ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Star Wars v. Star Trek!

Braxton474439G

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 263

Report this Jan. 27 2005, 11:21 pm

Alright my fellow Nerds-In-Chairs-At-Their-Computers, let's get this straight.

First of all, the navigational deflectors on Starships are immune to laser energy.

Second of all, the armor on Star Destoyers is NOT Neutronium. There is no proof of this. On the official Star Wars website, there is no mention of Neutronium on any page. Do a search and see for yourself. Besides, simple Ion Engines couldn't push it anyway. JPL is actually developing them at this very moment.

Also, would someone please tell me how to convert megatons of TNT into Joules? The sheilds on Star Trek ships can handle thousands of Terajoules of energy.

Also, did you notice how it takes, like, 3 minutes to go across the Star Wars galaxy? Well, that's probably because the stars are very crowded together in a very small galaxy.

Please consider this before posting.
:cool:

Gold_53

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 9036

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 2:27 am

Quote (Braxton474439G @ Jan. 27 2005, 8:21 pm)
Alright my fellow Nerds-In-Chairs-At-Their-Computers, let's get this straight.

First of all, the navigational deflectors on Starships are immune to laser energy.

Second of all, the armor on Star Destoyers is NOT Neutronium. There is no proof of this. On the official Star Wars website, there is no mention of Neutronium on any page. Do a search and see for yourself. Besides, simple Ion Engines couldn't push it anyway. JPL is actually developing them at this very moment.

Also, would someone please tell me how to convert megatons of TNT into Joules? The sheilds on Star Trek ships can handle thousands of Terajoules of energy.

Also, did you notice how it takes, like, 3 minutes to go across the Star Wars galaxy? Well, that's probably because the stars are very crowded together in a very small galaxy.

Please consider this before posting.
:cool:

Lord have mercy on our souls.....

Umm....there's an ENORMOUS thread already running devoted to this exact topic here:

Star Trek vs. Star Wars

You could also do a search from the 1000's of other threads dealing with this same exact topic, many of which are in this same exact section.

As for the size of the SW galaxy it is 120,000 light years in diameter, the Milky Way is about 100,000 light years in diameter. This was also covered a long time ago in a similar thread.

I don't mean to sound rude (because I probably do) but it would serve you well to read the 20+ plus pages currently covering this topic and then join in the fray lol.

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 2:58 am

Quote (Braxton474439G @ Jan. 27 2005, 8:21 pm)
Alright my fellow Nerds-In-Chairs-At-Their-Computers, let's get this straight.

First of all, the navigational deflectors on Starships are immune to laser energy.

Second of all, the armor on Star Destoyers is NOT Neutronium. There is no proof of this. On the official Star Wars website, there is no mention of Neutronium on any page. Do a search and see for yourself. Besides, simple Ion Engines couldn't push it anyway. JPL is actually developing them at this very moment.

Also, would someone please tell me how to convert megatons of TNT into Joules? The sheilds on Star Trek ships can handle thousands of Terajoules of energy.

Also, did you notice how it takes, like, 3 minutes to go across the Star Wars galaxy? Well, that's probably because the stars are very crowded together in a very small galaxy.

Please consider this before posting.
:cool:

First Lasers in star war are not lasers, it is a just a phrase like Phaser rifle, which is not a rifle cause it does uses rifling to spin bullets.

Lasers and turbolaser have properties that are unlaser like. abilities such as exploding like Flak ( laser donot do that), combine beams to make a single composite beam, or having a glowing Bolt in a vacuum ( laser even of visible light would not glow) which indicates some form of charge particle weapon, and lastly the bolt can be control by magnetic fields and force to spiral to increase the range of the bolt, this is definitely not the behavior of an laser.

Second Navigator deflector did not aid the Enterprise against the borg cutting laser or the ships that engage the Borg cube at wolf, according to the script of the Emissary at least one ship at wolf were destroyed by the cutting Lasers:

From the DS9 Emissary:
"
DEEP SPACE: "Emissary" REV. FINAL 08/12/92 - TEASER 2.

3 CONTINUED:

CAPTAIN
Move us to position alpha, Ensign...

CON OFFICER
Aye, sir...

CAPTAIN
Load all torpedo bays... ready phasers...

4 EXT. SPACE - THE SARATOGA (OPTICAL)

fires phasers and photons as the Borg ship sends out a cutting laser at the Melbourne... when the Melbourne's shields fail, there is a massive explosion. The Borg ship immediately turns its attention to the Saratoga... sending out another tractor beam..."


The Script takes great care to to insure that it the cutting laser used on the Melbourne and not a tractor beam which it uses on the Saratoga..

This is back by Various episode when Picard order shield raise when threaten by vessel with lasers, examples beings:

TNG Season 5, Ep# 114: "Conundrum" against the Lysian vessel arm with fusion power laser, shield are raised even with riker commenting about it being low power

again
TNG Season 1, Ep# 7: "The Last Outpost"

WORF: They are firing on us!
PICARD: Damage report!
TASHA: Shields holding!
DATA: Mostly electromagnetic, sir. Fusion generator and batteries down by (thirty percent)

again in TNG Season 2, Ep# 32: "Loud as a Whisper"

WORF: I'm reading laser activity in the Solari Solar System!
RIKER: How concentrated is the activity?
WORF: It is localized -- and very intense.

and then picard announces :

PICARD: Riva is in charge of the summit. I command the ship that brings him. I will not endanger my ship under any circumstances."

and these comments and incidents more than prove even laser are a hazard requiring shield. there are additionals incidents such as "Suddenly Human" where picard once again order shields raised...

Apparently in "the Outrageous Okona" the factor is the fact that this was a fairly backward race and their ships were vastly under power compare to Enterprise.

But the fact is the main weapons of Stardestroyer are turbolasers and ion cannons, and not laser..

The Armor of star destroyer are mention time and time again in EU as being Durasteel :

Wraith Squadron, pg.375

That first proton torpedo barrage from the Night Caller's bow hold [..] had targeted the heavy durasteel hull protecting the Star Destroyer's huge array of power cells. Fourteen proton torpedoes had slammed into the unshielded hull, chewing it to pieces but not destroying it completely.

Dura steel being a alloy metal consideing of Neutronium:

The SW Encylopedia has the following entries:

Durasteel: Used to build everything from space vehicles to dwellings, this ultra-lightweight metal can withstand radical temperature extremes and severe mechanical stress

Dura-armour: Industrial-strength military armor, it has the ability to absorb and divert blaster energy. Dura-armour is made by compressing and binding neutronium, lomite, and zersium molecules together through the process of matrix acceleration.

Cracken's Threat Dossier:

"As luck would have it, a remarkable find is made on Koratas, Dathomir's fourth moon. Digging through the thick, red - tinted soil, Imperial scientists stumble across several rich veins of neutronium, lommite and zersium. These minerals are the primary components in the alloy known as durasteel, the most common warship - grade armour used in Imperial ship construction. Excited by the discovery, Zsinj moved all his shipbuilding facilities to Dathomir"

This is also supported by the AOTC cross section Book which refer to the republic assault ship being cladded in Neutronium and barely being Scorched by Fusion missiles....


Ion engines in starwars are years ahead of ion engine that NASA working out, as is stand a theorical ION Drive using neutral particle beams can accelerate ship with thrust of 1000's netwons per gigawatts. Such a scheme is beyond are present level of technology and would apply acceleration greater than the human body could withstand.

1 megaton of TNT releases 4.184 x 10E15 joules = 4.184 petajoules (PJ), while a medium turbolaser is rated at 200 gigatons as per shot from "Attack of the Clone Cross section Book"

So according to you  the enterprise can handle low megaton attacks, but would be over whelm by medium turbo laser. Also There is no proof of Star trek shields withstand Terajoule attack, where is your proof.

SW galaxy is 120,000 LY across:

Shields of lies page 39

"The galaxy is one hundred twenty thousand light-years across"

This is also repeated in the various SW novels and SW Encyclopedia..

Note all material quoted from are officials and canon sources..

Braxton474439G

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 263

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 10:29 am

How come on the Star Wars website there's no mention of it? If it's not in their Databank, I don't think it's canon. If you read the TNG Tech Manual, I think it says something about terajoules, but I'm not sure.
Go to ditl.org for a great story about this topic.:logical:

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 10:54 am

Quote (Braxton474439G @ Jan. 28 2005, 7:29 am)
How come on the Star Wars website there's no mention of it? If it's not in their Databank, I don't think it's canon. If you read the TNG Tech Manual, I think it says something about terajoules, but I'm not sure.
Go to ditl.org for a great story about this topic.:logical:

Wrong The policy of Canon for SW is as Follows:

Movies, Scripts, Novelizations and Radio Dramas (In that order)Incredible Cross Sections books ( where we get the 200 gigaton figure for turbolaser.

Official : All EU material, Star Wars Encycopedia and other sourcebooks, Comic Books, certain aspects of the RPG

As for Star trek Canon : Movies and tv series. Official nothing..

Ditl list no bases for his speculations, notice he highlights his different section, and the section under phaser power it colored as speculation. He provides no calculations to back them up.

The TNG tech manual list the output of the Enterprise as 1.2 GW. that a 1X10E9 joules per second compare this to Turbolaser from republic Troop carrier rated at 200 gigaton.

A gigaton would be 4.2x10E18 Joules. so it would take the enterprise using the TNG manual around 8.4x10E12 seconds or 266362.25 years to produce the same amount of power.

Now if a troop carrier has that fire power, what are the Turbolasers of a star destroyer going to be like.

Lupino

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2754

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 5:57 pm

My plans are a success. Slowly but surely, every board on st.com will be overflowing with Trek vs. Wars topics, and it will bring about the ruin of the world! muwahahhahaha :laugh:

;)

But for the love of Zod, please don't start any more!  Go pick a fight with lancer on the general boards, he's doing a great job *high fives lancer*

Braxton474439G

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 263

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 6:49 pm

Dude, Lancer, you must have, like, no life if you know this stuff. Is this done all by memory? If so, I must congratulate you on your complete Dorkdome. Your prize will be waiting for you when you leave.

I like Trek better anyway, since it has a message and Star Wars is about, well, war.

Braxton474439G

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 263

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 9:15 pm

Star Trek is based on real science. Star Wars tech is made up. If those almighty Star Destoyers came into this universe none of their hyper-crap would work.

This hypermatter-annihlation stuff isn't really considered canon. George Lucas himself said he will violate any of that stuff in the next movie, so considering it "canon unless contradicted" is stupid.

Lancer, you really need to lighten up. You're acting like a real jerk. You're, like, totally serious about everything. It's sad that you can quote stuff right from a script, and that just proves that you're one of the many nerds in their parents' basement sitting at their computers all day.

:eyesroll:

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 10:09 pm

Quote (Braxton474439G @ Jan. 28 2005, 6:15 pm)
Star Trek is based on real science. Star Wars tech is made up. If those almighty Star Destoyers came into this universe none of their hyper-crap would work.

This hypermatter-annihlation stuff isn't really considered canon. George Lucas himself said he will violate any of that stuff in the next movie, so considering it "canon unless contradicted" is stupid.

Lancer, you really need to lighten up. You're acting like a real jerk. You're, like, totally serious about everything. It's sad that you can quote stuff right from a script, and that just proves that you're one of the many nerds in their parents' basement sitting at their computers all day.

:eyesroll:

Thank for the geek dom award, and You are right I have no Life other than Space warfare it my hobby, but I have my own home, Grand childerns, a son studying for a PHD in Mathematics and a daughter that a medical doctor. Since My business allowed me the luxury of retiring early I have time.. What about you. Have you moved out your room yet and gotten a life, doubt it..:D

Prove your statement about lucas going to throw out the Hypermatter stuff, as it stand Lucas Film has given all of the Material of the cross section Book a thumbs up:

Star Wars Inside #68 pg 23, the Lucasfilm editors say:

"The first two Incredible Cross-Sections books were conceived to explore bold new territory in the Star Wars universe, taking a rare look inside more vehicles and vessels than we had ever seen before, and doing in in unprecidented detail. These books would represent the most thorough research ever done on these vehicles and would receive Lucasfilm's formal imprimatur as canon. These volumes would henceforth be sent out to licensees as reference guides and would become useful manuals for Industrial Light & Magic, where some of the artwork influenced details in Episodes I and II."


The Film editor himself has said that the Material is Canon, Now where your statement from Lucas?

Star Trek base on Real science? Then what a Nadion? Dilthium Cyrstal and how does it extract power from an antimatter matter reaction. Teleporter, oh yeah that real science. NOT ;). Star Trek is sci fi and bad sci fi at that.

Star War is not about sci fi it a story about poeple, mythology played not with Bow and arrow but with Blasters and starship.

Characters in star war don't attempt to solve problem with technobabble, but with their personal abilities. The person is the story not the Science.

As it stand they don't say how they do things, just that they can do these things and starship and Droids are as common as cars and Tv are to us.

While Star trek is uncomfortable with its tech, half the problems they face each episode is one of technology gone wrong. A teleporter that split you in two, or a holodeck that attempts to kill you. For all their personal growth the characters are deeply trouble, a naval officer that addict to holo fanasty, another with a Don Juan complex , a father that cannot connect with his son, the list goes on and yet they attempt to preach moral and standards that they fail to live up to.

In Star wars these faults are tragedic, they cause the fall of the Galaxy, but that the human condition.

Both shows are just Soap Opera wiith star ships.

You want real science then read some of my other posts, that real science....

AquamonkeyEG

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4915

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 10:15 pm

hahaha

hyperspace is as much real science as subspace. or maybe hyperspace is older because it was being used "long, long ago"

they must both be real since Stargate is in our time and it has both. (side note: i love how SG1 sometimes puts a little remark about current events.)

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Jan. 28 2005, 11:45 pm

Quote (Braxton474439G @ Jan. 28 2005, 6:15 pm)
Star Trek is based on real science. Star Wars tech is made up. If those almighty Star Destoyers came into this universe none of their hyper-crap would work.

This hypermatter-annihlation stuff isn't really considered canon. George Lucas himself said he will violate any of that stuff in the next movie, so considering it "canon unless contradicted" is stupid.

Lancer, you really need to lighten up. You're acting like a real jerk. You're, like, totally serious about everything. It's sad that you can quote stuff right from a script, and that just proves that you're one of the many nerds in their parents' basement sitting at their computers all day.

:eyesroll:

actually you are the Jerk You started this Debate by throwing down the challeng and told us to consider our answer.

When faced by someone who has seen this debate countless time and when proven wrong you start with the insults.

You my friend need some manners, and to learn to take defeat like a man. Come back when you want your butt kicked again :laugh:

Gold_53

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 9036

Report this Jan. 29 2005, 1:59 am

Lancer is a worthy adversary when debating this topic, I learned this personally long ago. While our methods of proving points may be different, as I try to avoid using math and statistics to prove my point because I've noticed most people just won't accept the numbers. Regardless of his methods he knows what he is talking about and is unlikely to concede a point.

I on the other hand generally ride the fence from point to point I will defend Star Trek on one point while defending Star Wars on another. I also concede certain aspects of such a confrontation because I know when I see a "no win situation". I think both ST & SW have their advantages and the winner would highly depend on the type of conflict that both sides were involved in. As in the past I concede that in a direct ship to ship/fleet to fleet confrontation Star Wars has a tactical advantage.  :cool:

Braxton474439G

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 263

Report this Jan. 29 2005, 1:23 pm

Allright, I'm sorry. It was immature and stupid. Happy?:cry:

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Jan. 29 2005, 3:00 pm

Quote (Braxton474439G @ Jan. 29 2005, 10:23 am)
Allright, I'm sorry. It was immature and stupid. Happy?:cry:

well yes I am, I tired of irrate Trekkies insulting me every time I pop their bubble.

Just know this the "Culture" would beat Star wars like a unwanted step child, and so would Brine's "Uplift Civilization".
Force is relative and I enjoy Star trek as much as I do star wars...

Giantevilhead

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1175

Report this Jan. 29 2005, 11:34 pm

Star Trek will win through time travel. Send a ship back a couple billions years when the jedis and siths are still primordial goo on some lifeless plant and then blow them up.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum