Marina knows these people and might be able to help knock some sense into them.
Now a few things are wrong with this, first saying Wong is a dumbass, the second saying under a pseudonym that Wong wrote the B5tech site.FldMrslTed (5:21:38 PM): if you wanna good place for a good and fair debate on SWvsST, go to the message board at bbs.stardestroyer.net
SolarMx (5:21:53 PM): I have been there and it is not a good site
FldMrslTed (5:22:01 PM): it is a very good site
SolarMx (5:22:03 PM): It is not logical or accuate
SolarMx (5:22:49 PM): Michael Wong is dumbass
SolarMx (5:22:50 PM): He twists things to suit his ideas
SolarMx (5:22:50 PM): I have used the site for some stuff but I consider it weak
SolarMx (5:23:00 PM): His B5 site is just as weak
FldMrslTed (5:23:32 PM): he doesn't have a B5 site
SolarMx (5:23:42 PM): Yeah he does
FldMrslTed (5:23:47 PM): oh?
SolarMx (5:23:47 PM): He writes under another name
FldMrslTed (5:23:50 PM): oh?
SolarMx (5:23:53 PM): Let me get the URL
FldMrslTed (5:23:54 PM): what name?
SolarMx (5:24:11 PM): http://www.b5tech.com/index.htm
Another one who's involved is much more of a trekkie than the previously mentioned one.
Several stupid comments about ST being more efficent because it is smaller, etc...I am sure Don has a more complete response to this but...
"Anti-matter is an incredibly stupid means of power. If the containment fields went down, bye bye ship, whereever the plant is located. A cold fusion plant would be much better.
And anti-matter is limited by the amount that you can get into the reactor at a time, a few kilo's a sec, which is standard, isn't enough to power a ship to hyperspace."
1. Anti-Matter is many orders of magnitude more efficient than fusion reactors for many reasons. There is a reason the anti-matter tanks are in the middle of a ship burried very deep, by the time someone can hit them you are all already dead because the ship has lost power and most likley its atmosphere and all else necessary to make it effective.
The difference in output between fusion and anti matter is about the difference between a coal and nuclear power on a volume/weight ratio.
2. Warp speed as you describe it is realtivly undeveloped in the ST series. Don is much more capable than I of explaining how this works in the sim, but the ultimate in travel is not anything like Star Wars.
3. SW weapons rely completly on heat for their killing power. We have plasma today. In 20 years weapons like that could be developed.
Phasers on the other hand are whole orders of magnitude more effective weapons. You cannot just disrupt the beam with shields, to stop energy you have to put something in front of it. Shields lose power because the weapons attacking it "use" that power faster than it can be generated and replaced.
If Phasers impacted with armor they would not only degenerate the atoms as you say but they would essentially vaporize the very structure of the armor itself. Lasers and Plasma are heat based weapons. Phasers destroy the very structure of any element they come into contact with. A very large phaser, like the one mounted on a starship, are essentially focused nuclear weapons.
There is a reason Don considers Trek more advanced. It is a hundred thousand times more efficient. There is a reason that ships in Star Wars are huge monstrosities, they are not efficient. They are using near future technology and just massivly engineering it. Ion Engines are a thing of today. They exist now. Impulse Engines are a long time comming because they are far far more advanced. Whomever designed Star Wars stuff did it totally backasswards. I mean the Death Star is as big as a moon to destroy planets. Just load up a Star Destroyer with nucs its far more efficient. I am done for now.
How should I respond to both, and the last one mainly?
