Star Wars vs Star Trek

I'm...shocked...I've read those pages a few times and I have to admit I had no idea what he was talking about but now...after doing much of this research myself with measurements...it's just shocking to think that these explosion represent the size of the Asteroids!

I don't believe this trash...

You need to read the page and look at the pictures at the bottom of the page Georg....the ones you didn't post....This is unbelievable... This is a Hitler Website. A propaganda campaign of lies and deceptions....none of it is real. WOW....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

a plasma/energy bolt.

the turbolaser is not a low yield weapon. even if it was just plasma, no shield can resist to many shots.

except they use TWO kind of shields, and you have no proof it would be ineffective against phasers.

right! dude, that would mean star trek shields would also be useless against phasers!

right! try 30.000 years of galactic history, like in SW!

right there! another misconception about technology. dude, as wong said, performance is what matters. they developed the superlaser in a few years! less than a decade. what dose that tell you?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

first of first, they were in that asteroid for hours, with constant bombardment from huge asteroids. as i said already, the asteroid 99942 Apophis has been calculated to impact earth with an equivalent of 1480 megatons, or 1.5 gigatones. now it is a medium size asteroid at 600 meters in length. you seam to think shields should be almost omnipotent, however after hours of constant bombardment, that huge rock that strikes the bridge caries more than enough kinetic energy to destroy it. i'll like to see the enterprise take on a direct hit from one of those and survive. i remember an episode in TNG where another ship impacted its nacelle at a fairy low speed, and DESTROYED THE SHIP (in an alternate timeline i think).

only the atmospheric shields did that at any reasonable. remember the planetary shield at Endor? it enveloped the entire planet and the DS2. it had to be shut off in order to land, because otherwise the shuttle would have been destroyed. The DS personal shields were so big they had a few VERY small gaps. SD had no gaps.

right through it indeed. and indeed what dose that has to do? the Enterprise was unshielded Scott. at least i think so!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

no, seriously now, did you not reed how he did it? let me remember you:
he use multiple images of asteroids, not just when the exploded. how about CHECKING them, instead of just looking just at those which support you?

and who cares about that?

i didn't post? fro the bottom, THERE ARE NO ASTEROID IMAGES! just images with trees and walls blowing up. how about you post them, so i can see your proof?

 

so the best thing you can do is mop the floor with someone who wasn't even talking with you on that subject?

no, your friend kit wanted, and i returned the ball back into his side of the fence!

actually brains are almost everything. and who's insulting now bro?

respect demands that you earn it. so far no one here deserves it.

 

stop trying to change the topic? how about you and Saquist present the evidence that Wong used the explosion and not the asteroid to determine the size?
right now i am reading the site,over and over again! care to illuminate me?

 

Perhaps you don't understand context.
The images at the bottom have no context or relation to the images of the asteroids at the top. At the bottom of the page he show the falcon at one size and in shot after shot explosions not asteroid. None of this supports my position. NONE of it. It is deception in it's most villainous form and I will have nothing to do with it. I can't believe I thought this site had any credit at all.

What sort of statement is that?
I don't recall asking for consensus.

I don't need to post anything but a link you can see for yourself.
I will have nothing to do with the site any longer. I don't enjoy being lied to.
These aren't just errors it a deliberate attempt to mislead.

 

yeah, cuz he makes a different statement: the Falcon's weapons, and then ground weapons. what's so hard to get?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

the only attempt at deception seams to be from you. do you see the images that i just posted here??? directly from the site. call me stupid, but i would like you to clear something up: there is indeed nothing to support you position?

it means short: i don't care what you think is trash if you can't prove it is trash.

you don't enjoy being lied to?
what, do you thing that just a link will solve everything? bring in hard evidence to support you dude. what the hell, this is a debate. in a debate you bring in arguments and evidence. just posting a link and demanding everyone see your point is stupid.

 

there is no reason to believe that standard star wars shielding can block solid lasers. Especially when you see the effect plasma bolts have on those shields. The shields actually absorb the plasma. You can see that effect clearly upon a droideka.

Star wars shields cannot and will not block an uncharged photon.

 

Then do us all a favor and leave you prick. And when you try and start fights with my friends then you start a fight with me you self centered ass.

 

first, i would like to know what the hell do you mean by solid lasers, cuz i was under the clear impression lasers are concentrated beams of light.
second, the shield absorbs a part of it, however it also radiates most of the energy that hits it away.

by uncharged photons you mean what? i am not common with that termination. could you be specific?

look at this picture:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

its a gungan shield, which is quite inferior to other shields. it takes direct hits from laser canons. most of the energy violently sends out waves in the surface of the shield, indicating absorption. but most of it is radiated away, as you can see the bright spots right after impact glowing.
keep in mind that these are inferior shield compare to capital ship shielding.

 

sorry my bad about "solid laser" just meant "laser type weapon". Its pretty early in the morning and I havent woken up yet.

Look, for someone as much an aficionado as you are about star wars you should know that star wars lasers arent actually lasers. They are bolts of plasma that are heated by lasers (which is arguably a tad bit inefficient). So in technicality what you see hitting those shields is actually plasma not photons. The photon is basically like a light particle, practically every part of the electromagnetic spectrum is made up of photons. That includes lasers and phasers and masers.

The difference between a laser and a phaser is that a laser is highly energized light, but it is across a relatively wide spectrum of light so it is not as energized. A phaser is based off of the idea of a maser which is like a laser except it works in the microwave spectrum. It operates in a much smaller spectrum so it is more highly energized for the same amount of input energy.

But blocking plasma is much different then blocking a laser. Plasma very highly charged especially in the way wars uses it. So what you do is make a very highly charged shield and the idea is that it will stop the plasma in its tracks.

But unfortunately for star wars the only weapon those shields are made to stop are plasma weapons since those are the only ones that they have ever used on such a large scale for ship to ship.

But the problem is that the shield relies on the fact that the thing it is blocking is very highly charged.

But photons (which if you remember from earlier are what phasers, lasers, and light in general is made up of) don't have a charge. They would pass through that shield unhindered.

Star trek uses a type of oscillating shield set on a certain frequency which can be changed to block all sorts of weapons. But it lets normal light through the shield so you can actually see the shield. But star wars does not use that sort of shield. So if star wars shields could block phasers then it would block light and photons across the entire spectrum, and thus you would never actually see the ship just a block bubble created by the shield stopping the light.

Thus, star wars shields cannot block phasers.

 

i see.

yeah, i know sw turbolasers aren't lasers. i always claimed that. i always point that out. they were however much more than simple plasma weapons. its more like a particle-energy weapon. it uses a plasma particle beam that was given more and more energy as it passed through the system. it is more like a small solar flare. a simple plasma bolt would fade away fairy quickly, but because its also a particle beam, the two were held together.

yeah, i realize that. actually, there are these weapons called maser in SW to; they are used by the Chiss, and it most likely has the same principle. even phasers are mentioned several times in the EU.

actually plasma would be easily deflected by a strong magnetic field. if it would be plain plasma weapons, that's what they woudl use: a magnetic shield.

you kinda forget they also use missiles and torpedoes. now wars use two kind of shields:
ray shield which absorb radiation and "laser" bolts, and particle shield to deflect physical projectiles or space debris. they mostly rely on the ray shield, since most ship to ship combat uses "lasers".

no, i do not recall phasers to be made out of light. actually, i have yet to find anything that gives a reasonable explanation on what phasres are.

light is most often described as a wave and a particle. now photons have mass 0. how would you stop light with plain oscillation? you may be talking about cloaking devices, which in SW actually do much of what you said. but if what you said is true, then you might wanna answer why in The Outrageous Okona, they say lasers (light) won't pass through their navigation shields??? that's a direct contradiction to what you said. if their shields allow light to pass, then lasers would be the best weapon to use against them!

because i have absolutely no idea what phasers are made out, and no reason to assume its light, i have to pass this one. but could you care to explain why then it is that lasers won't even pass through their navigation shields??

that is not determined,but as i already pushed out the navigation shield, i won't have to do it again.

and now,for the final:
every shield so far in every scyfi show is invisible, or partially invisible like in SW (when in atmosphere). so, why assume that they could block light if they are invisible? light has no frequency, so of course it can pass through a frequency base shield. lasers have no frequency, so they to pass through.
plasma has no frequency!!!
all the trek frequency bullshit is just unreliable due to this.

 

I think it would be best if we all just added George and TW to our ignore list - they have fallen under the spell of Wong's giant Wang and have laid one to many times in their bed of lies... they cannot see the truth, even when it is right in front of them.

There is no chance to save them short of them pulling away from their almighty propaganda machines, step back, and look at the shit they've been consuming and spewing back out.

 

yeah, just act like a typical trekkie and ignore us, cuz that's what you do best, eh? unfortunately, i do not send personal messages, we post here, so you can't block either of us.
bed of lies? again you bring up bullshit! did you brought the evidence that i asked for yet? no! all you have is continuing demands that we see your point even if you have yet to explain your claims!

right. hard words again, but nothing more as usual.

 

Right... you know what you need to get off your high horse.

 

First off, the original phaser merely meant "photon maser", but now phasers mean "phased energy rectification" which is a fancier way of saying the same exact thing.

A particle energy weapon? Thats a rather idiotic thing to say. All that statement means is that there exists a particle that has some amount of potential or kinetic energy. Nothing more.

Its not like a small solar flare, not by a longshot.
Its more like a bolt of plasma.

Also, lets point out the fact that the damage measurements are at a singular time scale, usually when the entire bolt of plasma hits a surface. But you see phasers are damage over time weapons since they are a beam weapon which lasts longer then a single plasma bolt. Once you take into account the fact that a phaser is in contact with an enemy ship much longer then a plasma bolt you realize that the phaser is a hell of a lot more powerful then the actual calculations say because of the nature of a beam weapon.

Yah but missiles can be shot down and proton torpedos are not nearly as deadly as a quantum torpedo and can be blocked by star trek shields.

Yah but we rarely see the use of particle shields, it is an uncommon shield and so to assume that in a real battle every star wars ship would have one is flimsy at best.

Please, do you think the shield only works because it oscillates? Look, the deflector shield emits gravitons. A graviton is the force carrier of gravity. That makes it infinitely superior to star wars shields. The reason is because while only SOME things can be blocked by a shield that works on the principles of electromagnetism there are very few things can't be blocked by a shield reliant upon the principle of gravitation. That includes the primitive missiles, plasma bolts, and the proton torpedos star wars uses

The advantage with the star trek shields are that the shield frequency can be changed to allow certain kinds of matter and energy through including light waves. At the same time the frequency can be changed to become more resilient against certain types of weapons including plasma bolts.

Star trek shields are incredibly robust. Photon torpedos carried by voyager had a 25 isoton detonation yield. A class-6 warhead could raise it to 200 isotons. A class ten torpedo could be armed with an even more potent warhead.

A constitution class starship's shields could take the equivalent of of 90 torpedoes at once.

The fact that any beam weapon can be even marginally effective against star trek shields indicates either one of two things. One is that the calculations are mistaken and that they are far, far, far more devestating, which would be supported by the fact that they are efficient weapons powered by a multi exawatt reactor. Or two is that they are knife like weapons made to focus a tremendous amount of damage on a single point and that even if the phaser has a lower amount of raw damage the amount of damage per square centimeter or even square meter is many times greater then a turbolaser.

Which would make sense in the context that star trek does not really like turbolaser type weapons as much as beam type weapons.

The fact is that star trek shields are far far more sophisticated then star wars shields and that fact is indesputable.

How old are you? Im betting your at most a high school sophomore. The reason why is because light does have a frequency you moron. You learn that in high school.

You just said that light is a wave. It is literally impossible for there to be a wave without a frequency. Velocity equals the wavelength times frequency you idiot.

Lasers also must have a frequency since they are light.

Do you know what frequency means? It means the number of oscillations per second. Anything from one hertz to millions of hertz.

A shield that oscillates to set frequencies is extremely effective because certain frequencies can allow certain kinds of matter and energy through or completely block them from passing you dumb ass.

Its not bullshit its elementary physics. I know high schoolers that know about it then you do.

You have no idea what your talking about. Let me guess, you actually believe that the term "pure energy" actually means something?

 

George, if only you could understand how incredibly stupid you sound right now... ah well, I'm sure in time someone will make it clear to you (unfortunately it'll probably be when you go for a job interview or some other semi-important event, but oh well, such is life)

Wake up, grow up, and learn to think before you open your enormous pie hole.

This will be the last post of yours I respond to most likely - I hope in time you mature a little and see the error of your ways, hopefully before life bends you over its knee and makes you its bitch.

Ciao.

 

Agreed. What a little brat. "Light doesn't use frequencies.:bawl:" pathetic.

 

a technology that is more complex is not necessary better. take the borg: they can fire weapons that change frequency so fast ships rarely have time to adjust.
you still haven't answer my question: if light passes through the st shield, why can't lasers do so? lasers are light, and makes no sense.
as for the claim that SW shields are simple electromagnetic fields, that is wrong. the shields of endor were enveloping the entire planet. if it were just a electromagnetic field, there were no reason to take the shield down in order to land. that is also available for capital ships! they all had to bring down shield in order for other ships to land in their hangars.
now a solar flare is caused by magnetic lines violently throwing charged particles and plasma from the solar atmosphere. it is not idiotic to say turbolasers are a particle energy weapon, because that's how it is described. as i explained, a simple plasma bolt would just dissipate, and would not carry enough energy to do any of the things it dose in the movies, like vaporizing asteroids. it would certainly not.
as for "primitive missiles, plasma bolts, and the proton torpedoes", you might wanna know they were using them for well over 20,000 years. they perfected them, and as far as i am concerned, all that phasers are is low quality, useless technobable.

and kit, before you come up again with that bullcrap about maturity and all, why not answer what the fuck are you doing here, cuz this is NOT a debate for mature persons...wait, you just bring that up cuz you have been caught by the balls. i asked you to show the proof that SDN is wrong, all you and your buddies have is your claims. when i asked you to explain why sdn is wrong, you jump in with this kind of crap, to distract attention from the fact that you have nothing. i grew tired of this! you have nothing, and so far i have no reason to believe anything that comes from you.
when i ask for evidence, you change the subject! you don't even bothered read that site, did you? cuz as far as you are concerned, Wong has to be wrong no matter what! it dose not matter the evidence he brings, he just has to be wrong, otherwise you are wrong and that is unacceptable, eh?

and now comes the part in which he changes the subject again to distract everyone from the fact.