How does the new Star Wars Canon affect the debate?

[Borgholio]

Saying that Planetary shields exist because no one talks about them is a fallacy

Saying that they DON'T exist because no one talks about them is the same thing, asshole.

Can you quote me ever saying that Alderaan is a nuclear explosion? Like you said Dialogue is proof

that would be a chain reaction. Having one thing causing other things to react is a chain reaction. They dump a terrefic amount of energy into a planet there is an explosion which causes several other explosions of various sizes.

We are talking about nuclear chain reactions and ONLY nuclear chain reactions. We are not talking about a series of events happening in order from cause to effect. We are referring to the kind where nuclear energy is released which causes more nuclear energy to be released from nearby atoms. THAT IS NOT HAPPENING HERE.

I could not agree more with you. If you take a rock and add a lot of heat the rock will shatter. However it will not ever create a this

Pumping more energy into a planet in one second that our sun generates in thousands of years is not "simply adding a lot of heat". With that much energy, you better believe there will be a fireball.

one of several KINDS of chain reaction. Are you now saying that nuclear chain reactions are the only type of chain reactions because that is what you wrote.

Emperor Palpatine constructs Death Star and gives command to Tarkin -> Tarkin wants to set an example so heads to Alderaan -> Tarkin gives order to fire superlaser -> Superlaser charges up -> Gunner pushes big red button -> Superlaser fires -> Superlaser hits planet -> Massive amount of energy enters core and causes superheating -> Superheated core explodes taking the planet with it

There. Chain reaction. Want to go farther back? We can do it. Now you see how ridiculous your definition of chain reaction is for the purposes of this discussion?

[Borgholio]

You guys do understand that a Rube Goldberg machine is really a set of Chain reactions right?

WE

ARE

TALKING

ABOUT

NUCLEAR

CHAIN

REACTIONS

ONLY

YOU

STUPID

SON

OF

A

WHORE

[malguslover]

Saying that they DON'T exist because no one talks about them is the same thing, asshole.

The fact that there is no evidnece of planetary sheild is not proof that something exists.

We are talking about nuclear chain reactions and ONLY nuclear chain reactions.

Goal post shifting I see. I never once called it a Nuclear Chain reaction. I did say that a Nuclear bomb is a type of chain reaction. But I never once said that Alderaan was a nuclear explosoin. Why would it be?

Are you claiming that it is?

Pumping more energy into a planet

With that much energy, you better believe there will be a fireball.

Massive amount of energy enters core

You didn't answer my question before. but since you're an expert at physics and thermodynamics what kind of energy is this?

[Xess]

The energy that composes the super laser is unknown. That being said in general energy is absorbed by matter as heat, you add enough heat at a fast enough rate you get a rapidly expanding ball of plasma. This makes a big boom.

I'm note sure if you understand what people other than you mean by "chain reaction" in this thread. Here "chain reaction" means that the energy that destroys the planet is supplied by the planet itself as opposed to supplied by the Death Star. With the evidence in the film either is equally viable as an explanation. The chain reaction could liberate more energy from the core thus causing the second boom or the core could absorb more energy from the super-laser but at a slower rate thus causing the second boom.

[Batman]

THAT IS A CHAIN REACTION. If throw a stick of dynamite into a gas station the resulting explosions are caused by a chain reaction. The dynamite causes the gasoline to ignite. That is by its very defintion a chain reaction

And that, my misguided Warsie friends, is why every time somebody set fire to or set off explosions on this here planet Earth, the planet exploded. Because planets are just like gas stations. Planets are practically begging to explode and just need a small trigger event to set them off instead of, yes I know this sounds ridiculous, being made of inherently inert matter that needs some seriously insane energy input to behave the way we saw.

[malguslover]

The energy that composes the super laser is unknown. That being said in general energy is absorbed by matter as heat, you add enough heat at a fast enough rate you get a rapidly expanding ball of plasma. This makes a big boom.

I'm note sure if you understand what people other than you mean by "chain reaction" in this thread. Here "chain reaction" means that the energy that destroys the planet is supplied by the planet itself as opposed to supplied by the Death Star. With the evidence in the film either is equally viable as an explanation. The chain reaction could liberate more energy from the core thus causing the second boom or the core could absorb more energy from the super-laser but at a slower rate thus causing the second boom.

Thank you this is what i have been trying to tell them.

btw i love your sig I was a plant operator at Turkey Point

[Xess]

Thank you this is what i have been trying to tell them.

btw i love your sig I was a plant operator at Turkey Point

You're welcome. All that being said, a non-chain reaction mechanism seems to be more likely to me since it doesn't add a step between "shoot death-ray" and "planet kersplodes", but I can't prove it one way or the other.

[Eternal_Freedom]

The problem with your "dynamite at a gas station" analogy is that the second stage adds more energy to the event, whilst we see no evidence that Alderann added more energy to it's destruction.

Like Xess said, it could be either way, but since we have dialogue explicitly stating that the DSI can generate "enough power to destroy a planet" and we have no mention of a chain reaction within Alderaan, then we can go with the simpler explanation of "The Death Star powers a big damn raygun that shatters planets in one shot" since it doesn't require an extra unknown mechanism.

[Borgholio]

The fact that there is no evidnece of planetary sheild is not proof that something exists.

Look at the goddamn frame. You see a shield bubble. There's your evidence.

Goal post shifting I see.

Not shifting, SETTING. I am setting the goal posts because you can't get it through your thick fucking skull that when you are referring to high energy weapons, you are typically referring to nuclear or atomic chain reactions and not the mundane kind of chain reactions you would get if you, say, flew the Death Star itself into the planet in a giant kamikaze run.

But I never once said that Alderaan was a nuclear explosoin. Why would it be?

Because when you talk about a chain reaction, most physicists will assume the nuclear variety.

since you're an expert at physics and thermodynamics what kind of energy is this?

Not an expert, but I'm sure as hell better at analyzing things than you are. So let's do this.

Since you have a boner for dialogue, let's see what it is they say about the nature of turbolasers. Hmm...you know I can't recall a shred of evidence about exactly what a turbolaser is. They don't discuss exotic particles, they don't discuss weapon yields, they discuss nothing about it. They call it a turbolaser or a blaster. And...that's about it. Can't get much info there, so sucks to be you. I guess we just have to look at what we see on screen.

Well for starters, it has laser in it's name. If it is a laser, then it's simple EM energy directed at the planet. Said energy burns a hole through the planet, imparting enough raw heat and energy to exceed the thermal dissipation rate of the planet. That extra energy has to go somewhere. So...boom.

But looking at the on screen evidence, it's clearly not a laser. It's slower than the speed of light, visible in a vacuum, and travels in small bolts instead of continuous beams. Sounds like some form of plasma weapon to me. Ok so let's assume it's a plasma weapon. How does that change things? Well, it doesn't. Remember, NO DIALOGUE. So we can't assume some form of exotic particle or new state of matter, just highly charged and energized gas shot out of a cannon. So what happens when the DS fires a bolt of highly focused plasma at the planet? The bolt burns a hole through the planet, imparting enough raw heat and energy to exceed the thermal dissipation rate of the planet. That extra energy has to go somewhere. So...boom.

Is that a good enough non-expert analysis for you? Or do you want me to give you a popup book?

Thank you this is what i have been trying to tell them.

And you have done a great job. We got you a long time ago. Trouble is, there is no evidence for that at all! It is simpler (and therefore more likely) to assume it's just raw energy pumped into a planet that causes a massive explosion. Again back to your beloved dialogue, since they don't talk about the exact mechanism of the Death Star weapon, why the fuck would you assume a more exotic and complicated explanation when a simple *BANG* + *SPLAT* would do just fine?

[Eternal_Freedom]

Since all we have to go on (really) is dialogue and such, I think it's significant that the opening crawl states:

"the Empire's ultimate weapon, the DEATH STAR, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet."

Not "has the ability to", "has enough power to destroy an entire planet."

Yes, fine it's semantics, but it and other dialogue is all we have to work with since the visuals could go either way. Between using the simplest explanation and this opening crawl, I logically assume it's a brute-force weapon. Dump fuckloads of energy into planet, planet goes boom.

Now, if anyone has any unambiguous evidence that it was a chain-reaction effect a la Ender's Game, then by all means present it. Yes, the EU and it's statements on the Death Star are no longer canon, but that's not a problem since those explanations didn't disagree with what was seen on screen.

[malguslover]

Look at the goddamn frame. You see a shield bubble. There's your evidence.

Hmm earth has a shield bubble as well. Thank's Obama for buidling a planetary shield instead of fixing the economy
http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/scrc/file ... sphere.jpg

http://stardate.org/sites/default/files ... on%202.jpg

All the "goddamn" frame shows is that when a extremely bright laser hits the surface of planet as it bores down into the core it lights up the atmosphere

If the Shield fails why is it still there? Would it be off the second the Superlaser goes through it?

Because when you talk about a chain reaction, most physicists will assume the nuclear variety.

I'm not a Physicist are you?

Not an expert

no I guess not. So why would you assume that I was talking about a nuclear chain reaction when no one here is a nuclear physicist or was talking about it? The truth is that you used chain reaction and nuclear chain reaction interchangeably. See all nuclear chain reactions are chain reactions but not all chain reactions are nuclear chain reactions.

If you were confused you could have just asked.

Since you have a boner for dialogue, let's see what it is they say about the nature of turbolasers. Hmm...you know I can't recall a shred of evidence about exactly what a turbolaser is. They don't discuss exotic particles, they don't discuss weapon yields, they discuss nothing about it. They call it a turbolaser or a blaster. And...that's about it. Can't get much info there, so sucks to be you. I guess we just have to look at what we see on screen.

Great but ummm what does a Turbolaser have to do with the death stars Superlaser? Oh are you using Turbolaser interchangeably for Superlaser now? Didn't we just talk about how you shouldn't do that?

Well couple things Turbo laser isn't mentioned in the OT anywhere but since we all know thats what they are called we can still call them that i guess


Oh and how does it suck to be me since they don't explain it? Because that's what i'm getting at. With no explanation you can't make assumptions like you do.

But looking at the on screen evidence, it's clearly not a laser. It's slower than the speed of light, visible in a vacuum, and travels in small bolts instead of continuous beams

I agree if you are talking about Turbolasers but disagree about the Death star since that is a continues beam.

But moving on

Sounds like some form of plasma weapon to me

Really? So this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Fcg3RUDGFk

makes you think of this '
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuUJwFLUpS0

See I play a lot of WH40k and the way plasma weapons work in that is that they are large balls of super heated plasma. The blaster bolts in Star Wars looking nothing like a plasma weapon would.

Now be honest are you just going by the old canon? Because that's what it sounds like.

So we can't assume some form of exotic particle or new state of matter

why not? because there is nothing to indicate that its a plasma weapon. We don't even see a single person in the movies "reload" a weapon.

Now of course the bigger issue here is you are trying to say that a Turbolaser and the Death Stars superlaser work the same? Based on what? The on screen evidence doesn't show that and even by the old canon that is wrong.

imparting enough raw heat and energy to exceed the thermal dissipation rate of the planet. That extra energy has to go somewhere. So...boom.

So you are claiming that the all the Death Stars superweapon does is heat the planet extremely fast to cause several huge explosions.

That is an interesting theory

In fact that is actually my theory as well the difference being I beleive the heat that is used causes several other explosions which we witness by this fact

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wag8PF2g3Mc
watch at 34 secons the explosion begins 35 seconds the intial explosion has already begun to fade at 36 seconds a much larger explosion is formed from BEHIND the original explosion

[malguslover]

Since all we have to go on (really) is dialogue and such, I think it's significant that the opening crawl states:

"the Empire's ultimate weapon, the DEATH STAR, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet."

Not "has the ability to", "has enough power to destroy an entire planet."

Yes, fine it's semantics, but it and other dialogue is all we have to work with since the visuals could go either way. Between using the simplest explanation and this opening crawl, I logically assume it's a brute-force weapon. Dump fuckloads of energy into planet, planet goes boom.

Now, if anyone has any unambiguous evidence that it was a chain-reaction effect a la Ender's Game, then by all means present it. Yes, the EU and it's statements on the Death Star are no longer canon, but that's not a problem since those explanations didn't disagree with what was seen on screen.

if we are talking thermal energy that super heats the planet to fracture then its not brute force. Brute force would be smashing something with a hammer. IE the superlaser hits the planet so hard it breaks apart.

So if say the Death Stars main weapon was a huge Mass driver ie a weapon that takes a large mass and fires it at an incredible velcotiy to create a force capable of destruction ie F=MA

edit also if it was brute force there wouldn't really be debry flying in the direction of the beam. It would all be pushed away. oh and power is just the rate at which work is being done but i can't imagine that Lucas was thinking about that when he wrote the opening crawl.

[Batman]

Somebody doesn't understand what 'brute force' is commonly held to mean around here. I rather suspect it's the exact same thing that it's held to mean in the rest of the english-speaking world of course but just to be on the safe side, when SDN says 'brute force' we don't mean 'mechanical impactor', we mean 'yes we just dumped enough energy into the target for the observed results to be inevitable'.

[Eternal_Freedom]

You are astonishingly dense malguslover. "Brute force" meaning "done by energy transfer alone" as opposed to "triggers some unknown chain reaction process to destroy the planet."

Oh, you're also a dishonest shithead, since turbolasers are named in the OT. During the Battle of Yavin, an Imperial Officer reports to Vader:

"We counted at least 30 Rebel ships Lord Vader, but they're so small they're evading our turbolasers."

nn fact that is actually my theory as well the difference being I beleive the heat that is used causes several other explosions which we witness by this fact

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wag8PF2g3Mc
watch at 34 secons the explosion begins 35 seconds the intial explosion has already begun to fade at 36 seconds a much larger explosion is formed from BEHIND the original explosion

So by your own words the other explosions are secondary ones. Now, since the planet is extremely unlikely to contain vast lumps of near-critical mass fissile material, or lumps of naturally-contained antimatter, or anything like what would create a big enough bang, where does the energy for those secondary explosions come from?

[malguslover]

Oh, you're also a dishonest shithead, since turbolasers are named in the OT. During the Battle of Yavin, an Imperial Officer reports to Vader:

JAJAJA Serioulsy? I forget a single line of dialgoue and that makes me a dishonest piece of shit. Ok then but tell me how that changes anything I said?

You are astonishingly dense malguslover. "Brute force" meaning "done by energy transfer alone" as opposed to "triggers some unknown chain reaction process to destroy the planet."

.... serioulsy? I was supposed to know that when you said "brute force" you mean "by energy transfer alone"

Ok tell me how I was supposed to know that.

So by your own words the other explosions are secondary ones. Now, since the planet is extremely unlikely to contain vast lumps of near-critical mass fissile material, or lumps of naturally-contained antimatter, or anything like what would create a big enough bang, where does the energy for those secondary explosions come from?

When did I ever once say that the explosions were not secondary? Why would the planet need any near critical mass fissible material or antimatter?

Why are those the only two options?

[Borgholio]

Hmm earth has a shield bubble as well. Thank's Obama for buidling a planetary shield instead of fixing the economy

That's the atmosphere you mental midget. And what the fuck does Obama have to do with this thread?

Thanks to our own Darth Wong, here is an excellent picture showing a portion of the DS blast being blocked by the shield before the planet blows up:

If the Shield fails why is it still there? Would it be off the second the Superlaser goes through it?

It WAS cut off the moment it was hit. Take a look. The shield absorbs part of the blast for a fraction of a second, but overloads and lets the rest of the blast through. Boom.

I'm not a Physicist are you?

I do not have a doctorate, no. I'm simply smarter than you.

So why would you assume that I was talking about a nuclear chain reaction when no one was talking about?

Because everybody who has ever tried to talk about the DS method of destroying planets has compared it to Star Trek Phasers or the Xindi superweapon which are both explained to use exotic particles called nadions which (somehow) cause a NUCLEAR CHAIN REACTION in the target which causes it to release more energy than you put into it and cause the vaporization or destruction of the target. Nobody has ever tried to describe it as a kinetic or thermal chain reaction.

If you were confused you could have just asked.

You are the one who appears to be confused by applying inappropriate terms to basic physics.

Great but ummm what does a Turbolaser have to do with the death stars Superlaser? Oh are you using Turbolaser interchangeably for Superlaser now? Didn't we just talk about how you shouldn't do that?

No, we didn't talk about it. That's in your head as well. But why can't we use them interchangeably? They're the same thing, just different size. Don't believe me? Look at Episode 2. Look at the "mini-superlasers" used by the Clone Troopers. They're virtually identical to turbolaser bolts.

Well couple things Turbo laser isn't mentioned in the OT anywhere

"We count 30 Rebel ships, Lord Vader. But they're so small they're evading our Turbo Lasers."

"We'll have to destroy them ship to ship. Get the crews to their fighters."

Dude if you can't even get such a basic and well-known piece of dialogue from the most pivotal scene in the entire saga correct, then get the fuck out of this thread right now.

Oh and how does it suck to be me since they don't explain it? Because that's what i'm getting at. With no explanation you can't make assumptions like you do.

It sucks to be you because you have been harping all along about how dialogue is more important than visual effects. They don't explain jack shit about how the DS works except to say, "...an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet."

So all they say it has enough firepower to destroy a planet. They don't talk about anything else. So no matter what you do, you're left with an assumption about the mechanism of how it works. Either it just dumps a shit-ton of raw energy into a planet, or it uses an exotic nuclear disruption force. Now, which solution is more simple? Raw energy, or mystery particles that are never seen, discussed, or even implied over 6 movies and 30+ years of books and spin-offs if you wish to include the EU?

I agree if you are talking about Turbolasers but disagree about the Death star since that is a continues beam.

No it is not. It is just a very long bolt. A very long bolt that is combined by hundreds of smaller pulses that terminates after about 2 or 3 seconds, is still visible and in a vacuum and still moves slower than lightspeed.

Really? So this makes you think of this '

Do you have a better explanation on what a Turbolaser or Blaster is? I hope you're not going to call it a chain reaction.

See I play a lot of WH40k and the way plasma weapons work in that is that they are large balls of super heated plasma. The blaster bolts in Star Wars looking nothing like a plasma weapon would.

Since you need to drag 40k into this, how about I simply drag in Stargate SG1, Babylon 5, and Star Trek into this as well? All three series have weapons that look very similar to a blaster bolt and they are quite clearly explained as plasma weapons. If you're going to say that Star Wars weapons aren't plasma because they don't resemble a plasma globe or a neon light, why don't you go ahead and say that Stargate, B5, and ST are wrong too?

Now be honest are you just going by the old canon? Because that's what it sounds like.

Are...are you really that stupid? I'm quoting a line from the original 1977 Star Wars...YOU CAN'T GET ANY FUCKING OLDER CANON THAN THAT!!! Are you referring to the EU? I'm sure as hell not.

why not? because there is nothing to indicate that its a plasma weapon

What else would it be? Please, I'd like to hear some of your ideas.

We don't even see a single person in the movies "reload" a weapon.

Star Wars Episode 4 - Stormtroopers on Tatooine heading to Docking Bay 94, "Allright men, load your weapons."

Star Wars Episode 3 - Star Destroyers shown reloading their turbolasers with large shell-containers.

The blaster bolts in Star Wars looking nothing like a plasma weapon would.

Please describe what a plasma weapon would look like if it were designed by a civilization 10 thousand years more advanced than us.

are trying to say that a Turbolaser and the Death Stars superlaser work the same? Based on what?

Star Wars Episode 5 - Star Destroyer shattering asteroids with light and medium turbolaser blasts. Bolt of green energy lances out, hits a big rock, blows it to tiny molten chunks. Sound familiar?

even by the old canon that is wrong.

What is this old canon bullshit? If you're referring to the EU then just say the EU. If you're flat out denying the relevance of the OT or PT movies then just get the fuck out.

So you are claiming that the all the Death Stars superweapon does is heat the planet extremely fast to cause several huge explosions.

It causes ONE huge explosion. The fact that the pieces of the planet do not explode at the same speed is a function of what the planet is made of. It is not one small explosion that leads to another that leads to another.

In fact that is actually my theory as well the difference being I beleive the heat that is used causes several other explosions which we witness by this fact

That is not what we witness. We see a rolling, boiling, expanding cloud of superheated gas, dust and debris. Look closely at :35 seconds. You see a dark object within the cloud moving to the left. It is large enough to be a chunk of the planet or most likely the solid iron core. Solid iron will resist explosion better than the crust or mantle, so it makes sense that it would the longest to finally destabilize.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Oh, you're also a dishonest shithead, since turbolasers are named in the OT. During the Battle of Yavin, an Imperial Officer reports to Vader:

JAJAJA Serioulsy? I forget a single line of dialgoue and that makes me a dishonest piece of shit. Ok then but tell me how that changes anything I said?

Like Borgholio said, it's not exactly a throwaway line. And since you'll have watched ANH to talk about the destruction of Alderaan, you'll have seen this bit as well, unless you're going purely by youtube clips.

You are astonishingly dense malguslover. "Brute force" meaning "done by energy transfer alone" as opposed to "triggers some unknown chain reaction process to destroy the planet."

.... serioulsy? I was supposed to know that when you said "brute force" you mean "by energy transfer alone"

Ok tell me how I was supposed to know that.

Like Batman said, it's a common distinction on SDN. Given how long you've been here and your postcount you must have done some lurking and seen it sued somewhere in nearly 2 years. It's certainly used freely on the main site if you ever read that.

So by your own words the other explosions are secondary ones. Now, since the planet is extremely unlikely to contain vast lumps of near-critical mass fissile material, or lumps of naturally-contained antimatter, or anything like what would create a big enough bang, where does the energy for those secondary explosions come from?

When did I ever once say that the explosions were not secondary? Why would the planet need any near critical mass fissible material or antimatter?

Why are those the only two options?

READ. WHAT. I. FUCKING. WROTE. I did not say the planet would contain those things, or that they are the only options. I was asking you where the energy for those other/secondary explosions came from. The part about fissile material and antimatter was to show that it is extremely implausible for the energy to come from the planet itself.

This is why you're a dishonest shithead. You are mis-representing what I said while quoting my exact words.

[malguslover]

Hmm earth has a shield bubble as well. Thank's Obama for buidling a planetary shield instead of fixing the economy

That's the atmosphere you mental midget. And what the fuck does Obama have to do with this thread?

Thanks to our own Darth Wong, here is an excellent picture showing a portion of the DS blast being blocked by the shield before the planet blows up:




It WAS cut off the moment it was hit. Take a look. The shield absorbs part of the blast for a fraction of a second, but overloads and lets the rest of the blast through. Boom.

funny thing I looked at the image and it looked really off and I kept thinking why? Then I realized why its green. Why is the explosion green. In the videos its not green then it occurded to me i'm pretty sure that image is from the orignal editions and not the Special Editions which means its not canon.

So I quick pulled some images of a fraction of second before and one at the same time as the image you posted and look at the difference.



Now yes these are not even close to HD i'll get better ones later tonight off the Blu Rays

Big difference and no green explosion this time.

[malguslover]

Oh, you're also a dishonest shithead, since turbolasers are named in the OT. During the Battle of Yavin, an Imperial Officer reports to Vader:

JAJAJA Serioulsy? I forget a single line of dialgoue and that makes me a dishonest piece of shit. Ok then but tell me how that changes anything I said?

Like Borgholio said, it's not exactly a throwaway line. And since you'll have watched ANH to talk about the destruction of Alderaan, you'll have seen this bit as well, unless you're going purely by youtube clips.

You are astonishingly dense malguslover. "Brute force" meaning "done by energy transfer alone" as opposed to "triggers some unknown chain reaction process to destroy the planet."

.... serioulsy? I was supposed to know that when you said "brute force" you mean "by energy transfer alone"

Ok tell me how I was supposed to know that.

Like Batman said, it's a common distinction on SDN. Given how long you've been here and your postcount you must have done some lurking and seen it sued somewhere in nearly 2 years. It's certainly used freely on the main site if you ever read that.

So by your own words the other explosions are secondary ones. Now, since the planet is extremely unlikely to contain vast lumps of near-critical mass fissile material, or lumps of naturally-contained antimatter, or anything like what would create a big enough bang, where does the energy for those secondary explosions come from?

When did I ever once say that the explosions were not secondary? Why would the planet need any near critical mass fissible material or antimatter?

Why are those the only two options?

READ. WHAT. I. FUCKING. WROTE. I did not say the planet would contain those things, or that they are the only options. I was asking you where the energy for those other/secondary explosions came from. The part about fissile material and antimatter was to show that it is extremely implausible for the energy to come from the planet itself.

This is why you're a dishonest shithead. You are mis-representing what I said while quoting my exact words.

where do they get the power for all the ships? the weapons? the death star? they aren't burning coal are they?

oh and no i'm not a lurker i came here talked about star wars and went away for a long time

[Borgholio]

So when the shield tried to resist the Death Star blast they changed the color from green to orange....this proves nothing.

where do they get the power for all the ships? the weapons? the death star? they aren't burning coal are they?

I would advise you to read the entire section on this site about Star Wars Tech before you embarrass yourself any further. Here is the link:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/

[Eternal_Freedom]

So are you agreeing that all the energy for the explosion(s) came from the Death Star? (Also, way to ignore my question a second bloody time. How about an actual answer next time shithead?)

Because if so, those secondary explosions are the result of the energy being redistributed unevenly. You remember the posts earlier about different materials within the planet being affected differently, right?

To repeat: If all of the energy needed to destroy Alderaan came from the Death Star, then it is, by the common definition of SDN, a brute-force weapon not one that relies on a chain reaction within the target.

[malguslover]

So when the shield tried to resist the Death Star blast they changed the color from green to orange....this proves nothing.

where do they get the power for all the ships? the weapons? the death star? they aren't burning coal are they?

I would advise you to read the entire section on this site about Star Wars Tech before you embarrass yourself any further. Here is the link:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/

again none of that is canon anymore. Did you forget what the title of the topic you are posting in?

ok before you freak out some of it might be canon but the vast majority is not

[Borgholio]

ok before you freak out some of it might be canon but the vast majority is not

I agree with Eternal that you are a dishonest shithead. There is no way you could have read the entire section on SW tech and determined which is still canon within the last 45 seconds.

[malguslover]

So are you agreeing that all the energy for the explosion(s) came from the Death Star? (Also, way to ignore my question a second bloody time. How about an actual answer next time shithead?)

Because if so, those secondary explosions are the result of the energy being redistributed unevenly. You remember the posts earlier about different materials within the planet being affected differently, right?

To repeat: If all of the energy needed to destroy Alderaan came from the Death Star, then it is, by the common definition of SDN, a brute-force weapon not one that relies on a chain reaction within the target.

I was going to do a full rebuttle later I just really wanted to get those quick screen caps showing the CANON version of Alderaans destruction.

Those are actually 2 different questions

1. All the energy for the explosions
2. All the energy for Alderaans destruction.

Explosions no not at all. For the destruction of the planet yes. I do believe enough THERMAL energy was pumped into the core of Alderaan to cause it to break apart. I do not beleive that every single explosion there is from the intial Super Laser blast. That just doens't make any sense. The thermal energy has already dispated it wouldn't cause another explosion.

Think about a plate on the stove. As soon as you remove the source of the heat it immediately beings to cool down. If the larger chunks resisted the intial heat why are they exploding after the heat has been removed. Oh and of course the fact that rocks don't create fiery explosions that signifies the presence of some other element on the planet.

[Borgholio]

1. All the energy for the explosions
2. All the energy for Alderaans destruction.

Same question. The source of all this energy is the Death Star.

That just doens't make any sense.

It makes more sense than any other suggestion. Where did the extra energy come from? The planet? Impossible. Planets are not bombs. We only see one source of energy and it's the Death Star.

The thermal energy has already dispated it wouldn't cause another explosion.

The explosion WAS the dissipation. That's what you just don't get. Alderaan was absorbing energy from it's local sun quite fine and dissipating it easily. The Death Star gave it more power than it could dissipate, more power than was needed to melt it, more than was needed to break it apart. The amount of energy was so staggeringly high, it shattered the whole damn planet. There was no second explosion, it was...going back to my original arguments...a continuation of the main explosion.

Oh and of course the fact that rocks don't create fiery explosions that signifies the presence of some other element on the planet.

Oh they do when you hit them with nova-level blasts of energy.