The Deflectors are immune b.s.

[Darth Wong]

How does any of that matter? Coherence only affects cancellation, which is irrelevant to a shield, and frequency is hardly unique to lasers. Yes, they're more monochromatic than regular light, but how does it follow that you can make your shield invincible against a certain frequency? Polarization? Are you aware that this only affects what passes THROUGH the shield, and you want NOTHING to pass through the shield?

[Isolder74]

Edam, you can't simply say that any distinction makes anything possible even if you don't bother to explain how. Yes, lasers are coherent. But individual photons are still just ordinary EM photons.

All the differences I listed were things that we know can be used to filter photons.

frequency - you can tailor the shields to absorb on the specific frequency of the laser, at the cost of other frequencies. Lasers are highly monochromatic, so the shields can concentrate all their defense on the frequency of the laser. this only works for protection against lasers or other highly monochromatic EM attacks, but it gives imporved protection at the cost of defense against other frequencies.

Polarisation - lasers are often highly polarised, so you can tailor the shields to absorb/reflect the light differently (particularly if the refractive index of the shields can be altered). turn the shields into the equivalent of birefringent crystals. Again, your defense would be best against a specific polarisation at the cost of other polarisations

The directionality of lasers can be used against them, as you can concentrate the shields where the attack is occuring, and engineer the shields to reflect the beam somewhere safe - you couldn't do this with an explosion or non-collimated beam, because a safe reflection for one part of the beam could be a dangerous reflection for another.

Lasers while coherent are not polarized. The Photon still are oriented in random phases as it makes up the beam. It still take 2 polerizers to block a laser the same as with 'normal' light.

[SWPIGWANG]

Polarization? Are you aware that this only affects what passes THROUGH the shield, and you want NOTHING to pass through the shield?

Don't you want normal light to pass though the shield and laser to be blocked out in this case?

Maybe you can make a shield that automatically acts as a polarization filter that is 90 degrees from the highest energy light beam hitting the point, making it block unaltered lasers but let normal light pass though.

If I make a blue bullet, it will be different from all other bullets; does this mean we should assume it's possible to make armour that will block this bullet but allow all other bullets to pass through?

It might be possible if the properties of reflecting blue light is a part of the armor/sheild mechanism. For example if you have a armor that has blue light trapped in a mirror array, and when a blue bullet hits it reflects the light to hit say a explosive charge which then blows up the bullet. Other bullets would absorb the blue light and would not trigger the explosion.

And excuse me if my technobabbly ability sucks, I don't invent trek technology as a job.

[SWPIGWANG]

Lasers while coherent are not polarized. The Photon still are oriented in random phases as it makes up the beam. It still take 2 polerizers to block a laser the same as with 'normal' light.

meh?

*damn, gotta look up stuff now....*

[Frank LLoyd Wright]

Edam, you can't simply say that any distinction makes anything possible even if you don't bother to explain how. Yes, lasers are coherent. But individual photons are still just ordinary EM photons.

All the differences I listed were things that we know can be used to filter photons.

frequency - you can tailor the shields to absorb on the specific frequency of the laser, at the cost of other frequencies. Lasers are highly monochromatic, so the shields can concentrate all their defense on the frequency of the laser. this only works for protection against lasers or other highly monochromatic EM attacks, but it gives imporved protection at the cost of defense against other frequencies.

Polarisation - lasers are often highly polarised, so you can tailor the shields to absorb/reflect the light differently (particularly if the refractive index of the shields can be altered). turn the shields into the equivalent of birefringent crystals. Again, your defense would be best against a specific polarisation at the cost of other polarisations

The directionality of lasers can be used against them, as you can concentrate the shields where the attack is occuring, and engineer the shields to reflect the beam somewhere safe - you couldn't do this with an explosion or non-collimated beam, because a safe reflection for one part of the beam could be a dangerous reflection for another.

Lasers while coherent are not polarized. The Photon still are oriented in random phases as it makes up the beam. It still take 2 polerizers to block a laser the same as with 'normal' light.

the polarization theory has some other flaws.
just think what happens if you are fired uppon by more than one ship from more than one angle the shields must be anti polatrized to all the beams comming from all direction with the correct polarization to stop all the beams.

i doubt all lasers or beam weapons emit light or photons or whatever at the exact same polarization when fired every time and especially when fired from different ships at different angles of attack.

space is not flat it is three dimentional.
1dimention movement in one line.
2dimention movement along a curve on a plane.
3dimention movement along a curve on a cylynder or cone or another conic section.
an object oriented in space is oriented only to what is around it.

there is no limit to how one object is defined unless there is three of more
objects placed in space to which coordinates can be fixed to.

nothing is space is fixed everything is moving.

this is the first obsatcle overcome in designing any thing to be placed in space
how to orient the ship, satelite, or probe in relation to itself and where to put the various pods or pannels needed to operate the needs of the ship, satelite, or probe.
example
just look at the voyager probes they are designed the way they are not to be pretty but to be functional and efficient fullfill the misions desired of the probes.
the design has no real top or bottom just which part will face the planet and do al the scanning and whick parts face back to earth to relay the datta collected.

[SWPIGWANG]

just think what happens if you are fired uppon by more than one ship from more than one angle the shields must be anti polatrized to all the beams comming from all direction with the correct polarization to stop all the beams.

Well, different points on the shield are anti-polarized differently to match the hit beam, and there would be no problem unless to beam hits exactly the same spot.

And that would probably be using some technobabbly trick, but shields are technobabbly in itself anyway so it is no loss.

[SWPIGWANG]

arg lack of edit button SUXX0R

The problem is that the shield would have no information on the laser before it hit, so it have to respond effectively by changing polarization instanously when it is hit for it to be be effective. It appears unlikely that shield generators could respond at that rate and manipulate the shields so it probably is a property of the shield.

Than again, this is in world with FTL communication and other weirdness...

[Isolder74]

Lasers while coherent are not polarized. The Photon still are oriented in random phases as it makes up the beam. It still take 2 polerizers to block a laser the same as with 'normal' light.

meh?

*damn, gotta look up stuff now....*

just get a laser pointer and a two pairs of sunglasses and try it yourself!

[Darth Wong]

The point about polarizing filters is that they have to do the exact same amount of work to stop a laser as they do to stop any other form of light, so what difference does it make? Edam is appealing to ignorance: unless you explain why some distinction can NOT be used for magical invincibility, then any difference is a fair candidate for invincibility. Just say "it's different in this respect, therefore ... invincibility!"

[Isolder74]

arg lack of edit button SUXX0R

The problem is that the shield would have no information on the laser before it hit, so it have to respond effectively by changing polarization instanously when it is hit for it to be be effective. It appears unlikely that shield generators could respond at that rate and manipulate the shields so it probably is a property of the shield.

Than again, this is in world with FTL communication and other weirdness...

The only way a polerization effect would work is if the shield has two layers 90 degrees out of phase with each other. This of course would result in no EM Radiation getting into or out of the shield. Not what I would call a good defense.

[SWPIGWANG]

The idea only works if lasers are polarized in one direction. (which appears not to be the case)

I guess frequency specific blocking is the only possible mechanism that remains.

The point about polarizing filters is that they have to do the exact same amount of work to stop a laser as they do to stop any other form of light, so what difference does it make?

We are coming up with proposals on how a shield can be made to block lasers but not other forms of EM since the visuals clearly shows that other EM passed though the shield. We are trying to see if this is possible.

The mechanism behind how a trek shield works is basically completely unknown anyway so we have to rely on the suspension of disbelief.

But invincibility means that the shield probably take no work when blocking lasers. A perfect mirror perhaps?

[Darth Wong]

But invincibility means that the shield probably take no work when blocking lasers. A perfect mirror perhaps?

Even a theoretically perfect mirror requires a momentum transfer and therefore, reaction force. A sufficiently powerful laser would crush the shield generator.

As for ways to block lasers but not EM, that is a sub-topic to the larger topic which is about GK's idiotic claim that nav deflectors are infinitely immune to lasers. It is not a subject change to point out irrelevancy of this tangent to the larger issue under discussion.

[Darth Servo]

All the differences I listed were things that we know can be used to filter photons.

And every one of those filters has LIMITS. Get that through your thick skull.

frequency - you can tailor the shields to absorb on the specific frequency of the laser, at the cost of other frequencies. Lasers are highly monochromatic, so the shields can concentrate all their defense on the frequency of the laser. this only works for protection against lasers or other highly monochromatic EM attacks, but it gives imporved protection at the cost of defense against other frequencies.

The shields STILL have limits to the TOTAL amount of energy they can block.

Polarisation - lasers are often highly polarised, so you can tailor the shields to absorb/reflect the light differently (particularly if the refractive index of the shields can be altered). turn the shields into the equivalent of birefringent crystals. Again, your defense would be best against a specific polarisation at the cost of other polarisations

Pure bullshit. In my freshman physics lab we worked with ordinary low power lasers and they were NOT polarized. Furthermore, even if lasers were polarized, a laser of sufficient power would still vaporise the polarizer.

The directionality of lasers can be used against them, as you can concentrate the shields where the attack is occuring, and engineer the shields to reflect the beam somewhere safe - you couldn't do this with an explosion or non-collimated beam, because a safe reflection for one part of the beam could be a dangerous reflection for another.

Name one canon instance where they were able to control their shields this precisely. They can direct them forward, aft, etc, but when have we seen them able focus them all on one small point of impact? Never. Everytime we see the shields hit by anything, the energy is rapidly spread out over a large section of the shield ovoid.

Each individual photon in the laser may be no different to any other EM photon, but the bulk properties of a laser are different to the bulk properties of other EM attacks, and give you a way to have an apparent immunity to lasers without being immune to all EM.

Energy is still energy and Trek shields have NEVER demostrated the ability to deflect "apparent" infinite energy.

Of course, to prove / disprove any of these would require observations we don't have. The only time we've seen a laser used on Trek ships the shields were already down. They are just speculation as to how the laser immunity quote could make some sense (even then, you don't get actual immunity, just protection against energies so high that you might as well call it immunity)

But it is a canon fact that shields are not indestructable; they cannot withstand infinite EM radiation, no matter how many technobabble excuses you dredge up.

If I make a blue bullet, it will be different from all other bullets; does this mean we should assume it's possible to make armour that will block this bullet but allow all other bullets to pass through?

I've never heard of the colour of a bullet making any difference to how it acts, so what you suggest is a little different to our discussion on lasers.

And I've never heard of frequency, polarization, etc having any effect on the TOTAL POWER of a laser. The Frequency myth has already been thoroughly debunked yet you keep bringing it up again. Pathetic.

Now, if you changed the colour to magnetism, so that you had one magnetic bullet and one non magnetic bullet you might be closer to the difference between lasers and general EM (obviously you'd just turn your armour into a big magnet so the magnetic bullet never hits, but you still leave yourself open to other bullets, and particularly vulnerable to the bullets your magnet attracts)

Oh, so are you saying that if you attacked the E-D with lasers of two or more different colors then one would slip right through the Nav deflectors? You were proven to be an idiot in the debate with Darth Wong. Why do you continue to make yourself look even more stupid?

[Frank LLoyd Wright]

how are we now argueing the reflectivity of shields when all i have ever seen a shield do is dissipate the energy of weapons by spreading out a beam or causing a torpedo to splat on the shield.
and every time the shield is hit no matter the weapon there is a loss to the shield with some percentage amount.
if lasers are incapable of damaging a anti laser shield yet damage an electromagnetic shield (lasers are EM too).
than i think the writers of star treck had better go back to elementary physics or even astronomy to rediscover what light or EM is.
we cook food with microwaves EM and use infared lasers EM burn data on CDs. just think of all the things that use EM in star trek

if the shield blocks all lasers than it would have to block all EM
this type of shield would make a great cloaking devise because it would compleetly cloak the ship with a black field.
nothing would go in or out.
don't use it when moving or fighting because flying dead blind is deadly.
and pure comunication dead blackout from your defences is deadly too.

[SWPIGWANG]

Energy is still energy and Trek shields have NEVER demostrated the ability to deflect "apparent" infinite energy.

hmmm..... when you have infinite energy, universe be damned

[Isolder74]

Energy is still energy and Trek shields have NEVER demostrated the ability to deflect "apparent" infinite energy.

hmmm..... when you have infinite energy, universe be damned

exactally why the idea of imunity against lasers doesn't work. It takes energy to block energy with a energy field. now it won't take 10 watts to block 10 watts but its still takes energy to deflect the beam. so the defender still has to have enough energy to stop the incoming attack.