CrossoverManiac's little calculation...

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-02-01 03:00pm

I dunno, the bazooka analogy is interesting, like say if you fire a stream of neutrinos the other way of the beam.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-02-01 04:51pm

IIRC, no ship larger than a VicStarII has a repulsorlift. And I doubt it would work from that far out.

ISD's and up still utilized repulsorlifts... they just weren't designed to go into a planet's atmosphere, is all.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2003-02-01 06:52pm

SPOOFE wrote:
IIRC, no ship larger than a VicStarII has a repulsorlift. And I doubt it would work from that far out.
ISD's and up still utilized repulsorlifts... they just weren't designed to go into a planet's atmosphere, is all.

IIRC ISD's do, since they were employed in Dark Empire to help the ISD survive crashing into Coruscant. Likewise, they're neccesary close to planets (unless you think large streams of near-c ionized particles are healthy near a planet)

Hell, the Death Star had Repulsorlift tech (canon ANH novelization.) I doubt Star Destroyers wo uld not have it also.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-01 09:17pm

ClaysGhost wrote:Yes, it's technobabble.

Build something out of tachyons, build something that cannot survive at rest without laughing in the face of physics.

Who said it's at rest? It could be circulating about the ship at >c speeds, creating a halo of tachyonic matter.

Build something partly out of tachyons, watch in delight as the tachyon part of the something demonstrates zero connection with the rest of the structure (or more precisely, watch as the real matter stays where it is and the tachyons zip off into la-la land and carry on with violating causality, being sold into slavery in New Age healing products and all manner of other delightful things).

Of course, it isn't feasible. It is only mathematically possible. However, that puts it in the same league as wormholes, and I don't recall people objecting in the same strenuous terms whenever wormholes are mentioned.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-01 09:47pm

Mr Wong, could you please explain what you mean whenever you mentionb hypermatter? You are talking about tachyonic halos, have mentioned matter being 90 degrees to reality, and imaginary numbers in describing hypermatter. So could you please put it in laymen's terms?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-01 10:16pm

Ender wrote:Mr Wong, could you please explain what you mean whenever you mentionb hypermatter? You are talking about tachyonic halos, have mentioned matter being 90 degrees to reality, and imaginary numbers in describing hypermatter. So could you please put it in laymen's terms?

OK, what is the square root of 4? 2. And what is the square root of -4? Hmmmm ....

There is no real number which is the square root of -4. However, there are so-called "imaginary numbers" which do work for that purpose, and the square root of -4 is 2i, where i is defined as the square root of -1.

Now, let's say you have a number 2+2i. This has a real component (2) and an imaginary component (2i). On a chart where the Y-axis is imaginary numbers and the X-axis is real numbers, its phase angle would be 45 degrees. Its magnitude would be roughly 2.8.

Imaginary numbers are often thought of as an abstraction, but there are aplications for them (read Hawking's second book, "Black Holes and Baby Universes", in which he discusses imaginary time). In Einsteinian relativity, superluminal velocities generate imaginary numbers as solutions, and that's where this comes from.

The ICS specifically describes manipulation of the complex mass/energy of the ship in order to achieve hyperspace. In other words, a SW ship's mass is not described with a real number X. Instead, it is described with a number X+Yi.

In theory, let's suppose a SW ship has a mass in tons of 5E7+(1E9)(i). Its "real" mass would be 50 million tons. The magnitude of its complex mass would be 1 billion tons. The phase angle would be roughly 87.1 degrees. Now, let's say it can manipulate its complex mass to a phase angle of 90 degrees; the magnitude of its complex mass would be unchanged, but its real mass would become zero. Conversely, let's say it can manipulate its complex mass to a phase angle of 0 degrees: its real mass suddenly skyrockets to roughly 1.001 billion tons.

Now, you're thinking that this is all just a shitload of meaningless mathematical mumbo-jumbo, right? Well, you'd have a point. But it's exactly the same kind of meaningless mumbo-jumbo that's used to justify wormhole theory. Imaginary mass is bizarre, but certainly no less than negative mass. What does -5 kg look like? Any sci-fi fan who scoffs at the ICS description of complex mass manipulation but wholeheartedly accepts wormholes is not being fair.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-02-01 10:24pm

I will attempt to break down Mike's explanation into simpler terms, since I'm sure a few people didn't get it. Keep in mind, everything here is a Lie To Laymen.. It's not true, but it's close enough that you can conceptualize the ideas.

The easiest parallel is simply to walk over to Trek and use their technobabble 'Mass Lightening'. They can raise and lower the real mass of a ship by shoving the rest elsewhere, manipulating the Complex Mass is pretty much the same thing. Lower the mass, higher the speed, until your mass is 0 and you hit lightspeed. Theoretically, they can increase the phase angle to, say, 100, where they now have negative mass(And, theoretically, they will now be moving faster than light). This is very consistant with Mr. Saxton's thoughts on Hyperspace.

I hope that made sense. Again, it's not completely right, but it's close enough for you to conceptualize the idea.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-01 10:24pm

Much more clear now. Thank you.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-01 10:26pm

Ok, thanks to both ouf you now, since Nitram posted when I did

Crossover_Maniac · Post by **Crossover_Maniac** » 2003-02-02 05:00am

Darth Wong wrote:Iron is a volatile substance [/list]

When did I say anything about iron being volatile?

(and let's not even discuss his idiotic math).

If I made any math errors, just say so and I'll make the necessary changes. As ClaysGhost pointed out, I know I didn't take into account the changing mass of the superlaser as converts hypermatter into the energy for the superlaser.

LMSx · Post by **LMSx** » 2003-02-02 05:47am

Conversely, let's say it can manipulate its complex mass to a phase angle of 0 degrees: its real mass suddenly skyrockets to roughly 1.001 billion tons

That could have some.....interesting....potential.

Pcm979 · Post by **Pcm979** » 2003-02-02 07:06am

Ender wrote:Lets face it, the DS is all kinds of screwy. It goes to hyperspace when it's own mass should generate enough of a grav well for it not to.

???? All it needs is a really large hyperdrive.

Ender wrote:despite having a direct opening to space through the reactor, the Emperor's throne room did not depressurize.

All we know is that the Emperor's throne room has a long tunnel in it. Who says it leads to the reactor? (Even if it did, SW has forcefields)

Ender wrote:It causes ring explosions in some things, and doesn't cause them in others.

It's been speculated that the Alderaan rings were Hypermatter reactors going up. The Mon Cal cruisers were probably too small to make visible rings from their (relatively) puny hypermatter reactors.

Ender wrote:It can hold enough tibanna gas to fire alot of DS shots even though there is nowwhere on the ship shown to hold that stuff.

The Death Star Superlaser acts nothing like a blaster bolt. Why should they have similar systems?

Ender wrote:The thing gets shaken by TLshots. Not alot makes sense.

I thought that corridor was just below an exploding gun emplacement.

ClaysGhost · Post by **ClaysGhost** » 2003-02-02 10:00am

Darth Wong wrote: Who said it's at rest? It could be circulating about the ship at >c speeds, creating a halo of tachyonic matter.

So when the DS babbles its phase angle around from mostly-tachyonic to slightly-tachyonic, in preparation for firing, what happens? Some guy's briefcase decelerates from its orbit around the station and reappears to make up the missing mass? Must everyone on the DS look forward to periods during which some of their mass decides to wend its merry way around the station faster than the speed of light? And if the power fails whilst some of the mass is tachyonic, look out; it'll make the Enterprise towing around antimatter look sensible as regards safety.

Of course, it isn't feasible. It is only mathematically possible. However, that puts it in the same league as wormholes, and I don't recall people objecting in the same strenuous terms whenever wormholes are mentioned.

Nobody suggested building a battle-station out of wormholes before. Further, wormholes are valid solutions to the GR field equations. Tachyons are one of several possible interpretations of spacelike momentum vectors. Whilst both are mathematical curiosities, they are certainly not of the same order of sanity.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-02 10:18am

Pcm979 wrote:???? All it needs is a really large hyperdrive.

So despite the fact that hyperdrives don't work in a grav well and something the size of a small moon would generate it's own grav well, you say a large enough hyperdrive would let it go to lightspeed. What proof do you have that hyperdrive size affects gravity interaction? Now what Wong posted earlier would explain it, as it would just have to lower it's own mass, but what you put down does not compute.

All we know is that the Emperor's throne room has a long tunnel in it. Who says it leads to the reactor? (Even if it did, SW has forcefields)

The fact that it went to the reactor is well extablished. And Yes, I believe ther must be forcefields there. But it is still stupid.

It's been speculated that the Alderaan rings were Hypermatter reactors going up. The Mon Cal cruisers were probably too small to make visible rings from their (relatively) puny hypermatter reactors.

That was my attempt to take a potshot at the chain reaction theory.

The Death Star Superlaser acts nothing like a blaster bolt. Why should they have similar systems?

You mean aside from the fact that it is the same technology, just scaled way the fuck up?

I thought that corridor was just below an exploding gun emplacement.

ROTJ novel says the station was rocking from TL blasts.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-02 10:19am

Crossover_Maniac wrote: When did I say anything about iron being volatile?

Iron makes up a large part of the planet. If this chain reaction uses the matter of the planet for fuel, that means it consumes iron. Meaning you and Darkstar and all other chain reactionists believe that iron is volatile.[/quote]

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-02-02 12:25pm

ClaysGhost wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: Who said it's at rest? It could be circulating about the ship at >c speeds, creating a halo of tachyonic matter.
So when the DS babbles its phase angle around from mostly-tachyonic to slightly-tachyonic, in preparation for firing, what happens? Some guy's briefcase decelerates from its orbit around the station and reappears to make up the missing mass? Must everyone on the DS look forward to periods during which some of their mass decides to wend its merry way around the station faster than the speed of light? And if the power fails whilst some of the mass is tachyonic, look out; it'll make the Enterprise towing around antimatter look sensible as regards safety.

Of course, it isn't feasible. It is only mathematically possible. However, that puts it in the same league as wormholes, and I don't recall people objecting in the same strenuous terms whenever wormholes are mentioned.
Nobody suggested building a battle-station out of wormholes before. Further, wormholes are valid solutions to the GR field equations. Tachyons are one of several possible interpretations of spacelike momentum vectors. Whilst both are mathematical curiosities, they are certainly not of the same order of sanity.

DipshitGhost, no one said complex mass is tachyonic.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-02 12:34pm

ClaysGhost wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Who said it's at rest? It could be circulating about the ship at >c speeds, creating a halo of tachyonic matter.
So when the DS babbles its phase angle around from mostly-tachyonic to slightly-tachyonic, in preparation for firing, what happens?

It generates the 1E38 J of energy that is otherwise seemingly impossible. But if you have a better explanation, please let me know.

Some guy's briefcase decelerates from its orbit around the station and reappears to make up the missing mass? Must everyone on the DS look forward to periods during which some of their mass decides to wend its merry way around the station faster than the speed of light?

If you've got a better explanation for hyperdrive, then by all means, provide it. And by the way, everyone DOES, in fact, have to look forward to becoming tachyonic during hyperspace travel. It IS a superluminal drive system, in case you haven't been paying attention.

And if the power fails whilst some of the mass is tachyonic, look out; it'll make the Enterprise towing around antimatter look sensible as regards safety.

You are raising issues of practical application, not mathematics. I could just as easily raise similarly horrendous issues with wormholes, yet I don't.

Of course, it isn't feasible. It is only mathematically possible. However, that puts it in the same league as wormholes, and I don't recall people objecting in the same strenuous terms whenever wormholes are mentioned.
Nobody suggested building a battle-station out of wormholes before. Further, wormholes are valid solutions to the GR field equations. Tachyons are one of several possible interpretations of spacelike momentum vectors. Whilst both are mathematical curiosities, they are certainly not of the same order of sanity.

Bullshit. Wormholes require huge amounts of negative mass, and would induce monstrous tidal forces that annihilate anything trying to move through them. I don't see how they are any less ridiculous than imaginary mass manipulation.

Crossover_Maniac · Post by **Crossover_Maniac** » 2003-02-02 12:50pm

Ender wrote:
Crossover_Maniac wrote: When did I say anything about iron being volatile?
Iron makes up a large part of the planet. If this chain reaction uses the matter of the planet for fuel, that means it consumes iron. Meaning you and Darkstar and all other chain reactionists believe that iron is volatile.

I said it was one of the explanations. I also said the Death Star's superlaser could be composed of a mix of particles with possitive mass and negative mass allowing for a net momentum of zero, the superlaser particles are not only massless but doesn't have any momentum or the structural integrity field is strong enough on the Death Star to counter the stress caused by the superlaser (I'd explained this in my thread) although I have some doubts about the last one. The 'volatile iron' theory is just one possiblity. But I did manage to find at least one instance where iron is volatile.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-02 12:59pm

Crossover_Maniac wrote:
Ender wrote:
Crossover_Maniac wrote: When did I say anything about iron being volatile?
Iron makes up a large part of the planet. If this chain reaction uses the matter of the planet for fuel, that means it consumes iron. Meaning you and Darkstar and all other chain reactionists believe that iron is volatile.
I said it was one of the explanations. I also said the Death Star's superlaser could be composed of a mix of particles with possitive mass and negative mass allowing for a net momentum of zero, the superlaser particles are not only massless but doesn't have any momentum or the structural integrity field is strong enough on the Death Star to counter the stress caused by the superlaser (I'd explained this in my thread) although I have some doubts about the last one.

Alright then

The 'volatile iron' theory is just one possiblity. But I did manage to find at least one instance where iron is volatile.

Are your trying to claim that the DS could use the same technology as the Galaxy Gun, but in beam form?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-02 01:03pm

Crossover_Maniac wrote:
Ender wrote:
Crossover_Maniac wrote: When did I say anything about iron being volatile?
Iron makes up a large part of the planet. If this chain reaction uses the matter of the planet for fuel, that means it consumes iron. Meaning you and Darkstar and all other chain reactionists believe that iron is volatile.
I said it was one of the explanations.

Actually, "explanations" have to make sense. Small detail you apparently left out, as usual.

I also said the Death Star's superlaser could be composed of a mix of particles with possitive mass and negative mass allowing for a net momentum of zero, the superlaser particles are not only massless but doesn't have any momentum or the structural integrity field is strong enough on the Death Star to counter the stress caused by the superlaser (I'd explained this in my thread) although I have some doubts about the last one.

You're an idiot. Such a beam would have zero energy, since the positive and negative masses would cancel out.

The 'volatile iron' theory is just one possiblity. But I did manage to find at least one instance where iron is volatile.

This actually disproves your point (not that I've ever been a big fan of the Galaxy Gun; such Trek-like chain reactions are a brain-bug IMHO and it's g good thing we don't see them in the canon films), since a miniscule Galaxy Gun missile can do this. If an insignificant Galaxy Gun missile can do this, why would the Death Star need a gigantic moon-sized reactor and gun in order to do it?

Small wonder you posted your bullshit on SB but not here. Always best to keep stupid ideas away from people who will actually call you on it, eh?

Crossover_Maniac · Post by **Crossover_Maniac** » 2003-02-02 01:05pm

Ender wrote:Are your trying to claim that the DS could use the same technology as the Galaxy Gun, but in beam form?

It doesn't seem anymore outlandish than any of the other explanations.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-02 01:06pm

Darth Wong wrote: This actually disproves your point (not that I've ever been a big fan of the Galaxy Gun; such Trek-like chain reactions are a brain-bug IMHO and it's g good thing we don't see them in the canon films), since a miniscule Galaxy Gun missile can do this. If an insignificant Galaxy Gun missile can do this, why would the Death Star need a gigantic moon-sized reactor and gun in order to do it?

Plus there is the simple fact it was specifically stated that the Galaxy Gun missile was a brand new weapons application, and nothing like it had been done before.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-02 01:07pm

Crossover_Maniac wrote:
Ender wrote:Are your trying to claim that the DS could use the same technology as the Galaxy Gun, but in beam form?
It doesn't seem anymore outlandish than any of the other explanations.

Bullshit, it waqs specifically stated that the Galaxy Gun was a new application of the technology.

"It's amazing we didn't think of it years ago" - Palpatine

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-02-02 01:12pm

Exact Quote from HDS's thread on them in PSW

========================
At that very moment, young Emperor Palpatine is making an inspection tour of his new Galaxy Gun.

UMAK LETH: "We're relieved you chose to return to us, Emperor."

EMPEROR: "I could not have done otherwise, Leth. Now explain the operation of this new weapon to me."

LETH: "Of course, Your Majesty! As you already know, its purpose is to launch intelligent projectiles into hyperspace... Each projectile can exist at precise coordinates, find its target... and destroy it. Its threat is absolute."

EMPEROR: "Marvelous. It's a wonder we didn't think of it decades ago -- -- my new Galaxy Weapon is sure to inspire obedience. It means the end of the Rebel Alliance! This weapon can destroy a city... a land mass... or even an entire planet anywhere in the galaxy. Everything is falling into place as I have foreseen."
========================
-Dark Empire II

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-02 01:12pm

Crossover_Maniac wrote:
Ender wrote:Are your trying to claim that the DS could use the same technology as the Galaxy Gun, but in beam form?
It doesn't seem anymore outlandish than any of the other explanations.

Obviously, you have no sense of scale whatsoever. Suggestion: purchase a calculator, and then go to public school and ask the grade 5 math teacher what the equations for volume of a sphere and a cylinder are.