you know the old analogy about apples and oranges?

Bug-Eyed Earl · Post by **Bug-Eyed Earl** » 2002-09-22 03:49am

It just seems odd to even try to compare two technologies that are created wtith different mindsets. Did George Lucas think "To prove the sheer engineering might of the Empire, I'll have them build a moon sized starship that holds together and is capable of great speeds!" I think it was more along the lines of "A huge space station is groovy, man!"

Star Wars technologies are created without any real thought to the science, but Star Trek is no different- though they try to be consistent, the pseudo science is all they rely on, and other than that, they only vaguely try to keep the tech consistent.

Really, it's like apples and oranges, and there really are too many factors to compare the two universes. We never see The Enterprise blast through asteroid fields because in real life asteroids are at least a million miles apart from each other in asteroid belts. but in SW, the ships have to have the guns to blast through. Based on what I've seen(and ONLY what I've seen), the technology in SW is designed to go with the plot. Regardless, I know Mike and the others don't and can't take this into account to keep it as simple as it can be. I just can't help but take the creative thought processes into account.

Still, I like SW better, mind you. Im just not as hard on Trek as some of you. Look me in the face and tell me that Data and Q are not two of the greatests characters in sci-fi.

Kudos to Darth Wong for making the comparison nonsense credible.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-09-22 04:48am

Q is pretty laughable and Data's an idiot whose 'search for emotions' is nothing but a really annoying plot device.

What GL thought when he created the DSs is merely irrelevant for that kind of debate, what the DS itself tells us is important, and we get the information by making observations and afterwards logical conclusions, and that is a scientific method. So as useless as the debate in itself may be you can actually learn something useful from it.

Whats wrong with debating which side would win? The only thing is that nothing useful will come from the debate, but people always tend to spend their free time with useless things, that's no more different than collecting toys or stamps.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2002-09-22 04:55am

Oh for fucks sake! Not that I am really mad at you per say, it's just I heard this argument from a friend of mine yesterday, and it really gets my goat. Read Mike's web site, under essays, especially the engineering one. As an engineering student I can honestly claim that ST ignores most of the aspects which we are taught in second year!

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2002-09-22 06:41am

Yeah, science fiction - or space opera, whatever - rarely design their ships for the sole purpose of beating the snot out of some other sci-fi series.

However, the fact remains that both series present to us - no matter how awkward or bizarre the presentation may sometimes be - certain stats and base capablities that we can measure. Those measurements are usually fairly comparable, with few exceptions.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2002-09-22 07:21am

The apple will kick the orange's butt.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-22 08:21am

Yes not all Sci-Fi's are designed to be God like super weaponey things, But the fact is B5, ST are just SO low down there on weaponry strengths its not even Funny, Look at Andromida, Also written by Gene who wrote ST and a full up fight between the two would be a massacre, between SW and it, its almost a fair Fight(AD still has Size on its side)

But then heres thing

B5,ST are on the bottom rungs, AD and SW are somewhere in the middle, While the Founders Series, The Culture and Marvelverse top out the most powerful

Belive me its fun trying to figure out how say B5 would match up aginst the Culture(Normaly an Eeep! followed by many squishing sounds) but then agian VS the Empire or ED its just as hard(Eep followed by OH-SHIT before lots of squishing sounds)

Just a useless but normaly fun thing to do with your spare time

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-22 12:27pm

I kind of agree with you. ST is the story of a small portion of the Galaxy and its desire to expand and learn more about what is going on around it. Star Wars is the story of a few individuals whose actions end up affecting the entire Galaxy. The fact that many Trekkies simply refuse to understand this leads them into hopeless situations with us, but your point is reasonably well taken.

On the other hand, technologies can always be compared.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2002-09-22 01:03pm

Mr Bean wrote:Yes not all Sci-Fi's are designed to be God like super weaponey things, But the fact is B5, ST are just SO low down there on weaponry strengths its not even Funny, Look at Andromida, Also written by Gene who wrote ST and a full up fight between the two would be a massacre, between SW and it, its almost a fair Fight(AD still has Size on its side)

But then heres thing

B5,ST are on the bottom rungs, AD and SW are somewhere in the middle, While the Founders Series, The Culture and Marvelverse top out the most powerful

Belive me its fun trying to figure out how say B5 would match up aginst the Culture(Normaly an Eeep! followed by many squishing sounds) but then agian VS the Empire or ED its just as hard(Eep followed by OH-SHIT before lots of squishing sounds)

Just a useless but normaly fun thing to do with your spare time

Well to be fair, in gene's version the Andromeda was a fed ship. just a more advanced one...

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-22 01:04pm

Well to be fair, in gene's version the Andromeda was a fed ship. just a more advanced one

His First Script read that way but when he wrote the Pilot he changed it to be an entirely diffrent universe

Post by **NecronLord** » 2002-09-22 01:13pm

oh, he wrote the pilot? I stand corrected...

Bug-Eyed Earl · Post by **Bug-Eyed Earl** » 2002-09-22 01:52pm

Cpt_Frank wrote:
What GL thought when he created the DSs is merely irrelevant for that kind of debate, what the DS itself tells us is important, and we get the information by making observations and afterwards logical conclusions, and that is a scientific method. So as useless as the debate in itself may be you can actually learn something useful from it.

.

I merely said that I personally have a hard time forgetting that- to put it another way, I won't be writing any SW/SF crossover fics anytime soon. Notice the compliment to Mike- I felt that comparing the two in this manner is nearly impossible, but Mike Wong made it work.

Doomriser · Post by **Doomriser** » 2002-09-22 04:40pm

Trek 'at least tries to be consistent?'

ROFL! Prove Trek is more consistent than Wars.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-22 06:09pm

Doomriser wrote:Trek 'at least tries to be consistent?'

ROFL! Prove Trek is more consistent than Wars.

What? Trek is more consistent than Star Wars? Since when? Have you even watched Enterprise? Thanks for bringing that part to my attention, Doomriser. Anyone who wrote that is a complete idiot. To be fair, it's not entirely ST's fault. Different writers will have different values. However, Enterprise's complete disregard for continuity, as well as the incredible lack of understanding of science in all ST shows is ludicrous. Star Wars is almost totally consistent within the universe. That is something that is difficult to achieve. ST has no such success in terms of consistency, although it is clear that they are not trying to be succesful in this particular area.

Bug-Eyed Earl · Post by **Bug-Eyed Earl** » 2002-09-22 11:33pm

Master of Ossus wrote:
Doomriser wrote:Trek 'at least tries to be consistent?'

ROFL! Prove Trek is more consistent than Wars.
What? Trek is more consistent than Star Wars? Since when? Have you even watched Enterprise? Thanks for bringing that part to my attention, Doomriser. Anyone who wrote that is a complete idiot. .

First of all, I said they try, but they fail (and from what I've heard aobut Enterprise, they don't even do that anymore.). And I have never seen Enterprise, and I don't read ST tech journals. I don't listen to the techno babble. You could say Im not well informed- Im a casual Trek viewer. On the surface, there seems to be no inconsistencies, but I haven't looked as far as you guys have. That and I don't care.

Dead on Arrival · Post by **Dead on Arrival** » 2002-09-23 08:21pm

Rodenberry didn't write the pilot for Andromeda. The current series is his in name alone, nothing more...

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2002-09-23 08:24pm

The only consistant Trek I have seen is Star Fleet Battles-And tactics are actually used, no treknobabble involved.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2002-09-23 08:40pm

Of course, sci-fi wasn't meant for debating, but a few years ago, some guy decided to see what would happen if the two fought. Sure, none if it is possible, hence the name "sci-fi", but we're not here to explain how they work. We're here ot observe and compare their capabilities.