Do the devices necessarily have to be microscopic? At the very least, his example shows that personal shield generators are feasible with treknology.Darth Wong wrote:That thing only worked for a few shots, and then drained its power. Moreover, it was attached to a relatively large device, not microscopic internal implants.Don't believe its possible? Well remember that episode when Worf and Troi were stuck on that wild west holodeck program with the safeties off, and the computer made a holo figure of Data into the evil bad guy? At the end of that, Worf was forced into a shoot out by the holo Data. and guess what? Worf reconfigured his comm badge (I think?) to make a personal defense shield. Data fired his gun (which was an old revolver, you know the type, they are like small cannon with massive recoil) and Worf stood there completely still while the bullets bounced off. There is a perfect example of a KE absorbing shield for you. And since the Borg downloaded all the data on the Enterprise, they would have that tech (if they didn't already).
Borg vs Firearms
Moderator: Vympel
- Natorgator
- Jedi Knight
- Posts: 856
- Joined: 2003-04-26 08:23pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Prozac the Robert
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 1327
- Joined: 2004-05-05 09:01am
- Location: UK
Ignoring borg drones for a moment: If we can have faster than light travel (without affecting causality even), mass lightening, Heisenberg compensators, etc. then I see no reason to think that more magic could be used to send momentum elsewhere and convert kinetic energy to something else.
Back to the drones though, I can't really see a good reason to stop bullets but not close combat weapons.
Back to the drones though, I can't really see a good reason to stop bullets but not close combat weapons.
Hi! I'm Prozac the Robert!
EBC: "We can categorically state that we will be releasing giant man-eating badgers into the area."
EBC: "We can categorically state that we will be releasing giant man-eating badgers into the area."
- Gustav32Vasa
- Worthless Trolling Palm-Fucker
- Posts: 2093
- Joined: 2004-08-25 01:37pm
- Location: Konungariket Sverige
- Admiral_Handsome
- Redshirt
- Posts: 26
- Joined: 2004-08-22 04:52pm
I love the way you assume I know nothing about momentum conservation, you moron. Where in my post did I give you that impression (moron)?I love the way you're so hopelessly ignorant that you don't recognize that momentum and KE are different things.Quote:
I am not suggesting that a Borg shield is merely an impenetrable barrier to the bullets. I'm saying that they have the tech to absorb KE and channel it elsewhere, just like dampening fields do.
But that doesn't mean you can't either, moron (my my, you like this word don't you ).I see you completely ignored the point of the rebuttal, moron. The fact that you can make something work on a large scale does not mean you can necessarily make it work on a small scale.
Eg 1 a tank has a big gun capable of firing projectiles, likewise a soldier also has a gun but on a smaller scale. It too fires projectiles, but these generally have less momentum than their larger scale analogues.
Eg 2 a ship can carry large anti-aircraft missiles. Similarly a foot soldier can carry a smaller version such as the stinger.
Point made, moron.
That's just ridiculous. At this point I'm thinking you are either an idiot, or an engineer...I still can't decide which.By your imbecilic logic, the fact that US warships have fire-suppression systems must mean that US infantrymen do too, so they should be immune to napalm.
Then it did work!!!That thing only worked for a few shots, and then drained its power...blah blah blah...Quote:
Don't believe its possible? Well remember that episode when Worf and Troi were stuck on that wild west holodeck program with the safeties off, and the computer made a holo figure of Data into the evil bad guy? At the end of that, Worf was forced into a shoot out by the holo Data. and guess what? Worf reconfigured his comm badge (I think?) to make a personal defense shield. Data fired his gun (which was an old revolver, you know the type, they are like small cannon with massive recoil) and Worf stood there completely still while the bullets bounced off. There is a perfect example of a KE absorbing shield for you. And since the Borg downloaded all the data on the Enterprise, they would have that tech (if they didn't already).
If handled incorecctly, the recoil from a magnum revolver is enough to break a man's wrist. My "small canon" remark stands, I think that it is your remark that is stupid.Moreover, it was attached to a relatively large device, not microscopic internal implants. And that "small cannon" remark is just stupid. Given a fixed power output for their onboard systems, they can't throw in everything but the kitchen sink. It's pretty obvious that you've never designed anything in your life, hence the concept of design trade-offs is clearly foreign to you.
As for the rest of your post...please, spare me your technobabble shit, it doesn't make you seem any more intelligent.
- The Silence and I
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1658
- Joined: 2002-11-09 09:04pm
- Location: Bleh!
I think Robert was suggesting a K.E. shield is within the technological capabilities of the Borg--not that it is actually commonly employed.
I also think his points about the theoretical K.E. shield are valid:
A common arguement against the feasability of such shields is that the momentum imparted by the attack through the shield to the user would displace the implants generating the shield and in the process cause massive, perhaps fatal, internal injuries.
Robert's suggestion was that a form fitting shield potentially could impart the attack's momentum directly to the skin of the user, avoiding fatal internal injuries. He went further, proposing this theoretical shielding system might spread the momentum over the entire area of the user facing the attack. This would result in minor bruising over much of the body, instead of heavy bruising over a relatively small area--common to today's bullet "proof" vests.
This system would still allow an attack to knock the user over and does not suggest invulnerability to K.E. attack--no limits fallacies never entered this proposal, and it is suggested only as a theoretical system, not one in use currently (He offers an inability to distinguish between harmful and harmless physical interaction as a reason this is not employed by drones).
At least, that was my interpretation of his posts. Just hoping to clear some things up, as I like the idea in theory and don't want it dismissed on a misinterpretation only.
I also think his points about the theoretical K.E. shield are valid:
A common arguement against the feasability of such shields is that the momentum imparted by the attack through the shield to the user would displace the implants generating the shield and in the process cause massive, perhaps fatal, internal injuries.
Robert's suggestion was that a form fitting shield potentially could impart the attack's momentum directly to the skin of the user, avoiding fatal internal injuries. He went further, proposing this theoretical shielding system might spread the momentum over the entire area of the user facing the attack. This would result in minor bruising over much of the body, instead of heavy bruising over a relatively small area--common to today's bullet "proof" vests.
This system would still allow an attack to knock the user over and does not suggest invulnerability to K.E. attack--no limits fallacies never entered this proposal, and it is suggested only as a theoretical system, not one in use currently (He offers an inability to distinguish between harmful and harmless physical interaction as a reason this is not employed by drones).
At least, that was my interpretation of his posts. Just hoping to clear some things up, as I like the idea in theory and don't want it dismissed on a misinterpretation only.
Star Wars has personal shields. The difference is that the "Borg Shields" are said to be moored to the internal organs and tissues of a Borg drone's flesh (the implants visibly spring out of the person's skin).
Wars personal shields are generated from rigid metallic armor that is worn on the person's body (such as a belt, vest, or full body suit), so the impact is imparted to a person's body. Like a medieval Knight, obviously they can still be killed from the blunt trauma of impacts or otherwise messed up, but this is a far cry from nanoprobes that are projecting a piece of metal through your skin, and then hitting THAT with a KE attack.
Reasons I can speculate why Personal Shields aren't used more often in Wars include: 1) too costly 2) weapons are so powerful they often don't make much difference 3) somehow unreliable 4) laws prohibiting their production/use 5) lazy writers ; )
Anyway...
The first hit is going to kill the Drone as it rips apart the organs that are supporting the shield generators.
Borg KE shields could reasonably work, they just need to be designed differently than the currently used mechanism that has been mentioned and demonstrated time and again in the show.
Wars personal shields are generated from rigid metallic armor that is worn on the person's body (such as a belt, vest, or full body suit), so the impact is imparted to a person's body. Like a medieval Knight, obviously they can still be killed from the blunt trauma of impacts or otherwise messed up, but this is a far cry from nanoprobes that are projecting a piece of metal through your skin, and then hitting THAT with a KE attack.
Reasons I can speculate why Personal Shields aren't used more often in Wars include: 1) too costly 2) weapons are so powerful they often don't make much difference 3) somehow unreliable 4) laws prohibiting their production/use 5) lazy writers ; )
Anyway...
The first hit is going to kill the Drone as it rips apart the organs that are supporting the shield generators.
Borg KE shields could reasonably work, they just need to be designed differently than the currently used mechanism that has been mentioned and demonstrated time and again in the show.
Reason one and three from the EU, A expensive. C. Overheat and exploded making them slightly less than usefulKurgan wrote:Reasons I can speculate why Personal Shields aren't used more often in Wars include: 1) too costly 2) weapons are so powerful they often don't make much difference 3) somehow unreliable 4) laws prohibiting their production/use 5) lazy writers ; )
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
- Pablo Sanchez
- Commissar
- Posts: 6998
- Joined: 2002-07-03 05:41pm
- Location: The Wasteland
It was when you said that "they have the tech to absorb KE and channel it elsewhere." Which, following the rules of conservation of momentum, is a scientific impossibility. Your analogy using dampening fields is useless because there is no reason to believe that the momentum transfer due to acceleration has been made to disappear via magical processes. Rather, I would consider it more probable that the acceleration that would normally act on the interior of the ship is countered by the same devices which generate the ship's internal gravity, and that the acceleration which would normally be flinging the crew about the ship is instead made to act on the far more resilient superstructure of the ship. Instead of getting rid of the momentum it is transferred to another place within the same system.Admiral_Handsome wrote:I love the way you assume I know nothing about momentum conservation, you moron. Where in my post did I give you that impression (moron)?
Now, just a guess... but one that makes far more sense than yours.
The differences between a 120mm smoothbore tank cannon and an M16 are so many and various that I can't even begin to go into them here. Suffice it to say that the only thing they have in common is the process of propelling a piece of metal by chemical expansion in an enclosed barrel.Eg 1 a tank has a big gun capable of firing projectiles, likewise a soldier also has a gun but on a smaller scale. It too fires projectiles, but these generally have less momentum than their larger scale analogues.
Rocketry is an extremely atypical example, in that it can be made to act on virtually any scale. A better example (more accurate and working in the same principles as our actual discussion) would be chobham armor. It can be made to protect an armored vehicle very effectively yet would not work very efficiently as, say, personal body armor.Eg 2 a ship can carry large anti-aircraft missiles. Similarly a foot soldier can carry a smaller version such as the stinger.
That does not constitute a rebuttal and in fact reveals astonishing ignorance, in that you seem to believe that engineers are stupid or too literalist.That's just ridiculous. At this point I'm thinking you are either an idiot, or an engineer...I still can't decide which.
A sixteenth century arquebus "works" but it will never be a M16. In the same way, Worf's personal shield "works" but would never be remotely effective in actual combat.Then it did work!!!
It was not a magnum revolver, the first magnum cartridge was developed in 1912 for hunting purposes, and would have been quite out of place in a "Western" holodeck simulation.If handled incorecctly, the recoil from a magnum revolver is enough to break a man's wrist.
Furthermore, the only way that a heavy pistol's recoil would break a man's wrist is if he were Samuel L. Jackson in Unbreakable; or perhaps "incorrect handling" refers to some method of handling a pistol with which I am utterly unfamiliar. Maybe firing the pistol while simultaneously bashing one's wrist with a hammer?
"I am gravely disappointed. Again you have made me unleash my dogs of war."
--The Lord Humungus
-
- Dishonest Resident Borg Fan-Whore
- Posts: 4206
- Joined: 2002-08-08 03:56am
- Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Thank you. That is exactly what I was saying.The Silence and I wrote:I think Robert was suggesting a K.E. shield is within the technological capabilities of the Borg--not that it is actually commonly employed.
Edit: I should point out I've mentioned earlier that Borg drones typically possess at least leather like armor Michael Wong has shown on his website. This should add to the degree of protection; the shield wouldn't be interacting directly with the users skin, unless the area of affect is without covering. But as we know, most of the drone's body is covered anyways.I also think his points about the theoretical K.E. shield are valid:
A common arguement against the feasability of such shields is that the momentum imparted by the attack through the shield to the user would displace the implants generating the shield and in the process cause massive, perhaps fatal, internal injuries.
Robert's suggestion was that a form fitting shield potentially could impart the attack's momentum directly to the skin of the user, avoiding fatal internal injuries.
Finally! Someone who actually understands what I was pointing out. Your description/explanation couldn't have been more accurate. Thank you Silence.He went further, proposing this theoretical shielding system might spread the momentum over the entire area of the user facing the attack. This would result in minor bruising over much of the body, instead of heavy bruising over a relatively small area--common to today's bullet "proof" vests.
This system would still allow an attack to knock the user over and does not suggest invulnerability to K.E. attack--no limits fallacies never entered this proposal, and it is suggested only as a theoretical system, not one in use currently (He offers an inability to distinguish between harmful and harmless physical interaction as a reason this is not employed by drones).
At least, that was my interpretation of his posts. Just hoping to clear some things up, as I like the idea in theory and don't want it dismissed on a misinterpretation only.
-
- Dishonest Resident Borg Fan-Whore
- Posts: 4206
- Joined: 2002-08-08 03:56am
- Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- SirNitram
- Rest in Peace, Black Mage
- Posts: 28367
- Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
- Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere
Typically don't enter into it. We see a large array of situations with both normal and decidedly non-normal Drones. Besides, it was more a crushing blow against Handsome.Robert Walper wrote:Brilliant job at pointing out the obvious, Sherlock. Care to quote me where I said the Borg typically employ KE shielding?SirNitram wrote:*snip*
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus
Debator Classification: Trollhunter
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus
Debator Classification: Trollhunter
- Darth Wong
- Sith Lord
- Posts: 70028
- Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
- Location: Toronto, Canada
- Contact:
By acting as though you can solve the collision problem by postulating that they can absorb the KE. We can absorb KE today, you idiot. That's what crumple zones do. For that matter, it's what the flesh in your chest cavity does. But that doesn't allow us to ignore conservation of momentum.Admiral_Handsome wrote:I love the way you assume I know nothing about momentum conservation, you moron. Where in my post did I give you that impression (moron)?I love the way you're so hopelessly ignorant that you don't recognize that momentum and KE are different things.I am not suggesting that a Borg shield is merely an impenetrable barrier to the bullets. I'm saying that they have the tech to absorb KE and channel it elsewhere, just like dampening fields do.
Wow, you're so fucking stupid you can't even make up insults on the fly. By the way, you are obviously too much of an imbecile to recognize that you can't assume people can do something until you have evidence, and saying "you can't prove they CAN'T do it is not evidence.But that doesn't mean you can't either, moron (my my, you like this word don't you ).I see you completely ignored the point of the rebuttal, moron. The fact that you can make something work on a large scale does not mean you can necessarily make it work on a small scale.
No, point evaded, you blustering snot-nosed little shit. The fact that a larger phenomenon can be employed in both large and small devices does not mean that every large device can be miniaturized, or that it WILL be miniaturized and deployed on foot soldiers; your logic is as feeble as your creativity. You don't even understand the distinction between a piece of technology and an underlying physics principle.Eg 1 a tank has a big gun capable of firing projectiles, likewise a soldier also has a gun but on a smaller scale. It too fires projectiles, but these generally have less momentum than their larger scale analogues.
Eg 2 a ship can carry large anti-aircraft missiles. Similarly a foot soldier can carry a smaller version such as the stinger.
Point made, moron.
So you admit that the logical conclusion of your own argument is "ridiculous", and you think this reflects poorly on my intelligence?That's just ridiculous. At this point I'm thinking you are either an idiot, or an engineer...I still can't decide which.By your imbecilic logic, the fact that US warships have fire-suppression systems must mean that US infantrymen do too, so they should be immune to napalm.
By the way, what's your profession, that you should look down on engineers? You've already demonstrated that you don't know jack shit about physics (pretending that absorption of KE will let you ignore conservation of momentum), so what exactly is it that you do know?
And it was much larger than a nano-scale Borg implant!Then it did work!!!That thing only worked for a few shots, and then drained its power...blah blah blah...
First, you completely ignored most of my point, thus indicating that I was correct: you don't know jack shit about designing anything. Second, there is no reason to believe that every revolver in the Old West had the same recoil as a magnum revolver, fool.If handled incorecctly, the recoil from a magnum revolver is enough to break a man's wrist. My "small canon" remark stands, I think that it is your remark that is stupid.Moreover, it was attached to a relatively large device, not microscopic internal implants. And that "small cannon" remark is just stupid. Given a fixed power output for their onboard systems, they can't throw in everything but the kitchen sink. It's pretty obvious that you've never designed anything in your life, hence the concept of design trade-offs is clearly foreign to you.
In other words, it flew over your head and you're too stupid to understand it, so you're sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "la la la la la"...As for the rest of your post...please, spare me your technobabble shit, it doesn't make you seem any more intelligent.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
- Darth Wong
- Sith Lord
- Posts: 70028
- Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
- Location: Toronto, Canada
- Contact:
Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs; something I've tried to explain to both you and Admiral Shithead.Robert Walper wrote:Thank you. That is exactly what I was saying.The Silence and I wrote:I think Robert was suggesting a K.E. shield is within the technological capabilities of the Borg--not that it is actually commonly employed.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
- Sarevok
- The Fearless One
- Posts: 10681
- Joined: 2002-12-24 07:29am
- Location: The Covenants last and final line of defense
That's just ridiculous. At this point I'm thinking you are either an idiot, or an engineer...I still can't decide which.
Your posts indicate otherwise. You dont realize the difference between KE and momentum.I love the way you assume I know nothing about momentum conservation, you moron. Where in my post did I give you that impression (moron)?
Except that tank shells can be explosive. Try doing that at infantry level.Eg 1 a tank has a big gun capable of firing projectiles, likewise a soldier also has a gun but on a smaller scale. It too fires projectiles, but these generally have less momentum than their larger scale analogues.
How ? You are claiming that shielding technology on a massive 3 KM ship can be used on a 2 M drone.Point made, moron.
You are the one being ridiculous.That's just ridiculous. At this point I'm thinking you are either an idiot, or an engineer...I still can't decide which.
And they used this tech in First Contact... Right !!!Then it did work!!!
Go to the library and read some actual science.As for the rest of your post...please, spare me your technobabble shit, it doesn't make you seem any more intelligent.
I have to tell you something everything I wrote above is a lie.
- LordShaithis
- Redshirt
- Posts: 3179
- Joined: 2002-07-08 11:02am
- Location: Michigan
Isn't that pretty much what Walper said? Technically they could make KE shields, but there must be some downside, because they don't actually do so. He then pointed out one or two hypothetical examples of said downside.Darth Wong wrote:Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs;
If Religion and Politics were characters on a soap opera, Religion would be the one that goes insane with jealousy over Politics' intimate relationship with Reality, and secretly murder Politics in the night, skin the corpse, and run around its apartment wearing the skin like a cape shouting "My votes now! All votes for me! Wheeee!" -- Lagmonster
- Ghost Rider
- Spirit of Vengeance
- Posts: 27779
- Joined: 2002-09-24 01:48pm
- Location: DC...looking up from the gutters to the stars
Problem is aside from one Federation fluke...where did the Borg ever demonstrate the tech to employ this?GrandAdmiralPrawn wrote:Isn't that pretty much what Walper said? Technically they could make KE shields, but there must be some downside, because they don't actually do so. He then pointed out one or two hypothetical examples of said downside.Darth Wong wrote:Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs;
Giving a hypothtetical by insuring ever possible variable produces Borg having the possiblity of maybe having a Borg shield but no proof to the case is inane.
It is no different then saying The Federation maybe possibly has planetary shields twenty times the power of ship board but have never showed it.
MM /CF/WG/BOTM/JL/Original Warsie/ACPATHNTDWATGODW FOREVER!!
Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all
Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete
Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all
Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete
- Darth Wong
- Sith Lord
- Posts: 70028
- Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
- Location: Toronto, Canada
- Contact:
Those aren't downsides; he was just pointing out that his proposed system wouldn't provide perfect protection. He did not (and still does not) acknowledge that there can be design trade-offs which would make them not ever deploy the thing, hence "it's possible" is not a proof. He needs to show that they've actually done it.GrandAdmiralPrawn wrote:Isn't that pretty much what Walper said? Technically they could make KE shields, but there must be some downside, because they don't actually do so. He then pointed out one or two hypothetical examples of said downside.Darth Wong wrote:Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs;
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
-
- Dishonest Resident Borg Fan-Whore
- Posts: 4206
- Joined: 2002-08-08 03:56am
- Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
I presume by "fluke" you're referring to STVOY "Drone", where One deployed and utilized a KE shield several times?Ghost Rider wrote:Problem is aside from one Federation fluke...where did the Borg ever demonstrate the tech to employ this?GrandAdmiralPrawn wrote:Isn't that pretty much what Walper said? Technically they could make KE shields, but there must be some downside, because they don't actually do so. He then pointed out one or two hypothetical examples of said downside.Darth Wong wrote:Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs;
I don't subscribe to the notion that sophisticated and functional technology just appears "accidently" out of no where. The KE shield came from somewhere, and a perfectly acceptable explanation, IMO, is the nanoprobes possessed the specifications to build one, along with the rest of the Borg technology.
Look to the US military as an example. Currently active troops possess some impressive equipment and capabilites, but current projects researching future/new types of soldiers are far more advanced.
As far as I'm concerned, STVOY "Drone" is an example of modern Borg technology actually creating a KE shield. One simply had the technology available and the independence to utilize it.
-
- Dishonest Resident Borg Fan-Whore
- Posts: 4206
- Joined: 2002-08-08 03:56am
- Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
I consider STVOY "Drone" the "smoking gun" evidence modern Borg technology can in fact create a KE shield, and I've submitted what I see as a valid theory on how it would work.Darth Wong wrote:Those aren't downsides; he was just pointing out that his proposed system wouldn't provide perfect protection. He did not (and still does not) acknowledge that there can be design trade-offs which would make them not ever deploy the thing, hence "it's possible" is not a proof. He needs to show that they've actually done it.GrandAdmiralPrawn wrote:Isn't that pretty much what Walper said? Technically they could make KE shields, but there must be some downside, because they don't actually do so. He then pointed out one or two hypothetical examples of said downside.Darth Wong wrote:Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs;
The only rebuttal I've seen to One's KE shield is "it was a fluke", "magical 29th century technology" or similar constructed arguement.
As I stated in my last post, I don't subscribe to the arguement that sophisticated and functional technology just "accidently" comes into being. Particularily in face of the far more logical arguement that the nanoprobes built the technology from pre existing design specifications.
- Batman
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 16375
- Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
- Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks
Hello? We are talking about the Borg. Chances are during the half millenuim between Trek 'now' and the 29th century they assimilated a species that had individual KE shields. To assume that they somehow had the technology all the time and for whatever reasons never used it is patently absurd...
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
-
- Dishonest Resident Borg Fan-Whore
- Posts: 4206
- Joined: 2002-08-08 03:56am
- Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
In other words, there is a cost to benefit ratio(I am aware of this concept).Darth Wong wrote:Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs; something I've tried to explain to both you and Admiral Shithead.Robert Walper wrote:Thank you. That is exactly what I was saying.The Silence and I wrote:I think Robert was suggesting a K.E. shield is within the technological capabilities of the Borg--not that it is actually commonly employed.
This makes perfect sense from the perspective of efficiency, one of the Borg's self declared goals. Since Borg drones already typically bitchslap enemy troops quite well(hell, a couple of drones can manhandle even Data), there doesn't seem to be a pressing need to employ KE shielding, especially when physical contact with drones is a very bad idea in the first place.
The repeated arguement of the Borg losing a few drones to physical attacks during the First Contact incident completely ignores the fact the battle to hold the E-E from Borg forces was lost, and the Starfleet crew was forced to abandon ship.
-
- Dishonest Resident Borg Fan-Whore
- Posts: 4206
- Joined: 2002-08-08 03:56am
- Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Wrong. One's technology came from modern Borg nanoprobes assimilating a 29th century mobile holo emitter. There was no future Borg database accessed, nor is there any rational arguement to claim the mobile emitter contributed anything other than access to a new alloy casing, compact computing capability and...well, a holo emitter.Batman wrote:Hello? We are talking about the Borg. Chances are during the half millenuim between Trek 'now' and the 29th century they assimilated a species that had individual KE shields. To assume that they somehow had the technology all the time and for whatever reasons never used it is patently absurd...
Secondly, no one is assuming the Borg had this technology "all this time". If and when the Borg acquired/created the technology isn't relevent as far as I can see.
- Batman
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 16375
- Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
- Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks
My mistake then. Looks like I misremembered the episode.Robert Walper wrote:Wrong. One's technology came from modern Borg nanoprobes assimilating a 29th century mobile holo emitter. There was no future Borg database accessed,Batman wrote:Hello? We are talking about the Borg. Chances are during the half millenuim between Trek 'now' and the 29th century they assimilated a species that had individual KE shields. To assume that they somehow had the technology all the time and for whatever reasons never used it is patently absurd...
Assuming none of the components in that emitter was vital to miniatureizing KE shields when that emmitter was the only difference between the one Borg drone that had KE shields and all the others.nor is there any rational arguement to claim the mobile emitter contributed anything other than access to a new alloy casing, compact computing capability and...well, a holo emitter.
Yes, that certainly makes sense...
Either you assume 24th century Borg have miniature KE shields or you don't.Secondly, no one is assuming the Borg had this technology "all this time".
Either you do in which case they have had the ability all this time, or you don't, in which case this discussion is moot.
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
- Darth Wong
- Sith Lord
- Posts: 70028
- Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
- Location: Toronto, Canada
- Contact:
And the fact that this shield GAVE HIM THE ABILITY TO DOMINATE ALL OTHER DRONES did not register in your mind? Only a liar or a moron would conclude that it means all drones can do that.Robert Walper wrote:I consider STVOY "Drone" the "smoking gun" evidence modern Borg technology can in fact create a KE shield, and I've submitted what I see as a valid theory on how it would work.
See above, moron.The only rebuttal I've seen to One's KE shield is "it was a fluke", "magical 29th century technology" or similar constructed arguement.
Oh, this is rich. A drone assimilates some technology half a millenium into the future, gains a new capability which no other drone has, uses it to singlehandedly overwhelm a cube's defenders, and with a perfectly straight face, you conclude that this proves the drone had this capability all alongAs I stated in my last post, I don't subscribe to the arguement that sophisticated and functional technology just "accidently" comes into being. Particularily in face of the far more logical arguement that the nanoprobes built the technology from pre existing design specifications.
Yet another point that flew right over your head, I see. There are many engineering trade-offs that one can run into that have nothing to do with cost/benefit ratios. But by all means, feel free to continue confidently pontificating in your ignorance.In other words, there is a cost to benefit ratio(I am aware of this concept).Too bad it doesn't prove a damned thing. It is well within the technological capabilities of modern industry to produce body armour which is much stronger than what we presently use, but that doesn't mean we're necessarily going to deploy it on foot soldiers. There are always trade-offs; something I've tried to explain to both you and Admiral Shithead.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
- Ghost Rider
- Spirit of Vengeance
- Posts: 27779
- Joined: 2002-09-24 01:48pm
- Location: DC...looking up from the gutters to the stars
I'm glad you use one fluke that had FORIEGN EQUIPMENT THAT NO OTHER BORG EVER HAD in him to conclude...all other drones must somehow have this tech, but what?Robert Walper wrote:I presume by "fluke" you're referring to STVOY "Drone", where One deployed and utilized a KE shield several times?Ghost Rider wrote:Problem is aside from one Federation fluke...where did the Borg ever demonstrate the tech to employ this?GrandAdmiralPrawn wrote: Isn't that pretty much what Walper said? Technically they could make KE shields, but there must be some downside, because they don't actually do so. He then pointed out one or two hypothetical examples of said downside.
I don't subscribe to the notion that sophisticated and functional technology just appears "accidently" out of no where. The KE shield came from somewhere, and a perfectly acceptable explanation, IMO, is the nanoprobes possessed the specifications to build one, along with the rest of the Borg technology.
Look to the US military as an example. Currently active troops possess some impressive equipment and capabilites, but current projects researching future/new types of soldiers are far more advanced.
As far as I'm concerned, STVOY "Drone" is an example of modern Borg technology actually creating a KE shield. One simply had the technology available and the independence to utilize it.
Choose not to use it?
Are too stupid to use it?
It's nice to see your ass backwards way of concluding things are still going strong.
MM /CF/WG/BOTM/JL/Original Warsie/ACPATHNTDWATGODW FOREVER!!
Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all
Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete
Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all
Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete