StarDestroyer.Net BBS

From ASVS:

>>>Is it a plasma weapon, a really powerful laser, something else? And
>>>what in god's name does 'Tibanna' have to do with anything?
>>
>>
>>most common idea I've seen floating around, both here and at SD.net
>>is that it's a blast of plasma contained somehow in a magnetic bottle.
>
>
> Irregardless as to what it actually is I don't think thats at all the most
> common idea, maybe the most commonly disliked idea perhaps.

I'm not sure where you are getting that opinion from, since almost
everyone will agree that it behaves more like a plasma weapon than
anything else.

That was my opinion, was it wrong? I thought the issue was kinda settled along the lines that say what you will on what it might be, the one thing turbolasers did not act like was plasma.

This is not a debate, well not involving me anyway, for me it's just opinion gathering.

It's probably not a plasma.

EDIT: After chatting with IP, he pointed out some things I had forgotten about, so disregard the following.

Although I still contend that the space shots are inconclusive, the AOTC battle and any example of a blaster being fired in atmosphere is moderately inconsistent with plasma. Plasma expands too rapidly in the absence of a containing magnetic field and, unless there were some kind of laser fired first to clear the 'path' for the plasma, as I understand it, it would look more like lightning than like a bolt. The AOTC battle also exhibits blasters being fired over great range with little-to-no visible droop due to gravity, suggesting that there's no mass involved (or that the crazy anti-gravity tibanna gas is somehow involved).

/EDIT

I still think the jury's out on exactly what they are, but they are probably not plasma weapons.

I consider them to be massless energy particles.

The space shots are conclusive. Simply put: no model for plasma exhibiting observed characteristics exists, so the mere suggestion that plasma is at work, or may be at work, is unfounded.

In the words of the late Dr. Sagan, "I try not to think with my gut." Without evidence or model, the assumption is null.

The properties of turbolasers points them to being magic....

I mean blowing up things before touching.... wtf

As far as I'm concerned they're magical rayguns.

Tibanna gas powers turbolasers, according to the Star Wars Visual Dictionary.

There ray guns. No more logical or realistic than Buck Rodger's ray guns. I just always accepted that they did what they did through some kind of effect, i think, similar to a laser. Now they arent lasers, but i always just assumed it was. Still do, personally. It doesnt matter if it shoots cottoncandy, really, since we know what each shot DOES and that has been documented. For all we know, it's IS a laser. The point is, it works. So for me i say laser.

EDIT: I know REALY it isnt, so dont jump down my throat...

I'll bite Fruit Stripe Gum...

If you know it's not a laser, then why the fuck say that you think it is a laser?

18-Till-I-Die wrote:There ray guns. No more logical or realistic than Buck Rodger's ray guns. I just always accepted that they did what they did through some kind of effect, i think, similar to a laser. Now they arent lasers, but i always just assumed it was. Still do, personally. It doesnt matter if it shoots cottoncandy, really, since we know what each shot DOES and that has been documented. For all we know, it's IS a laser. The point is, it works. So for me i say laser.

EDIT: I know REALY it isnt, so dont jump down my throat...

Affect is nothing like a laser.

Even ignoring all about how lasers work (speed of light, invisible in vacuum, etc), on impact a laser will drill through something. Turbolasers explode. Furthermore, most explosives will just blow apart an asteroid in a massive explosion, but turbolasers vaporize the asteroid and don't make a large explosion outside the vaporization radius.

Seems more analogous with plasma or some kind of unknown weapon that lasers.

Except that they don't operate in any way that would correspond with plasma, either. Not to mention that the plasma model is hideously flawed...

They don't appear to be plasma. The impacts seen on targets within an atmosphere don't show the effects of plasma too well (ie. atmospheric effects caused by the high-temperature gases, which we would expect seeing as how the bolt is obviously energetic enough to easily damage metallic structures and tear through thin pieces of armor, etc.).

Also, the damage before and after the bolt arrives is VERY difficult to explain via a plasma explanation.

Master of Ossus wrote:Also, the damage before and after the bolt arrives is VERY difficult to explain via a plasma explanation.

What examples of damage after the bolt are there? They'd act as a good bit of supporting evidence for my theory since it theorizes that damage after the bolt is possible. (That being, of course, because turbolaser blasts aren't plasma...)

And as for blasters... they're something else... and different from turbolasers, it'd seem. Best explanation I can think of is that they're made of explosive Jell-O...

Mad wrote:

Master of Ossus wrote:Also, the damage before and after the bolt arrives is VERY difficult to explain via a plasma explanation.

What examples of damage after the bolt are there? They'd act as a good bit of supporting evidence for my theory since it theorizes that damage after the bolt is possible. (That being, of course, because turbolaser blasts aren't plasma...)

Luke's hand in RotJ doesn't start disolving until after the bolt passes, IIRC.

ARGHH!!! Everything is NDF (kidding )

Best evidence I can think of against plasma is color: Green?!? By the time a plasma/gas/solid is hot enough to emit green light it is already emitting red, orange and yellow too--those plus green != green!

Whatever it is it is exotic, and that's about all we can be ABSOLUTELY SURE of. In space they can transfere heat VERY well; vaporizing an entire asteroid without messy chunks and stuff implies, to me anyway, that the bolt heats up the entire asteroid more or less uniformly and simultainously...weird!