She'll make point five...

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-10-09 12:45am

Just a thought I wanted to run by everyone...

What if "she'll make point five, past lightspeed" actually does reference some kind of travel rate, rather than a rating of the equipment? For instance, when we say a car will do up to 120, it's pretty much guaranteed (in the US, anyway) that you're talking about 120 mph. Maybe Han is saying "point five" in the same way. Point five light years per hour (well, it'd probably be faster than that, obviously, but just as a similar-units example), for instance, simply omitting the commonly accepted units. The "past lightspeed" is simply to refer to the performance being in hyperspace rather than realspace.

Thoughts?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-10-09 12:50am

Ya think?

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-10-09 12:52am

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Ya think?

Assuming you mean to imply what I'm saying is already commonly accepted, then I disagree. From what I've seen, the commonly accepted interpretation is that it's a device rating, inverted in terms of relative speed (i.e. 0.5 = fast, 2 = slow). What I'm saying is that 0.5 might be an actual unit of relative velocity or some such indicating speed.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-10-09 12:55am

It's actually both.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-10-09 12:57am

The device rating corresponds to various velocities in hyperspace.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2004-10-09 01:45am

Point-five lightyears per minute? Dunno.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2004-10-09 10:34am

Two (well possibly three) explanations I've heard to correct what otherwise sounds like Han Solo's admission that the Falcon is pretty danged slow (contradicted by travel times in the films):

1) it's ".5 FACTORS past lightspeed" as in the novelisation. The movie leaves out that part of the line (reminds me of the "we're all out of rockets" vs. "we're all out of ordinance" in the AOTC novel/film debacle).

2) It's a ".5 class" hyperdrive which is awesomely fast! (this seems to be picked up by the EU as an explanation)

And finally:

3) "Lightspeed" is not 'the speed of light', like we might think, but in-universe it's just a synonym for entering hyperspace (which is many many times faster than the speed of light). This seems evident from dialouge in the other films. This might also be a possible explanation for the ESB "no lightspeed" thing. Perhaps their "sublight" engines actually can go faster than the speed of light, just not as many times faster as hyperdrive (or Bespin was really close to the Hoth asteroid field, or they got the hyperdrive fixed temporarily, or they hitched a ride, or they had a short-term backup hyperdrive, or etc...)

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-10-09 11:32am

Kurgan wrote:3) "Lightspeed" is not 'the speed of light', like we might think, but in-universe it's just a synonym for entering hyperspace (which is many many times faster than the speed of light). This seems evident from dialouge in the other films. This might also be a possible explanation for the ESB "no lightspeed" thing. Perhaps their "sublight" engines actually can go faster than the speed of light, just not as many times faster as hyperdrive (or Bespin was really close to the Hoth asteroid field, or they got the hyperdrive fixed temporarily, or they hitched a ride, or they had a short-term backup hyperdrive, or etc...)

Yeah, this is what I'm more or less suggesting. Notice the phrasing, "past lightspeed." This suggests, at least to me, that perhaps he's saying "in the realm of spaceship attributes, in the 'past lightspeed' (i.e. FTL) category, she can achieve 0.5 (units) per (time)." That's what I'm trying to convey in the OP. And since we know (with a fairly high amount of certainty) that the GFFA uses the same units we use here on Earth, we can probably figure out just what (units) and (time) are, thereby getting an exact fix on how fast ye olde Millennium Falcon is.

andrewgpaul · Post by **andrewgpaul** » 2004-10-09 12:04pm

In the first book of the Trawn trilogy, it references a Star Destroyer having a cruising speed of point 4, and taking (IIRC) 5 days to go 350 lightyears, or 70 lightyears/day. This would imply that the scale increases (ie, point 5 is better than point 4). Unfortunately, there's no way of knowing whether the scale is linear (implying point 5 = 87.5ly/day), geometric, logarithmic or exponential.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2004-10-09 12:04pm

I dunno about that. To me, without getting into some complex theory, if somebody said to me ".5 past" I'd assume he meant .5 times faster than whatever was being referenced. So .5 faster than "lightspeed" (which, since it can't be the speed of light in the SW universe, whatever standard Hyperspace speed is). That's how I'd guess it just watching the movies, if I had no idea about this debate or any official explanations.

Star Wars doesn't have the same penchant for technobabble that Trek has, but in the few instances of mentioning real life units we have these problems and the need for (behind the scenes) explanations. Like the parsec thing, and the lightspeed thing, and lasers, etc.

Hence why one explanation is that "Han was just bullshitting" (dialouge < visuals, ignoring SFX gaffes of course but that's a whole 'nother debate).

I know Wong's explanation about words changing meaning (and it's reasonable enough), but it just needed to be said here (again). ; )

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-10-09 12:34pm

People don't normally arbitrarily set units of measurement where one of the most grossly large measurements is .5.

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-10-09 01:48pm

Kurgan wrote:I dunno about that. To me, without getting into some complex theory, if somebody said to me ".5 past" I'd assume he meant .5 times faster than whatever was being referenced. So .5 faster than "lightspeed" (which, since it can't be the speed of light in the SW universe, whatever standard Hyperspace speed is). That's how I'd guess it just watching the movies, if I had no idea about this debate or any official explanations.

True, but he doesn't say "0.5 past lightspeed." He says, "0.5, past light speed." There's a discernable pause.

Star Wars doesn't have the same penchant for technobabble that Trek has, but in the few instances of mentioning real life units we have these problems and the need for (behind the scenes) explanations. Like the parsec thing, and the lightspeed thing, and lasers, etc.

Yeah, but then we have instances where we have legitimate units references too: "one seven decimal two eight" representing 17.28 km to the power generators in ESB, the distance counters in the targeting computers in ANH. I did a write-up in another thread about the targeting computers, actually, and the calculated velocities of the fighters.

IP wrote:People don't normally arbitrarily set units of measurement where one of the most grossly large measurements is .5.

Meaning...what? I think I see where you're going, and it's a good point, but I want to be sure.

andrewgpaul · Post by **andrewgpaul** » 2004-10-09 01:54pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:People don't normally arbitrarily set units of measurement where one of the most grossly large measurements is .5.

It could be that a rating of 1 refers to the speed it takes for you to get from one reference point to another in a set time. For example, if the point rating is linear, perhaps a rating of 1 point 0 refers to going from (say) Coruscant to another planet that is 140ly away in a day. Yes, this may be absurdly fast relative to actual starship performances, but it could make sense.

Also, is there any evidence of the actual, calculatable speed of the Falcon? Say, distance from Tatooine to Alderaan, time taken, etc? The only definite mention I've come across is my reference from Heir To The Empire above.

Enola Straight · Post by **Enola Straight** » 2004-10-09 01:54pm

Maybe its something analogous to an X/Y slope (with X=space and Y=time), whereas "jump-factor" 1 lightspeed (a 45% slope following the geometry of the light-cone) is exactly the speed of light, and 0 is infinitely fast. .X past light speed indicates speed ratings FTL.

andrewgpaul · Post by **andrewgpaul** » 2004-10-09 01:58pm

Like I mentioned, the cruising speed of a Star Destroyer is given as point four. It's unlikely that the speed of the Falcon, a suped-up hotrod of a smuggler ship, is slower than the cruising (not max) speed of an ISD. This implies that .4 < .5.

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-10-09 01:58pm

andrewgpaul wrote:It could be that a rating of 1 refers to the speed it takes for you to get from one reference point to another in a set time. For example, if the point rating is linear, perhaps a rating of 1 point 0 refers to going from (say) Coruscant to another planet that is 140ly away in a day. Yes, this may be absurdly fast relative to actual starship performances, but it could make sense.

The specifics might be off, but this is more or less the RPG/common interpretation of hyperspace "ratings."

Also, is there any evidence of the actual, calculatable speed of the Falcon? Say, distance from Tatooine to Alderaan, time taken, etc? The only definite mention I've come across is my reference from Dark Force Rising ( ?) above.

Yes and no. We know the Falcon is expected to arrive at Alerdaan at "about oh-two-hundred hours." But we don't know when they left or what they did to "forget your worries about those Imperial slugs, I told you I'd outrun them." So, we have a time of arrival. We just need a time of departure.

Enola Straight wrote:Maybe its something analogous to an X/Y slope (with X=space and Y=time), whereas "jump-factor" 1 lightspeed (a 45% slope following the geometry of the light-cone) is exactly the speed of light, and 0 is infinitely fast. .X past light speed indicates speed ratings FTL.

This is an interesting idea...

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2004-10-09 04:09pm

People, this has been settled conclusively: "Point-Five Past Lightspeed" is a brand of Star Wars coffee, with an incredibly high caffeine level. Han is bragging about the Falcon's coffeemaker.

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2004-10-09 04:43pm

andrewgpaul wrote:Also, is there any evidence of the actual, calculatable speed of the Falcon? Say, distance from Tatooine to Alderaan, time taken, etc? The only definite mention I've come across is my reference from Heir To The Empire above.

I know we caluclated it a while back, and I did the final math for it, but I don't know where it is, and I've reformatted my computer three times since then. I'll check my post past to hunt for it.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-10-09 05:39pm

Wasn't it "point 5 factors"?

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2004-10-09 05:40pm

Han said "She'll make point-five past lightspeed" (with or without a comma... I fail to see how it makes any sort of grammatical difference in this case). Nothing 'bout factors (and, again, I don't know how that would make any significant difference).

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-10-09 05:45pm

He says factors in the novelization, but not the movie. And based on what I'm saying, it would make a significant difference had he said factors, since that would eliminate the idea of it being a rate-unit.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-09 11:28pm

Personally, I was never too fond of the idea of exponential "factors" of hyperspace velocity. Too reminiscent of Star Trek.

I would prefer to have interpreted it as "lightspeed" merely being a colloquialism in the Star Wars galaxy for a standard hyperspace speed (as opposed to exactly c), and the Falcon was capable of going 50% faster than whatever this typical benchmark is.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2004-10-09 11:33pm

Darth Wong wrote:Personally, I was never too fond of the idea of exponential "factors" of hyperspace velocity. Too reminiscent of Star Trek.

I would prefer to have interpreted it as "lightspeed" merely being a colloquialism in the Star Wars galaxy for a standard hyperspace speed (as opposed to exactly c), and the Falcon was capable of going 50% faster than whatever this typical benchmark is.

Why bother interpreting it at all? There's no reason to believe in this particular instance that Han is saying anything parrticularily sensible or meaningful (sort of like the "Parsec" thing, or his claims about the Imperials not being able to destroy Alderaan.) For all we know he's just saying something to impress what he migth think of as ignorant rurals or something.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-10-09 11:37pm

Well they certainly fit the part of ignorant rurals- Ben Kenobi is dressed exactly like a moisture farmer, after all.

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-10-10 02:01am

The reason I'm inclined to disagree with you Connor is the tone he uses. I realize it's thin ground on which to observe and conclude, but his demeanor in the cantina...

<incredulous> "You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?"
<innocent> "Should I have?"
<boasting> "...it's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs."
<wry smirk>

...is much different than his demeanor in bay 94...

<disgust> "What a piece of junk!"
<business-like> "She'll make point five, past lightspeed. She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid. Plus I've made a lot of special modifications myself. But we're in a little rush, so if you'll just get on board, we'll get out of here."

In the former, he is trying to impress potential customers and does so by attempting to bullshit them. In the latter, though, he's not really ready to bullshit, he's just dealt with a major crime boss and wants to get his troubles over with ASAP. He's also defending his ship against an insult.

Obviously, this is based on subjective interpretation of what's being portrayed and conveyed through the dialogue, but it's what makes me doubt that he's bullshitting in the second instance.