The CME he used was far larger and faster than the one that hit the Borg Cube.

    Bullshit. It doesn't change anything. Do you really think that it being an artificial CME is going to change anything?

    What?!
     
  21. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    No, you PROVE they had shields up. CANONICALLY their shields are stronger, and CANONICALLY, those asteroids were harmlessly flying off the ISD's hulls. The ONLY threatened section was the bridge itself. You claim they had shields up, you prove it. I'm not accepting your positive claim at all.
     
  22. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Well, we'll give you two choices:

    A) They had their shields up
    B) They are pants on head retarded
     
  23. ricrery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,616
    Unlikely, given that a large asteroid traveling at a fast velocity - that threatened the Millennium Falcon (a 35 meter vessel) to move out of way - did no damage to the unshielded hull of the Avenger.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page