Only curiosity, don't hate me

[kilopi505]

I have read some threads that involve star wars, and various other sci-fi stories here. My question is this. If somebody, say Q, or God Almighty himself, were to take all the physics out of the equation, and make the...technologies of every sci-fi franchise out there...effective against those of other sci-fi stories or franchises no matter what is stated in canon when they go to another universe, who might win?

No...let me restate that. I believe in a multiverse. And that for any of the crossovers here in SD.Net to happen, you have to CROSS the divide, or the space between universes. And if one person from universe A goes to Universe B, instead of following the physics of Universe A, the person could only follow Universe B's physics

For example, there is this new thread, 'Gundam vs. Star Wars' It's a given that if we rely on the canon of both universes, Gundam will lose. But if the various Gundam franchise factions cross into the Star Wars universe...beam cannons become as potent as SW's turbolasers.

So...do you guys get what I'm asking?

[Themightytom]

I have read some threads that involve star wars, and various other sci-fi stories here. My question is this. If somebody, say Q, or God Almighty himself, were to take all the physics out of the equation, and make the...technologies of every sci-fi franchise out there...effective against those of other sci-fi stories or franchises no matter what is stated in canon when they go to another universe, who might win?

..."All the physics out of the equation"? So suddenly all the characters molecules fly apart because there is no nuclear force? You sick son of a...
Which aspects off physics are you trying to cherry pick here?

No...let me restate that. I believe in a multiverse.

Uh I believe the children are our future...

And that for any of the crossovers here in SD.Net to happen, you have to CROSS the divide, or the space between universes. And if one person from universe A goes to Universe B, instead of following the physics of Universe A, the person could only follow Universe B's physics

I don't think universes would be separated by space.

For example, there is this new thread, 'Gundam vs. Star Wars' It's a given that if we rely on the canon of both universes, Gundam will lose. But if the various Gundam franchise factions cross into the Star Wars universe...beam cannons become as potent as SW's turbolasers.

So...do you guys get what I'm asking?

Yeah you should let go of the idea because its pretty nonsensical. What they generally do here on the site is establish a baseline of comparison using observable facts. you are proposing replacing objective measure with subjective opinion. Go to Spacebattles for that.

[SapphireFox]

I have read some threads that involve star wars, and various other sci-fi stories here. My question is this. If somebody, say Q, or God Almighty himself, were to take all the physics out of the equation, and make the...technologies of every sci-fi franchise out there...effective against those of other sci-fi stories or franchises no matter what is stated in canon when they go to another universe, who might win?

No...let me restate that. I believe in a multiverse. And that for any of the crossovers here in SD.Net to happen, you have to CROSS the divide, or the space between universes. And if one person from universe A goes to Universe B, instead of following the physics of Universe A, the person could only follow Universe B's physics

For example, there is this new thread, 'Gundam vs. Star Wars' It's a given that if we rely on the canon of both universes, Gundam will lose. But if the various Gundam franchise factions cross into the Star Wars universe...beam cannons become as potent as SW's turbolasers.

So...do you guys get what I'm asking?

Not really... what you seem to be saying is the universal physics model devolving into little more than the Rule of Cool.

That is a dumb way of judging power because you can make it say whatever you want so what is the point?

[Mayabird]

Goddamnit, don't misuse or overuse ellipses. It just makes me want to hate you.

And yeah, if you just want to ask what the most ridiculously over-powered sci-fi universe is while assuming that everything they can do in-universe still works in the crossover and does the same thing, then we can discuss the merits of Time Lords vs. Xeelee or whatever. Otherwise, we can't even do comparisons well.

But Gundam still loses because of the sheer numbers involved in the Star Wars universe, unless there's some new new series where they actually leave the solar system and colonize the entire galaxy.

[thegreatpl]

What i think he might be suggesting is that they follow the physics of only one of the universes. So who would win in Star Wars vs Star Trek if the Star Wars Universe was invading Star Trek universe and the invaders had to follow Star Trek Physics.

the first bit seems to confuse it all though.

[Srelex]

I guess the simplest way to express would be to give any two sides parity in firepower, and possibly by extension industry, etc. So, in a STvST scenario, a Galaxy-class can equal and ISD, and so on. Unfortunately, as others have sorta pointed out, this is less an excuse for reasoned debate and more for fanwankery. Although fanwankery can be fun.

[Jake]

Transformers (from the first movie) would own. The allspark would just transform all rival technologies into more decepticons. Imagine the pure wanktaculer pwnage that would result from a deathstar transformer...

[Eldy]

I have read some threads that involve star wars, and various other sci-fi stories here. My question is this. If somebody, say Q, or God Almighty himself, were to take all the physics out of the equation, and make the...technologies of every sci-fi franchise out there...effective against those of other sci-fi stories or franchises no matter what is stated in canon when they go to another universe, who might win?

That's sort of what already happens. Sort of. It's assumed that the weapons and technologies of the different franchises are effective against their opponents (for instance, turbolasers don't magically pass through Star Trek ships), but the effects are determined through suspension of disbelief and science. I find that to be superior to ignoring physics and canon since if you remove either (much less both) of those the debate becomes hopelessly subjective.

For example, there is this new thread, 'Gundam vs. Star Wars' It's a given that if we rely on the canon of both universes, Gundam will lose. But if the various Gundam franchise factions cross into the Star Wars universe...beam cannons become as potent as SW's turbolasers.

Why would you arbitrarily make Gundam's cannons as powerful as Star Wars' turbolasers? If we're playing that game I can declare that Han's blaster pistol is as powerful as a beam cannon and say that he can destroy a mech with a single shot. Doesn't mean it makes sense though. Do you see what I mean about subjectivity?

[Vendetta]

Transformers (from the first movie) would own. The allspark would just transform all rival technologies into more decepticons. Imagine the pure wanktaculer pwnage that would result from a deathstar transformer...

It would just be Unicron with pew pew instead of nom nom.

[Junghalli]

I think maybe I understand what he's suggesting; each universe keeps its own physics, and if the other guys try to cross over to the other universe they have to obey the other universe's physics.

To take an example:

We have a vs debate between universes A and B.

Universe A is a hard SF universe. It follows real physics. Its big powers are factions of superintelligent AI.

Universe B is a soft SF universe. It has 10 mile long warships with 10 gigaton beam weapons. For some reason no superintelligence can exist, some magical force prevents anything from being significantly more intelligent than a human.

Presumably, laws of physics are assumed to be the same except where they are shown to be different, so interaction is still possible (i.e. each side's ships don't turn into puffs of monoatomic gas or something when they go through the portal into the other universe).

If a Universe B ship crosses into Universe A it gets whacked with the Big Stick of Real Physics.

If a Universe A ship crosses into Universe B its controlling intelligence loses about 10,000 IQ points, becoming no smarter than a smart human (or maybe it becomes like some autistic savant that can crunch numbers really well but is uncreative and inflexible, because Universe B takes that cheesy soft SF approach to AI).

Each side keeps its own abilities and limitations within its own universe: the Universe A superintelligences are still superintelligent in Universe A, the Universe B ships still can accelerate at 10,000 G and shoot 10 gigaton lasers in Universe B. Universe A people can concievably design 10 gigaton lasers that will work in Universe B and Universe B people can concievably design superintelligent AI that can work in Universe A, after they figure out the physics of the other universe, but of course they wouldn't be able to use them in their own universe.

Eh, it makes a vs debate a lot more complicated, because you have to decide what abilities from one universe get to cross into the other universe and what don't and it's often ambiguous, especially when both universes are soft SF so you can't really say for sure what is and isn't possible there, it's a lot simpler to just assume each side gets to keep all its own abilities. It might be a better premise for a fanfic than a vs debate, I think. That said, the OP is kind of too general to answer in that respect, we'd need a specific crossover scenario to really discuss it.

[Vendetta]

Really what he seems to be suggesting is to ignore power level differences and assume that everything is the same power level, and then see who wins.

Which isn't really an interesting test of who would win, because it ignores the things that, for a versus, makes them different.

[Cykeisme]

Basically you want to know who would win in a boxing match between Mike Tyson and yourself, but you punch as hard as Mike Tyson?

[Simon_Jester]

Really what he seems to be suggesting is to ignore power level differences and assume that everything is the same power level, and then see who wins.

Which isn't really an interesting test of who would win, because it ignores the things that, for a versus, makes them different.

I'm sure there are good versus debates you could have that don't revolve around relative firepower. Hmm... wait, I remember one I did on another site some months ago. I think I'll bring it up here in its own thread, actually; it might be worth a crack.

[starfury]

think maybe I understand what he's suggesting; each universe keeps its own physics, and if the other guys try to cross over to the other universe they have to obey the other universe's physics.

To take an example:

We have a vs debate between universes A and B.

Universe A is a hard SF universe. It follows real physics. Its big powers are factions of superintelligent AI.

Universe B is a soft SF universe. It has 10 mile long warships with 10 gigaton beam weapons. For some reason no superintelligence can exist, some magical force prevents anything from being significantly more intelligent than a human.

Presumably, laws of physics are assumed to be the same except where they are shown to be different, so interaction is still possible (i.e. each side's ships don't turn into puffs of monoatomic gas or something when they go through the portal into the other universe).

If a Universe B ship crosses into Universe A it gets whacked with the Big Stick of Real Physics.

If a Universe A ship crosses into Universe B its controlling intelligence loses about 10,000 IQ points, becoming no smarter than a smart human (or maybe it becomes like some autistic savant that can crunch numbers really well but is uncreative and inflexible, because Universe B takes that cheesy soft SF approach to AI).

Each side keeps its own abilities and limitations within its own universe: the Universe A superintelligences are still superintelligent in Universe A, the Universe B ships still can accelerate at 10,000 G and shoot 10 gigaton lasers in Universe B. Universe A people can concievably design 10 gigaton lasers that will work in Universe B and Universe B people can concievably design superintelligent AI that can work in Universe A, after they figure out the physics of the other universe, but of course they wouldn't be able to use them in their own universe.

I recall a much eariler Star Trek vs Star Wars debate where we tried something somewhat like it, reducing star wars tech advantage and making their ships pound for pound the equal of star treks ships, the much larger size of star wars ships and their sturdier construction still allowed them to win out against the Federation ships and most alpha Quadrant ships, that was a rather interesting debate, since it evolved into how well engineered the ships are as opposed to raw power.

[The Vortex Empire]

For some reason no superintelligence can exist, some magical force prevents anything from being significantly more intelligent than a human.

I don't see any reason to think Wars couldn't make a super intelligent droid mind, but there's every reason why they wouldn't. Why make something independent and smarter than you when it could destroy you. And wasn't there some sort of big droid rebellion in the Star Wars history? One would think that would instill a distrust of machine intelligence in the population.

[Sarevok]

Yep. Not one but TWO droid uprisings that were put down by the Jedi. As Obiwan put it "If droids could think there'd be none of us here."

[Eldy]

I think maybe I understand what he's suggesting; each universe keeps its own physics, and if the other guys try to cross over to the other universe they have to obey the other universe's physics.

He starts off saying something like that, but I don't see how it follows that all power levels are then the same, which seems to be his ultimate suggestion.

[Junghalli]

I don't see any reason to think Wars couldn't make a super intelligent droid mind, but there's every reason why they wouldn't. Why make something independent and smarter than you when it could destroy you. And wasn't there some sort of big droid rebellion in the Star Wars history? One would think that would instill a distrust of machine intelligence in the population.

I wasn't talking about Star Wars, just a made-up generic soft SF universe.

[The Vortex Empire]

I don't see any reason to think Wars couldn't make a super intelligent droid mind, but there's every reason why they wouldn't. Why make something independent and smarter than you when it could destroy you. And wasn't there some sort of big droid rebellion in the Star Wars history? One would think that would instill a distrust of machine intelligence in the population.

I wasn't talking about Star Wars, just a made-up generic soft SF universe.

Ah, ok.

[Balrog]

I recall a much eariler Star Trek vs Star Wars debate where we tried something somewhat like it, reducing star wars tech advantage and making their ships pound for pound the equal of star treks ships, the much larger size of star wars ships and their sturdier construction still allowed them to win out against the Federation ships and most alpha Quadrant ships, that was a rather interesting debate, since it evolved into how well engineered the ships are as opposed to raw power.

Sounds interesting, but I don't recall that one. Do you have a link?

[Ford Prefect]

I'm sure there are good versus debates you could have that don't revolve around relative firepower. Hmm... wait, I remember one I did on another site some months ago. I think I'll bring it up here in its own thread, actually; it might be worth a crack.

I can state with utmost certainty that the absolute best versus debates are going to be ones where the relative difference in technological capability is not that much different, so the arguments can focus on something other than 'yes, well, I am afraid to say that the evidence suggests that my lasers are more fuck off huge in comparison to yours' and 'I am afraid that your conclusion of fuck off huge lasers is based upon spurious data'.

[Junghalli]

I can state with utmost certainty that the absolute best versus debates are going to be ones where the relative difference in technological capability is not that much different, so the arguments can focus on something other than 'yes, well, I am afraid to say that the evidence suggests that my lasers are more fuck off huge in comparison to yours' and 'I am afraid that your conclusion of fuck off huge lasers is based upon spurious data'.

I tend to agree.

[Havok]

So...do you guys get what I'm asking?

I get what you are asking.

Star Trek Phasers are just Star Wars turbo lasers that aren't as powerful yet. Trek has discovered transporter tech, but the Empire never did, although they could.
Star Wars uses hyperspace, while 40k uses chaosspace, or whatever, but both are there.

You are thinking like command and conquer style thing were some factions can research some certain technology and use it, while anyone can eventually capture it and then implement and use it.

In this setting, basically galaxy vs galaxy with your rules, you have to look at industrial capacity, speed and logistics. Speed is one thing you can't take out of the equation or make susceptible to your change, because if you do say make Warp 9 as fast as .5 past light speed, you have to explain why the Federation hasn't explored almost all of their galaxy yet.

So it comes down to who can make the most ships the fastest and who can protect their proprietary tech best. This doesn't really change much however.
Now we know for a fact that transporters can't go through a Star Destroyers shields and Gundam still hasn't discovered lightspeed or has galactic industrial capacity. Most are still slower than fuck compared to Star Wars and the Empire can still make a planet destroying space station in three years. This also does nothing to help the Empire against the galaxies that can already mop them up.

It's still pretty much status quo.

[Cykeisme]

Well, there's also the fact that it's all well and good to say that for purposes of comparing tactical and strategic capabilities, we give them parity in terms of weapon outputs.. to paraphrase, "beam cannons become as powerful as turbolasers".
Now, let's for a moment put aside the fact that Havok pointed out that even that would still leave things rather unfair.

We want to give them parity, but what exactly does that mean? Do they have firepower that is similar within an order of magnitude? A factor of five? Or exactly the same?
Does an Imperator-class Star Destroyer have identical firepower to a Galaxy-class ship? Then the "flag" class of each universe has the same yields, a universe that mass produces smaller ships would inadvertently suit these rules and end up having an advantage. Better yet, a universe that hasn't even gotten the capability to build truly massive craft, so they just make lots of little ones.. like Gundam.
Or perhaps we consider the Imperator having a proportionally higher power power output to the Galaxy based on its the ratio of volume? Then doesn't the universe with simply the biggest ships win?

Then what about sublight acceleration? FTL travel? Durability? Should we put them on par too? Then what's the point of the VS comparison at all?


There's also the fact that if we degrade the technological level of SW, particularly in terms of power generation, the Death Star simply won't be able to completely scatter the mass of a planet anymore. Destroying planets isn't some on/off "ability", it's related directly to the power generation tech that SW has, that also allows it's Star Destroyers to have huge fuck off lasers.

[kilopi505]

I think maybe I understand what he's suggesting; each universe keeps its own physics, and if the other guys try to cross over to the other universe they have to obey the other universe's physics.

To take an example:

We have a vs debate between universes A and B.

Universe A is a hard SF universe. It follows real physics. Its big powers are factions of superintelligent AI.

Universe B is a soft SF universe. It has 10 mile long warships with 10 gigaton beam weapons. For some reason no superintelligence can exist, some magical force prevents anything from being significantly more intelligent than a human.

Presumably, laws of physics are assumed to be the same except where they are shown to be different, so interaction is still possible (i.e. each side's ships don't turn into puffs of monoatomic gas or something when they go through the portal into the other universe).

If a Universe B ship crosses into Universe A it gets whacked with the Big Stick of Real Physics.

If a Universe A ship crosses into Universe B its controlling intelligence loses about 10,000 IQ points, becoming no smarter than a smart human (or maybe it becomes like some autistic savant that can crunch numbers really well but is uncreative and inflexible, because Universe B takes that cheesy soft SF approach to AI).

Each side keeps its own abilities and limitations within its own universe: the Universe A superintelligences are still superintelligent in Universe A, the Universe B ships still can accelerate at 10,000 G and shoot 10 gigaton lasers in Universe B. Universe A people can concievably design 10 gigaton lasers that will work in Universe B and Universe B people can concievably design superintelligent AI that can work in Universe A, after they figure out the physics of the other universe, but of course they wouldn't be able to use them in their own universe.

Eh, it makes a vs debate a lot more complicated, because you have to decide what abilities from one universe get to cross into the other universe and what don't and it's often ambiguous, especially when both universes are soft SF so you can't really say for sure what is and isn't possible there, it's a lot simpler to just assume each side gets to keep all its own abilities. It might be a better premise for a fanfic than a vs debate, I think. That said, the OP is kind of too general to answer in that respect, we'd need a specific crossover scenario to really discuss it.

Err, sorry for the confusion. Well...I'm not really good at explaining things even in real life, so I'm sorry for the confusion in my first post.

Umm, what is in the quote is what I'm really thinking about, however I'm not only thinking of applying this one to sci-fi universes. I was also thinking about applying the idea to every universe and strange idea out there. Like, magic from the Harry Potter universe doesn't work the way it is supposed to if it's in the Buffy the Vampire Slayer universe. Or if Q goes to the Stargate universe to meet the ascended, he becomes a little less powerful because it is in another universe where something, anything in the universe works differently from his and he can only follow the way the universe he is in works.

I also noted Vendetta's post:

"Really what he seems to be suggesting is to ignore power level differences and assume that everything is the same power level, and then see who wins.

Which isn't really an interesting test of who would win, because it ignores the things that, for a versus, makes them different."

Well, I just want to see how would people debate if you could not use the canon superiority of one technology or magic over another, and that the subjects of the 2 series compared have some kind of parity in what they have.