StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I am watching DS9's "A time to stand" heres the intresting part"I just beamed down 83 empty canisters and one not so empty filled with 90 isotons of explosive,Should take care of everything for 800km including the station."-Obrien.

Obrien didn't say what the explosive was(if he did I missed it.)

Assuming it was Antimatter what calcs could be based off this? the base was also burried in the asteroid which looked to be atleast KM in width.

Debate.

According to http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Sci ... roids.html

If the asteroid was 1km and just plain granite the explosive yield would be 3.8gt.

Now excuse me if this has been done before.

Okay, Ill go slightly off topic here. There was a good point made in the movie Armageddon involving exposives and the large ass asteriod on a course for Earth. One of the scientest types mentioned that ifyou were to set off a firecracker in your open palm, it probaly wouldnt do much. But if you closed your fist, it would probaly blow your hand up. Why I mention this is that it involves the same principle.

The TNG episode in which Riker stated that it would take the entire torpedo loadout of the Enterprise to destroy the asteriod was based on firing from the outside to a side of the asteroid. Much of the resulting expolsions would have dissapated into space rather than into the asteroid itself. If they had been able to beam warheads into certain sections of the asteroid, they probably would have been able to destroy it with much less torrpedoes, albeit at a higher risk to the ship inside.

This is due to the fact that less energy is wasted because of the more confined area, and the resulting effect is that the exlposion is more confined, causing greater damage to the target than a surface exposion would have allowed at the same yeild.

Besides that, the plant was probaly filled with explosive chemicals and agents, we have no idea what else was stored there as well. We also dont know what the asteriod was made of, and that it was probaly hollowed out, making it structually weaker than a solid asteriod.

Comments/flames/etc?

Problem is the quote was said to do all the damage before it was beamed into the jemmie base.

Or will you just throw this as an off hand comment like Kim said in voyager?

A centrally buried explosive in an asteorid is more effective than one on the surface.

The type of explosive (if not mentioned) is largely irrelevant. It oculd be antimatter, it could be something else, but it doesnt matter.

I noticed that y ou used only the vaporization figures for granite (the 3.8 gigatons) - but there are alot of other figures too - the fragmentation energy (1 megaton), melting energy (~770 megatons) - technically, even the cratering energy might be relevant.

The question as to what energy output is what the observed effects on the station were.

I'd be a bit uncertain about the "Destroying everything within 800 km",
though.

Or will you just throw this as an off hand comment like Kim said in voyager?

It was probaly based on more of an offhand calculation, rather than anything else. Or he may have just been overconfident, exxagerating, or a dozen other things.

That doesn't work, they aren't going to be orders of magnitude out on how explosive it is and then later they start doing exact calcs on how to outrun the explosion.

That doesn't work, they aren't going to be orders of magnitude out on how explosive it is and then later they start doing exact calcs on how to outrun the explosion.

Theres no real way of them making a competly exact calculation, after all, they really dont know what is on the base, in order to make an exact calculation, you have to figure in all the variables. My guess is they made it as close as possible, considering that the ship was still heavily damaged even though they timed it correctly IIRC.

Red Knight wrote:

That doesn't work, they aren't going to be orders of magnitude out on how explosive it is and then later they start doing exact calcs on how to outrun the explosion.

Theres no real way of them making a competly exact calculation, after all, they really dont know what is on the base, in order to make an exact calculation, you have to figure in all the variables. My guess is they made it as close as possible, considering that the ship was still heavily damaged even though they timed it correctly IIRC.

No they didn't time it correctly and the materials on the base probably had very little to do with anything since they were out running the explosive's shockwave (or whatever effects) not any secondary explosions which would probably be very minor in comparison.

Why are we even talking about this? The last time I checked, "take care of" is not exactly a physically precise statement. You can "take care of" an entire city with a 15 kT bomb as we saw in Hiroshima, but it's hardly vapourized, destroyed, or even cratered.

Look at observations: this thing destroyed a miniscule supply depot. That's what we have to work with. Whoop-de-doo.

When will the Trek side learn that semantic interpretation of dialogue is essentially worthless in these debates?

Darth Servo wrote:When will the Trek side learn that semantic interpretation of dialogue is essentially worthless in these debates?

"Trek side?" This isn't the vs forum.

Red Knight wrote:

That doesn't work, they aren't going to be orders of magnitude out on how explosive it is and then later they start doing exact calcs on how to outrun the explosion.

Theres no real way of them making a competly exact calculation, after all, they really dont know what is on the base, in order to make an exact calculation, you have to figure in all the variables.

[/i]

Err the only variable they factored in was the power of the explosives. They bassed the power of the explosion and the shockwave and such off the expected detonation power. They logicaly CAN'T calculate any power off the asteriod as they don't have the first clue of what its going to be able to add to the power of the explosives.

My guess is they made it as close as possible, considering that the ship was still heavily damaged even though they timed it correctly IIRC.

They timed it correctly but the explosives went off early. They accelerated away from the asteriod as the shockwave approached, but it managed to catch the back of them fry some systems like the power core, life support and IIRC sensors.

The whole explosion is just weird. Its some funky two stage effect. You have the first explosion that blows out all the structures on the asteriod and rocks the ship in orbit then a second bigger explosion that blasts the asteriod appart in a massive blast wave.

Darth Servo wrote:When will the Trek side learn that semantic interpretation of dialogue is essentially worthless in these debates?

I'm sorry, I thought the whole purpose of the pure Trek forum was to stay AWAY from 'these debates'. This isn't a vs debate Servo....

Laird wrote:I am watching DS9's "A time to stand" heres the intresting part"I just beamed down 83 empty canisters and one not so empty filled with 90 isotons of explosive,Should take care of everything for 800km including the station."-Obrien.

Did a fucking mod move my post from a thread and split it off?

Anyone with any knowlege knows ISOtons are fucking worthless,
basically 1 isoton = 1 ton of HE.....

Wow, 90 tons of explosive, big fuckin whoop

MKSheppard wrote:

Laird wrote:I am watching DS9's "A time to stand" heres the intresting part"I just beamed down 83 empty canisters and one not so empty filled with 90 isotons of explosive,Should take care of everything for 800km including the station."-Obrien.

Did a fucking mod move my post from a thread and split it off?

Anyone with any knowlege knows ISOtons are fucking worthless,
basically 1 isoton = 1 ton of HE.....

Wow, 90 tons of explosive, big fuckin whoop

And anyone who knows Trek understands that the Trek Isoton is different. It was intentionally used to mark firepower while not establishing real measurements.

Darth Wong wrote:Why are we even talking about this? The last time I checked, "take care of" is not exactly a physically precise statement. You can "take care of" an entire city with a 15 kT bomb as we saw in Hiroshima, but it's hardly vapourized, destroyed, or even cratered.

Look at observations: this thing destroyed a miniscule supply depot. That's what we have to work with. Whoop-de-doo.

The whole "800km" bit could mean simply that the explosive left over enough radiation to make that area unusable for the near future.

Alyeska wrote: And anyone who knows Trek understands that the Trek Isoton is different. It was intentionally used to mark firepower while not establishing real measurements.

So in other words, its a nice pretty term that's FUCKING WORTHLESS in a
vs debate.

MKSheppard wrote:

Alyeska wrote: And anyone who knows Trek understands that the Trek Isoton is different. It was intentionally used to mark firepower while not establishing real measurements.

So in other words, its a nice pretty term that's FUCKING WORTHLESS in a
vs debate.

Yep

Alyeska wrote:And anyone who knows Trek understands that the Trek Isoton is different. It was intentionally used to mark firepower while not establishing real measurements.

And yet, it fits precisely with the observed firepower of photon torpedoes, which is no more impressive than modern chemical weapons.

Durandal wrote:

Alyeska wrote:And anyone who knows Trek understands that the Trek Isoton is different. It was intentionally used to mark firepower while not establishing real measurements.

And yet, it fits precisely with the observed firepower of photon torpedoes, which is no more impressive than modern chemical weapons.

TDiC, Broken Link, Skin of Evil, hell even Pegasus disagrees with this. The ONLY time this is supported to any extent is ST:5, which is like me holding a Voyager episode as the ultimate proof of firepower, meaningless.

Alyeska wrote:

Durandal wrote:

Alyeska wrote:And anyone who knows Trek understands that the Trek Isoton is different. It was intentionally used to mark firepower while not establishing real measurements.

And yet, it fits precisely with the observed firepower of photon torpedoes, which is no more impressive than modern chemical weapons.

TDiC, Broken Link, Skin of Evil, hell even Pegasus disagrees with this. The ONLY time this is supported to any extent is ST:5, which is like me holding a Voyager episode as the ultimate proof of firepower, meaningless.

So Night Terrors doesn't agree with it then except that it does.

CmdrWilkens wrote:

Alyeska wrote:

Durandal wrote: And yet, it fits precisely with the observed firepower of photon torpedoes, which is no more impressive than modern chemical weapons.

TDiC, Broken Link, Skin of Evil, hell even Pegasus disagrees with this. The ONLY time this is supported to any extent is ST:5, which is like me holding a Voyager episode as the ultimate proof of firepower, meaningless.

So Night Terrors doesn't agree with it then except that it does.

The gas did not create a larger "explossion", it created different power. The E-D used its deflector dish to unleash most of its warp core power on the rift to escape, that didn't work. They needed a traditional explossion to free themselves and they could't do it alone. A torpedo produces an anti-mater explossion and thats almost pure energy. We already know that the energy from the deflector dish couldn't get them out. They had to try something else. Night Terrors is not an indication of poor firepower.

Alyeska wrote:The gas did not create a larger "explossion", it created different power. The E-D used its deflector dish to unleash most of its warp core power on the rift to escape, that didn't work. They needed a traditional explossion to free themselves and they could't do it alone. A torpedo produces an anti-mater explossion and thats almost pure energy. We already know that the energy from the deflector dish couldn't get them out. They had to try something else. Night Terrors is not an indication of poor firepower.

Yes it is. High-energy events of any kind in an environment containing matter (as this one did, hence the visible manifestations of such) will be CONVERTED into the same kinds of heat and pressure shockwave created by a conventional explosion. That is how an A-bomb explosion works: gamma radiation being converted through various cascade interactions into thermal radiation and a pressure shockwave.

It is simply ridiculous to surmise that hundreds or thousands of megatons can be unleashed into a matter-filled environment without more pressure-shockwave and heat effects than a conventional explosive. It also goes against the dialogue of the show, in which the amount of energy was the sticking point, not the nature of the energy (unless, of course, you are willing to admit that perhaps crew dialogue is routinely full of shit, as I've been saying all along).

Indeed, while many people ridicule the "crew dialogue is full of shit" approach, it is the ONLY way to explain Night Terrors.

Darth Wong wrote:

Alyeska wrote:The gas did not create a larger "explossion", it created different power. The E-D used its deflector dish to unleash most of its warp core power on the rift to escape, that didn't work. They needed a traditional explossion to free themselves and they could't do it alone. A torpedo produces an anti-mater explossion and thats almost pure energy. We already know that the energy from the deflector dish couldn't get them out. They had to try something else. Night Terrors is not an indication of poor firepower.

Yes it is. High-energy events of any kind in an environment containing matter (as this one did, hence the visible manifestations of such) will be CONVERTED into the same kinds of heat and pressure shockwave created by a conventional explosion. That is how an A-bomb explosion works: gamma radiation being converted through various cascade interactions into thermal radiation and a pressure shockwave.

It is simply ridiculous to surmise that hundreds or thousands of megatons can be unleashed into a matter-filled environment without more pressure-shockwave and heat effects than a conventional explosive. It also goes against the dialogue of the show, in which the amount of energy was the sticking point, not the nature of the energy (unless, of course, you are willing to admit that perhaps crew dialogue is routinely full of shit, as I've been saying all along).

Indeed, while many people ridicule the "crew dialogue is full of shit" approach, it is the ONLY way to explain Night Terrors.

Shockwaves in space act differently then in the atmosphere. Where as nuclear reactions create large fireballs and huge shockwaves, anti-matter reactions are just energy releasing events IIRC.

Alyeska wrote:The gas did not create a larger "explossion", it created different power. The E-D used its deflector dish to unleash most of its warp core power on the rift to escape, that didn't work. They needed a traditional explossion to free themselves and they could't do it alone. A torpedo produces an anti-mater explossion and thats almost pure energy. We already know that the energy from the deflector dish couldn't get them out. They had to try something else. Night Terrors is not an indication of poor firepower.

This is one of the flimsiest explanations I've ever heard. Do you honestly think there is a difference between a 15 kT atomic bomb explosion and a 15 kT matter/anti-matter explosion? The radiative effects may be different, but the heat and shockwave effects will be the same. Does Trekkie pseudoscience bullshit never end?

My calculations based on "Night Terrors" indicate an upper limit of 600 megatons for photon torpedo firepower, assuming the Enterprise carried 250 of them. The "Pegasus" firepower indications of 450 kT fall well within this upper limit. The interpretation of O'Brein's quote in this thread does not. Guess which one is more valid.