A little help with scientific measurements.

[Aaron]

The thread in question is here, the person I am debating is DMJ, I am of course Cpl Kendall. I don't know how to respond to him, I know that a gigawatt and a gigaton are different units of measure but I don't know how to explain that to him, as he just twists whatever I say to fit his dementia anyways. Any help would be appreicated or you can just jump in.

Thanks.

[Batman]

Urm- BOTH KT/MT/GT/etc and joules are units of energy.
A megaton is per definition 4.18E15 joules. They are defintiely comparable.
Kilo/Mega/Gigawatts is a unit of power, i.e. energy per time.
Let's assume a TL bolt takes an entire second to deliver its energy (which it doesn't). For a 200GT medium TL, that's 836,000,000 GW. As opposed to a shield resiliency of 400 GW. That suit you?

[Glimmervoid]

The thread in question is here, the person I am debating is DMJ, I am of course Cpl Kendall. I don't know how to respond to him, I know that a gigawatt and a gigaton are different units of measure but I don't know how to explain that to him, as he just twists whatever I say to fit his dementia anyways. Any help would be appreicated or you can just jump in.

Thanks.

1 tons = 8.15336983 × 1019 joules and 1 joule= 2.3*10^-10 tons

1 watt = energy/time it is delivered over.

A gigawatt is 1e6 joules a second or 1.23e-14 tons per second.
A gigaton is 1e6 tons or 8.15e25 joules per second.

A gigawatt laser would need to fire for 2.11E32 years to deliver a gigaton of energy.
That is 211000000000000000000000000000000 years.

This is assuming 1 gigaton and 1 gigawatt.

[Glimmervoid]

1 tons = 8.15336983 × 10^19 joules and 1 joule= 2.3*10^-10 tons

1 watt = energy/time it is delivered over.

A gigawatt is 1e6 joules a second or 1.23e-14 tons per second.
A gigaton is 1e6 tons or 8.15e25 joules.

A gigawatt laser would need to fire for 2.11E32 years to deliver a gigaton of energy.
That is 211000000000000000000000000000000 years.

This is assuming 1 gigaton and 1 gigawatt.

Sorry found errors could some one delete my last post.

[brianeyci]

As opposed to a shield resiliency of 400 GW.

Are these the current figures for shields in Trek? It's come a long way since DW's 300 TW phasers (main site) then, are these the Insurrection ramming figures?

Not that it really matters lol, since 8.36e8 GW is more than enough.

For fast conversion between GW and tons though, since one ton of TNT is 4.184e9 J and 1 gigawatt is 1e9 J / s, would not just divide by 4 work for tons of TNT per second?

Brian

[Aaron]

Urm- BOTH KT/MT/GT/etc and joules are units of energy.
A megaton is per definition 4.18E15 joules. They are defintiely comparable.
Kilo/Mega/Gigawatts is a unit of power, i.e. energy per time.
Let's assume a TL bolt takes an entire second to deliver its energy (which it doesn't). For a 200GT medium TL, that's 836,000,000 GW. As opposed to a shield resiliency of 400 GW. That suit you?

That suits me, though I don't really understand it. The figures stare me in the face but the light bulb isn't on if you know what I mean? I was never very good at science, my skills are of the soldier persuasion not the thinking kind. Perhaps we could sticky this thread as it evolves, I can see it becoming a good reference for newbies in the debate.

[Kuroneko]

You can think of them as simply different units of measure for essentially the same thing. Just like one can measure distance in miles or in centimeters, the only difference is that one would have a lot more centimeters for the same distance (to be precise, 160934.4 times more, since that is number of centimeters in a mile). Centimeters are simply smaller than miles, even though they both measure distance. Likewise, both joules and [TNT-]tons measure energy, and it is a very small unit of measure--there are 4.184e9 gigajoules per gigaton, i.e., over four billion gigajouls in a single gigaton. That's a very large difference; it can be visualized as the difference between a centimeter and Earth's equator, as it has a four-billion-to-one ratio also.

[Xuenay]

That suits me, though I don't really understand it. The figures stare me in the face but the light bulb isn't on if you know what I mean? I was never very good at science, my skills are of the soldier persuasion not the thinking kind. Perhaps we could sticky this thread as it evolves, I can see it becoming a good reference for newbies in the debate.

I'd be inclined to suggest that if you don't really feel you understand something you're using to debate your case, don't use it - use something you know and can defend. If you're using something you don't know, you most likely don't know how to respond to your opponent attacking it, either. (Been guilty of this myself, more times than I care to admit)

[Dooey Jo]

I'm sorry, but this is just too damn funny:

So they were hit twice by a 400 Gigawatt blast and the only thing it did was create thermal damage to the hull! So I say to you that a mere 200 Gigaton blast would barely do anything to the Fed ships

A mere 200 GT versus 400 GW? Well hey, 200 GT is just 2 billion times more powerful (and that's assuming it takes on second for the 200 GT to be delivered, but it actually takes much less, so the power would be even higher). That's nothing!

Of course, Worf probably meant 400 GJ anyway, since you don't measure energy in watts (unless he meant particle power, whatever that is. Sounds like something a manga character would say)...

[Glimmervoid]

I'm sorry, but this is just too damn funny:

So they were hit twice by a 400 Gigawatt blast and the only thing it did was create thermal damage to the hull! So I say to you that a mere 200 Gigaton blast would barely do anything to the Fed ships

A mere 200 GT versus 400 GW? Well hey, 200 GT is just 2 billion times more powerful (and that's assuming it takes on second for the 200 GT to be delivered, but it actually takes much less, so the power would be even higher). That's nothing!

Of course, Worf probably meant 400 GJ anyway, since you don't measure energy in watts (unless he meant particle power, whatever that is. Sounds like something a manga character would say)...

Tell him that it would take 1300000000000 years for a 400 gigawatt laser to deliver 200 gigatons of energy. And if he wants proof i will send you over the calculations.

[Lord of the Farce]

1 tons = 8.15336983 × 1019 joules and 1 joule= 2.3*10^-10 tons

1 watt = energy/time it is delivered over.

A gigawatt is 1e6 joules a second or 1.23e-14 tons per second.
A gigaton is 1e6 tons or 8.15e25 joules per second.

A gigawatt laser would need to fire for 2.11E32 years to deliver a gigaton of energy.
That is 211000000000000000000000000000000 years.

This is assuming 1 gigaton and 1 gigawatt.

Tell him that it would take 1300000000000 years for a 400 gigawatt laser to deliver 200 gigatons of energy. And if he wants proof i will send you over the calculations.

Errr... Just a few things:

"Giga" is 1e9. 1e6 is actually "Mega".

A megaton is 4.184e15 joules.

8.15e25 joules is 19,480,000 gigatons.

After dividing 4.184e18 (for 1 gigaton) by 1e9 (for 1 gigawatt), you get 132.67 years.

[Glimmervoid]

1 tons = 8.15336983 × 1019 joules and 1 joule= 2.3*10^-10 tons

1 watt = energy/time it is delivered over.

A gigawatt is 1e6 joules a second or 1.23e-14 tons per second.
A gigaton is 1e6 tons or 8.15e25 joules per second.

A gigawatt laser would need to fire for 2.11E32 years to deliver a gigaton of energy.
That is 211000000000000000000000000000000 years.

This is assuming 1 gigaton and 1 gigawatt.

Tell him that it would take 1300000000000 years for a 400 gigawatt laser to deliver 200 gigatons of energy. And if he wants proof i will send you over the calculations.

Errr... Just a few things:

"Giga" is 1e9. 1e6 is actually "Mega".

A megaton is 4.184e15 joules.

8.15e25 joules is 19,480,000 gigatons.

After dividing 4.184e18 (for 1 gigaton) by 1e9 (for 1 gigawatt), you get 132.67 years.

I had corrected the 1e9 and 1e6 thing after i posted it.

And sorry about the joules i was working of a site that gave me wrong numbers. I 66.5 years though.

[Glimmervoid]

Hear is how I got it.

1 ton =4180000000 joules of energy.

1 joule = 2.39E-10 tons.


400 gigawatt blast = 4.00E+11 joules per second
=(400E+9)*( 2.39E-10)= 9.57E+01 tons per second


200 gigaton blast=(200E+9)* 4180000000= 8.36E+20 joules
= 2.00E+11 tons

Amount of time

=(8.36E+20)/( 4.00E+11 )=2.09E+09 Seconds
=(2.09E+09)/60=3.48E+07 minutes
=(3.48E+07)/60=5.81E+05 hours
=(5.81E+05)/24=2.42E+04 days
=(2.42E+04)/7=3.46E+03 weeks
=(3.46E+03)/52=6.65E+01 years

66.5 years.

[Dooey Jo]

I'm not a member on of that board, I read it in the link supplied in the OP.

Anyway, you can do that calculation quicker and more precise by using 3600*24*365.25 as the number of seconds per year. There aren't 52 weeks in every year.

[Glimmervoid]

I'm not a member on of that board, I read it in the link supplied in the OP.

Anyway, you can do that calculation quicker and more precise by using 3600*24*365.25 as the number of seconds per year. There aren't 52 weeks in every year.

Ok 52.177457 but that only means its 66.2 years rather than 66.5. No big diffrence.

[Batman]

Okay, that's it. That DMJ guy is officially making me angry. I can't believe he's actually trying the 'nav deflectors' bullshit.
That one has been shot down how often now?

[brianeyci]

Okay, that's it. That DMJ guy is officially making me angry. I can't believe he's actually trying the 'nav deflectors' bullshit.
That one has been shot down how often now?

It seems like he's picking and choosing what he likes. Picard says that lasers can't hurt the Enterprise-D, and someone brings up the Borg cutting laser, so he says that Worf is wrong and Picard is right? Why, because Klingons are stupid?

Brian

[Darth Lucifer]

Both Darth Servo and Sothis have tried to debate this troll; I've even tangled with him at ST.com, but he's forever lost to the dark side of the force.

relevant links below:

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... highlight=

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... highlight=

http://www.1-2-free-forums.com/mf/searc ... author=DMJ

Outside of Star Trek versus debating, he's an okay guy, but like a spoiled child, he'll throw tantrums and hurl insults if doesn't get his way or hears (reads) what he doesn't agree with.

[Darth Lucifer]

oops, One more link I forgot to post.

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... highlight=

[Aaron]

Does anyone have the actual AOTC:ICS quotes describing the SW lasers? I can't seem to find my ICS and I'm sure it describes them as a particle/plasma weapon.

[Batman]

Does anyone have the actual AOTC:ICS quotes describing the SW lasers? I can't seem to find my ICS and I'm sure it describes them as a particle/plasma weapon.

Irrelevant. The movies clearly show they can't be lasers. DMJ is just being a moron.

[Vicious]

What is it with the goddamned "lazers d0nt wurk!11!!oneohone! argument? Has any of them ever considered the logical conclusion, i.e. that the technology in the alpha quadrant is incapable of producing a laser powerful enough to damage a Galaxy-class vessel? It isn't a blanket invulnerability field, it's just a technological issue. But there I go again, trying to use logic and rationalization to figure things out, rather than leaping to the most extreme conclusion.

[Batman]

Welome to the vs debate, Vicious.

[Aaron]

Does anyone have the actual AOTC:ICS quotes describing the SW lasers? I can't seem to find my ICS and I'm sure it describes them as a particle/plasma weapon.

Irrelevant. The movies clearly show they can't be lasers. DMJ is just being a moron.

Yeah I know, but I was hoping it would work if just for a little while.

[Batman]

Does anyone have the actual AOTC:ICS quotes describing the SW lasers? I can't seem to find my ICS and I'm sure it describes them as a particle/plasma weapon.

Irrelevant. The movies clearly show they can't be lasers. DMJ is just being a moron.

Yeah I know, but I was hoping it would work if just for a little while.

Recheck the thread and think about that.