superlaser question...

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-12 10:52am

SirNitram wrote:I suppose I was a little harsh on him, but I honestly have trouble with the amount of stupidity Connor is flinging about here. The 'TL's are Energy' was dealt with back during the days of the Nav Deflector, for Bob's sake. I suppose I just need to be more considerate about my aim.

Ofcourse those days and those very debates yielded the the painfully scinetifically ignorant plasma theory brainbug, and the only reason it was done so was due to the incredibly dubious reasons of eliminating a possible weakness in vs debates, oh yeah, that was certianly done with the aim of being true instead of being used to fulfill a temporary transient debating need, but instead of dying once used it gathered a life on its own and got enough momentum to infest alot of people who's knowledge of plasma is hardly more than something hot and glowy.

And flakbursting, ugh, another brainbug(that I'll be reccomending for MW's brainbug page), that if anything will make SW forces moronic beyond salvation(aotc in particular, and ANH, TESB and so on), man redshirts could take SW forces on now.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-01-12 12:01pm

HDS, are you painfully ignorant? Seriously, you seem to be masturbating to these theories in lieu of actual thought.

TL's are not energy. They have a major component with moves slower than light and is at least partly responsible for the bursts.

For the flak theory to be wrong, you must invent situations where the shields are, for no good reason, much farther out than we observe them to be in the Canon films. In addition, they must be reacting in ways other than we've observed them(The pic of the Tantive IV, which, if we're going to throw around big-name debators, I will point out Saxton says this is how shields and TL's interact).

The Plasmoid theory is not a brain bug, but is strongly supported within Official. I think it's one of those 'amazing technology' books which describes the TL making plasma in it's barrel and using a bottle effect. I'll get the quote later.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-12 12:43pm

SirNitram wrote: For the flak theory to be wrong, you must invent situations where the shields are, for no good reason, much farther out than we observe them to be in the Canon films. In addition, they must be reacting in ways other than we've observed them(The pic of the Tantive IV, which, if we're going to throw around big-name debators, I will point out Saxton says this is how shields and TL's interact).

No, it's how shields and bolts interact when the shield cannot repel the bolt- the bolt in its entirety, the bolt splinters- it isn't indicative of every shield interaction- for one thing, if it was, every bolt would splinter and do damage to the ships's hull, ala Tantive IV.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-01-12 12:58pm

Conceeded on the splinter. Bolts that don't penetrate look like this...

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-12 01:03pm

SirNitram wrote:HDS, are you painfully ignorant? Seriously, you seem to be masturbating to these theories in lieu of actual thought

Oh please.

TL's are not energy. They have a major component with moves slower than light and is at least partly responsible for the bursts.

You can claim theyare not if you wish, you are still wrong on that though.

In the movies we see bolt/shield interactions without any visisble bolt anywhere, we see damage before impacts and they also travel at C(superlasers and compound lasers), also note official evidence of laser cannons being said to move at C.

For the flak theory to be wrong, you must invent situations where the shields are, for no good reason, much farther out than we observe them to be in the Canon films.

For the theory to be right, which is the issue you have to prove it.

And the visuals already contradict the idea that they are not energy, and definitly not plasma, because we see flakbursts and impacts without ANY visual bolts whatsoever, energized matter tends to both arc in gravity wells and be visisble against bright backgrounds.

In addition, they must be reacting in ways other than we've observed them(The pic of the Tantive IV, which, if we're going to throw around big-name debators, I will point out Saxton says this is how shields and TL's interact)

I will point out to debators to read his site more carefully, and this thread where this is already addressed.

The Plasmoid theory is not a brain bug, but is strongly supported within Official. I think it's one of those 'amazing technology' books which describes the TL making plasma in it's barrel and using a bottle effect. I'll get the quote later.

Oh there are separate mentions of that stupid piece of shit in the visual dictionaries, but only on blasters, never anything bigger(and the ICS has tibanna gas as COOLANT!), but it's directly visually contradicted on many occasions, best of the contradictions is every time it fires and the bolt isn't white hot like the sun or expanding with the force like an explosion, ofcourse AOTC and it's total lack of arcing bolts is also pretty good, not that there's anything wrong with the images of translucent bolts either, but let's not forget the classic "no arcing".

In short I don't give a damn, it's right up there with 8km SSD's.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-01-12 01:08pm

Oy.

TL's are energy, huh? It doesn't matter that we can see part of the beam move at less than lightspeed? Gods above and below. Of course, if you read my posts here, you'd know I agree part is lightspeed.. But you'd see the word 'part', which actually fits Canon. But you're ignoring that.

How do the visuals contradict it being something other than pure energy? I could point out a noticable portion of it moves slower than light... Of course, you're still ignoring the fact that you must invent shield geometry not seen, and claim that the bursts are identical to the shield impacts we see.. Which, as anyone whose looked at the pictures in this thread can see, they aren't.

Well, I'm glad you freely ignore evidence, HDS. There aren't as many contradictions as you and the others in this circlejerk want to think, but I can see that presenting Canon proof just bounces off you all.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-12 01:09pm

For the flak theory to be wrong, you must invent situations where the shields are, for no good reason, much farther out than we observe them to be in the Canon films.

The ICS has clearly verified the volumetric shield:

Pg. 3: Conventional shield technologies use a range of force-field effects. Ray shield, for example, deflect or break up energy beams, while particle shields forcefully retard high-velocity projectiles. Normally, shield intensities diminish gradually with distance from the generator or projector. However, shields projected in an atmosphere tend to have a defined outer surface. Such a boundary becomes super-hot when left still, and mirage like affects are seen. Shields surrounding a moving airborne vessel are less visible, but can impact aerodynamic performance.

(ref: Episode II Incredible Cross-Sections)

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-12 01:22pm

TL's are energy, huh? It doesn't matter that we can see part of the beam move at less than lightspeed?

It doesn't matter that they do move at lightspeed in other circumstances either I see.

Gods above and below. Of course, if you read my posts here, you'd know I agree part is lightspeed.. But you'd see the word 'part', which actually fits Canon. But you're ignoring that

You ignore the lightspeed component being the damaging factor too in other examples of TL technology being showed to be C propagating.

How do the visuals contradict it being something other than pure energy?

This was clearly pointed out already

I could point out a noticable portion of it moves slower than light...

I could point out that it doesn't matter if it's captured in a medium, we do this today, I could point out that SW has time retardation technology that slows time down and it's used on simple tasks like keeping plants fresh longer(ICS)
I think it's eminently in their power to create some forcefield to contain massless energies for a higher powered punch rather than a long beam.

I could point out that plasma is not red
I could point out that the emission according to Saxton is monochromatic and non-thermal.(This is proven by the existence of green blaster bolts, because there is no temperature at which an incandescent surface appears subjectively "green.")(plasma is hot and will emitt thermal energy, as white hot radiation, like the sun)
I could point out that something with mass would arc, but doesn't arc the slightest.
I could point out that something with mass shouldn't be translucent
I could point out that something with mass should reflect of shiny surfaces
I can and have pointed out all these things.

Of course, you're still ignoring the fact that you must invent shield geometry not seen,
You're still ignoring evidence while claiming we do it.

and claim that the bursts are identical to the shield impacts we see.. Which, as anyone whose looked at the pictures in this thread can see, they aren't
No one says they have to be, you're utlizing the fanboy approach of using one scenario and assuming they're only-case scenarios(well thats what MW said it was)

Well, I'm glad you freely ignore evidence, HDS. There aren't as many contradictions as you and the others in this circlejerk want to think, but I can see that presenting Canon proof just bounces off you all

Pot. Kettle. Black

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-12 01:24pm

I could point out that something with mass shouldn't be translucent

Clarify, I mean something thats infused with megajoules of energy.

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » 2003-01-13 03:35am

SirNitram wrote:Conceeded on the splinter. Bolts that don't penetrate look like this...

Quite similar to those we seen in AotC...

Similar to those hits on the LAATs shield, except we don't see smoke here which is quite understandable.

Maybe the smoke effect is unique to Geonosis and it's appearence somehow connected to the mixture of gases that are present in the atmosphere of Geonosis.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-13 03:40am

They're similar enough to me, no one says it has to look exactly alike(atleast no one should), reality is alot more random than that and factors beyond quantification tends to come into play.

but yeah, the atmosphere probably explains the smoke.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-13 03:48am

Ops, error found:
"I could point out that something with mass should reflect of shiny surfaces"

It shouldn't do that, thats what I meant

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-01-13 06:00pm

I think we can safely say the blasters/lasers/turbolasers/superlasers rely on hyperphysical phenomenon we can't duplicate or associate with known knowledge. They're physics are likely associated with lightsabres.

We know this:

1.) The damaging component is massless and travels at lightspeed.

2.) A glowing bolt traveling at less then lightspeed with visible light emiting in all directions (including behind and forward). The length of the bolt seems related to the intensity of the weapon in the "pulse" versions of said weapons. This is not the case in "continuous beam" versions (SPHA-T, LAAT ball turrets, superlaser).

3.) It relies on some odd physical substance that normally exists in gas fom known as Tibanna gas that is somehow more useful when "spin-sealed."

4.) Some of the weapons appear to dissipate used Tibanna gas through the barrel of the weapon, causing recoil.

I believe that is all.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-14 02:15am

1.) The damaging component is massless and travels at lightspeed

That seems true in some cases(beam weapons, one exception being the DS2), not all of them, in bolt weapons the damaging portion does seem slower than light most of the time, but there also seems to be an invisible damaging STL bolt followed by a trail of degenerating bolt quanta, we know that when ranges extend to lightseconds that they propagate at C, but in the movies at shorter ranges they travel slower.

Look at this for my idea on why the bolt is just a trail of degenerating bolt quanta:

2.) A glowing bolt traveling at less then lightspeed with visible light emiting in all directions (including behind and forward). The length of the bolt seems related to the intensity of the weapon in the "pulse" versions of said weapons. This is not the case in "continuous beam" versions (SPHA-T, LAAT ball turrets, superlaser)

It seems more related to range and/or speed than intensity to me.

3.) It relies on some odd physical substance that normally exists in gas fom known as Tibanna gas that is somehow more useful when "spin-sealed."

Maybe, maybe not, if so, only in blasters, on both the Geonosian fighter and the Aetherspite Tibanna is used as coolant(ref: ICS)

4.) Some of the weapons appear to dissipate used Tibanna gas through the barrel of the weapon, causing recoil

True, I refer to the ICS on the page of the geonosian fighter.

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » 2003-01-14 03:17am

I have found a short description about turbolasers and about the use of Tibanna gas...

I wish to ask before I say anything, is the Visual Dictionary of SW official or not?

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-14 03:33am

Boba Fett wrote:I have found a short description about turbolasers and about the use of Tibanna gas...

I wish to ask before I say anything, is the Visual Dictionary of SW official or not?

Yes, but contradicted, so it doesn't matter

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » 2003-01-14 03:38am

Yes I agree...So you read it also?

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-01-14 03:39am

Boba Fett wrote:Yes I agree...So you read it also?

all quotes are on my site already and I got the AOTC:VD

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » 2003-01-14 03:51am

I never visited your site before. Congratulation! A good one if one is looking for descriptions.