Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech?

[Darth Tedious]

What in Valen's name is a 'stellar fuel bottle'?

They have been canonically mentioned (in the ICS, IIRC), with no description or detailed information given.

---

Found a source for Mercenario's mystery quote!

It's from howstuffworks.com

The hypermatter reactor is the heart of the Death Star. The Death Star's hypermatter core is based largely on early Sienar Systems hypermatter implosion core that was the power source of the Confederacy of Independent Systems' Great Weapon (the early inspiration for the Death Star -- more on this later). Little is actually known about the details of the highly classified reactor design, but we do know that it is a massive fusion reactor fed by stellar fuel bottles that line the periphery of the main reactor chamber.

Note that he only quoted the second half of the paragraph.

Mercenario, cherry-picking quotes from non-canon sources is one thing.
When the same source states that which you are trying to disprove, you show yourself to be a completely dishonest piece of shit perfoming little more than an exercise in trolling.

The Death Star is powered by a hypermatter reactor. Concede the point or fuck off.

[Lord Helmet]

Did you read what you quoted me as saying? Kim was the one who scanned the asteroid, and he expected fragmentation (into much smaller pieces than were observed). Chakotay eyeballed it, and thought it would be vapourised.

They/Kim scanned the roid, they/he would have then reported/sent the findings ect to Tuvok and Tuvok would have set the yield of the torp appropriately. Chakotay's comment is pretty typical for most of the situations it is used in accross all sci-fi and even non-sci-fi considering that "vapourised" virtually never means vapourised in as factual sense.

The fact is that we cannot say for sure and it is actually very unlikely considering how things are done that the torp was set to max.

[Norade]

Did you read what you quoted me as saying? Kim was the one who scanned the asteroid, and he expected fragmentation (into much smaller pieces than were observed). Chakotay eyeballed it, and thought it would be vapourised.

They/Kim scanned the roid, they/he would have then reported/sent the findings ect to Tuvok and Tuvok would have set the yield of the torp appropriately. Chakotay's comment is pretty typical for most of the situations it is used in accross all sci-fi and even non-sci-fi considering that "vapourised" virtually never means vapourised in as factual sense.

The fact is that we cannot say for sure and it is actually very unlikely considering how things are done that the torp was set to max.

Bullshit. We've seen torpedo hits in other cases that were nowhere near that powerful and the maximum yield they could fit by volume and known warhead material isn't all that high.

[Mercenario]

@Whiskey144

First off, PROVIDE A SOURCE for your quote. Otherwise, I think it's safe to assume that you just MADE SHIT UP.

The QUOTE WAS ABOVE this sentance.

@Darth Tedious

Mercenario, cherry-picking quotes from non-canon sources is one thing.

Yeah.
Darth Tedious:Mercenario show me were it says fusion based.
*Mercenario brings the quote.*
Darth Tedious: You are cherry picking.
Mercenario: ???
Honestly, of course I did only quote as less as possible and as close to the question you asked as possible.

Several big lasers focues into one laser, but not acting like a Laser power by a fusion reactor with the energy output of a small sun.

Firstly, you might want to read your own sources. The DS's power comes from a hypermatter reactor, not fusion. *several insults followed*

I was only arguing the fusion part. I never said anything about what kind of atoms they combine in the first place. So I brought you the quote telling it is some kind of fusion. So yes, your hypermatter is not wrong, just your "not fusion".

The Death Star is powered by a hypermatter reactor. Concede the point or fuck off.

And you are able to tell me, what Hypermatter is? (Not that it would really matter, because the type of reaction used allready gives the mass/energy output)

[Darth Tedious]

Darth Tedious:Mercenario show me were it says fusion based.
*Mercenario brings the quote.*
Darth Tedious: You are cherry picking.
Mercenario: ???

Actually, my response was:

Mercenario, cherry-picking quotes from non-canon sources is one thing.

But good job cherry-picking my words there, too. Nice to know we can rely on your ability to miss a point so badly you'll quote half a sentence, when the other half contained the salient point.

Provide a reference from a canonical source to show the DS uses fusion as its power source.

Also note: I never asked you to show that the DS is fusion based- I had simply called you on your bullshit claim that there was as little information about the DS as there is about S8472. Of course, anyone who can read can see that on pages 9-10 of this very thread.

And you are able to tell me, what Hypermatter is?

He knew that hypermatter existed only in hyperspace, that it was composed of tachyonic particles, and that charged tachyons, when constrained by the lower dimensions of realspace, produced near-limitless energy.

Produces energy simply be being introduced into realspace! I can see why they need fusion on top of that... oh, wait... no they don't.

Because you're a fucking idiot, I'll say it a second time:

Provide a reference from a canonical source to show the DS uses fusion as its power source.

[Mercenario]

@Darth Tedious

I never asked you to show that the DS is fusion based-

You just called me a lair for telling so.

And you know as well as I do, that there are several contradicting canonical sources.
I mean if you go for the novels refering to the films you will end up with:

"the liberated energy of a small artificial sun"

Well, I guess we both know that the phrase artificial sun means fusion reactor.

[Metahive]

OK, could someone please do an IP check on Merc here and make sure it isn't just another Darthy sock-puppet?

Well, I guess we both know that the phrase artificial sun means fusion reactor.

No, it means the energy output equivalent of a small, artificial sun, not more not less.

Or what is a tachyonic particle?

Really, man, what's exactly your point here? "Star Wars uses a fictional method of energy production and therefore all numbers are wrong"? That's what I gather from your JasonB style word vomit.

[Darth Tedious]

I am aware of the phrase used in the ANH novelisation. It does not imply that the DS's power source was a fusion reactor, nor does it contradict what is stated in Death Star.

The Episode II ICS explains that all hypermatter annihilation chambers use a fusion reaction as a method of containment. Thus, there is no contradiction- a small artificial star actually was released when the DS was destroyed. It wasn't the power source.

Note the wording I used:

Provide a reference from a canonical source to show the DS uses fusion as its power source.

The DS does not use fusion reaction as a power source, but as containment for a much greater one. In honesty, I did string you along there to see what train wreck of an argument you'd pull from your arse this time. Thanks for playing. Feel free to concede the point whenever you like.

Taking a step back, all this was brought up when I called you on your false claim that there is as little information about the DS as there is about S8472. Care to concede that point?

---

OK, could someone please do an IP check on Merc here and make sure it isn't just another Darthy sock-puppet?

That thought occurred to me also...

[Mercenario]

@Darth Tedious

Taking a step back, all this was brought up when I called you on your false claim that there is as little information about the DS as there is about S8472. Care to concede that point?

Yes, I elaborated a bit. But still you have shown no physical basis on how the death star is supposed to work.
(Which is as much as there is for S8472)

@Metahive

No, it means the energy output equivalent of a small, artificial sun, not more not less.

Well, good. So we have at least the numbers for the energy output, since we know how much energy is produced by Stars in general.
So yes, there is more information about the death star. (I was actually just making a bit of an elaporated statement to show what I was trying to point out. But I guess it failed, because we got caught up in this debate)
So right, we do know a bit more about the death stars reactor. But still not so much about the "Laser".

"Star Wars uses a fictional method of energy production and therefore all numbers are wrong

No. Just saying there is no information in fictional particels other than just posing numbers and giving numbers also add quite few information. (Which is quite obvious I think)
You may replace Hypermatter through any other word, you may like. It does not add or substract information. Because the word itself has no definition.
To have some real definition you have to end up with a real life particle in the end(tachyons exist in real life physics but I take it you do not think they are refered to)
I am not saying that this is some kind of must have. It is not that any other SiFi series do not break with real life physics all the time.
The ST M/AM has quite few in common with what we consider it to be in real life.

[Darth Tedious]

But still you have shown no physical basis on how the death star is supposed to work.

So right, we do know a bit more about the death stars reactor. But still not so much about the "Laser".

Try this on for size.

The two men were standing in a small nexus chamber overlooking the eight radiating particle accelerator tubes designed to feed the super-laser beam.

If the primary beam focusing magnet was off a nanometer, the tributary beams would not coalesce, and there was a good chance of imbalance explosions in the beam shaft if the tributaries weren't pulsed in at exactly the proper time and in the proper sequence.

Particle acceleration drives the tributary beams to full power, which are combined by the primary beam focusing magnet. The tributaries are harmoniously pulsed to create a synergistic effect.

There is a metric fuckton more information on the Death Star than there is on S8472.

So yes, there is more information about the death star. (I was actually just making a bit of an elaporated statement to show what I was trying to point out. But I guess it failed, because we got caught up in this debate)

Concession of the point accepted. What exactly were you trying to point out?

Also, you earlier postulated that Voyager would be able to shrug off a direct hit from the Death Star's superlaser because... you say so. Care to back that up with some reasoning?

[Darth Tedious]

There definitely is a habit of SW writers to try and stitch everything together, no matter how crazily it must be done. And I agree, it gets pretty zany. Personally, I enjoy some of the results it produces.

Silliness aside, that's how it (the DS reactor) works. I don't write the stuff, I just read it...
Picture me shrugging my shoulders as I say that.

[Norade]

So back to the fusion thing. I definitely remember some older source saying "hypermatter fusion". Now, there's a new source that says it just magically does it's thing... then there's a third newer source that combines the two and sounds really silly.

How do fusion reactions contain anything? They want to lose containment themselves all the time! (this is why building a fusion plant is so hard; the reaction really really just wants to stop itself)

I doubt a tech base that gets things to repulse against gravity without using energy needs to worry about containing fusion. Also, for all we know they somehow make the fusion reaction specifically to interact with tachyons. Fuck if I have any idea how it works, but it's already trying to use science more correctly than anytime a character in Trek opens their mouth to explain something.

[Mercenario]

@Darth Tedious

Concession of the point accepted. What exactly were you trying to point out?

That most off the "high end effects" do lack explaination or try to explain it into a manner which has nothing to do with real physics.

Thats why you mostly do not try to elaborate such things, because real physics will bite you in the end.
Does the book you quoted from "Death Star" not state, that the beam somehow transfers normal matter in the hyperspace?

Also, you earlier postulated that Voyager would be able to shrug off a direct hit from the Death Star's superlaser because... you say so. Care to back that up with some reasoning?

I gave that earlyer.
If you just go the same way for both you end up with one planet leaving behind an astorid field and the other leaving behind no asteroids.
So you will come up with a differance in energy values. (Which can be, extreamly high)
Now you just follow through with the easy assumption like every ship of S8472 contributing the same amount of energy (maybe the big ship double). So it depends on what way of calculation you may want to go, but I guess it would leave one single ships of S8472 with about the firepower of the death star. Maybe more, maybe less.
(Which is silly, I assume. But I started from the position, that all those calculations are silly to begin with.)
My hole argument boils down to this:
It is most likely that any feat provided in the 6 StarWars movies is shown in similar manner in one of the StarTrek series. (Here I mostly trust in writers beeing copy cats and their limited creativity.)
So calculations done for one will be hold valid for the other too. Leading to the same silly numbers on both sides.
And since TV series mostly use "sillyness" quite feely...
(I mean yestarday I was watching Andromeda and what where those guys doing? Yeah, blowing up a planet.)

I mean, hell. The special effects were sometimes even done by the same guys. (I think there is a falcon to be found in a ST episode, can't remember which)

[Whiskey144]

Now you just follow through with the easy assumption like every ship of S8472 contributing the same amount of energy (maybe the big ship double). So it depends on what way of calculation you may want to go, but I guess it would leave one single ships of S8472 with about the firepower of the death star. Maybe more, maybe less.

*facepalm*

Main Site S8472 Notes

Main Site Death Star Notes

You realize that you're an idiot, right?

(I mean yestarday I was watching Andromeda and what where those guys doing? Yeah, blowing up a planet.)

Planetary demolition a la DS1 has been a staple of science fiction for decades. Blowing up planets isn't being a copycat anymore, it's a trope. However, S8472-style demolition is emulation, as it's remarkably similar to the visual style of the Death Stars.

I mean, hell. The special effects were sometimes even done by the same guys. (I think there is a falcon to be found in a ST episode, can't remember which)

One of the Borg-related episodes or movies. Can't remember offhand which one, though I think it's First Contact. However, your point is relatively moot; it doesn't matter that the same guys are occasionally doing the special effects for both SW and ST. They use different effects that fit the stylistic approach of each. Hence why ILM's work on a couple of Trek films doesn't have the Enterprise firing red-tailed, conical proton torpedoes a la the X-Wings in ANH instead of the usual orange-ish, spherical starburst photorps.

[Norade]

I doubt a tech base that gets things to repulse against gravity without using energy needs to worry about containing fusion.

Those things are completely unrelated, and doesn't really address the main point anyway - that the explanation is fairly silly.

So is an android calling a fish an amphibian, the creating of a new standard unit like isotons, or there being cracks in event horizons. You have no leg to stand on when calling out science in any other series.

[Mercenario]

@Whiskey144
What are your two links saying? Nothing. Right.
(And as a matter of fact, they are both scaled the same in your link)
The formula used is a very, very large approximation.
To even get close to something precise you would need to run a simulation.


The calcualtion would be correct for one planet in the middle of the void, exploding in a giant nebula.

[Whiskey144]

What are your two links saying? Nothing. Right.

WUT?

(And as a matter of fact, they are both scaled the same in your link)

Did you even bother to actually read them both? It clearly said that the DS1 would require around 1E22 megatons to get the results we saw on-screen. In contrast, '8472's bioship-cluster-thing would require around 5E16 megatons (that's seven orders of magnitude LESS you dimwit) to blow up a planet, and we as we never saw the aftermath of the explosion, a la DS1 and Alderaan in ANH, that's all we can give it.

To even get close to something precise you would need to run a simulation.

*fistpalm, because facepalm does not express the level of FAIL*

You do realize that using something as basic as thermodynamics, such things were calc'd?

The calcualtion would be correct for one planet in the middle of the void, exploding in a giant nebula.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Because if you're attempting to say that the calcs are correct only if the planet is in deep space, not in orbit of a star (how the hell did it get there in the first place?), and being destroyed in a nebula, then.......
Well quite frankly, I have no idea how you could come to that conclusion. I'm pretty sure that even D-XIII, who has been non-supportive of the 'pro-SW' side (no offense intended to Destructionator), would say that you're being an idiot.

[Norade]

#1: Units are created all the time. BTW there's no such standard unit as a "gigaton" but that doesn't stop people from using it! The whole point of shorthand units is convenience. If 4e18 kg * m^2/s^2 is a mouthful, someone will shorten it.

We have units for yield of large weapons and has been used by many official real world nations. There would be no reason to change to a new unit when the current system, as shown by both real life and this board, works just fine.

#2: tu quoque is a fallacy, no matter how many times you repeat it.

Except that tu quoque is commonly used in debates and in courts of law so I'm perfectly justified in pointing out your hypocrisy.

#3: The fish/amphibian thing never happened. It's a common myth. What he actually was talking about was a briefcase that looked like a fish, in the context of learning. He's not saying "a fish is an amphibian". He's told something that looks like a fish is funny. Some amphibians look like fish. So, are they funny too?

Alternatively, he's simply using the other valid definition of amphibian from the dictionary: a generic word meaning it works with both land and water. Land in that a person is carrying it, and water in that it has fish imagery.

Sorry, but that really is reaching there.

BTW, this tangent is doubly hilarious. On one hand, I bitch about writers bending over backward to keep all the Holy Canon from being wrong, but on the other hand, I'm ok with explaining what a simile is to explain a Data statement. Oh lol.

Yes, we all know how you love trying to make sure that Starfleet officers look like they know what they're doing in spite of many gaffs. Kilowatts per second anybody?

[Norade]

We have units for yield of large weapons and has been used by many official real world nations. There would be no reason to change to a new unit when the current system, as shown by both real life and this board, works just fine.

Energy is measured in joules, calories, BTUs, watt-hours, kilowatt-hours, electron volts, foot-pounds, and I'm sure many many others I'm forgetting.

That's just the kind of things you might see around the house in America. Well, maybe not electron volts around the house, but it's common enough.


Then, on top of all that shit, some asshole added grams of TNT and etc. Which I very, very rarely hear in the real world. I've heard people say "five hundred pound bomb" though, yay, another measure.


So that's seven different ways to talk about the same shit in use today, but it's omfg bad science to think there might be another one in the future and in a different country.


Of all the shit you could bitch about... this is like saying TOS is unrealistic because Captain Kirk's uniform has two solids and a dashed braid rather than four solids like many of us Anglophones are used too.

HOW DARE OTHER COUNTRIES NOT CONFORM TO MY EXPECTATIONS

Except that all real militaries use kilo and megatons to refer to nuclear yields numbnuts. If the didn't the terms wouldn't be used in international treaties on nuclear arms. Not to mention that most nations also refer to chemical explosive bombs by weight so when we have two perfectly good systems that have been in use since WWI in some cases why the fuck would that suddenly change to describing things in isotons? Care to explain

Except that tu quoque is commonly used in debates and in courts of law so I'm perfectly justified in pointing out your hypocrisy.

#1: Appeal to popularity is another fallacy

#2: What hypocrisy? My statement applied to Star Trek just as well as anything else.

1) This site is less strict than a court of law, thus anything that flies there and in professional debate can and will fly here regardless of if you like it.

2) Yes, you bend over backwards to defend stupid shit in Trek, but the moment Wars does it you point a finger in its direction.

Sorry, but that really is reaching there.

The real reach is taking someone saying essentially "an amphibian looks like a fish" and concluding that he thinks amphibians and fish are the same thing.

Given the stupid shit they say all the time it's easier to believe that he's as functionally handicapped as the rest of the crew.

[Mercenario]

@Whiskey144

Did you even bother to actually read them both? It clearly said that the DS1 would require around 1E22 megatons to get the results we saw on-screen. In contrast, '8472's bioship-cluster-thing would require around 5E16 megatons (that's seven orders of magnitude LESS you dimwit) to blow up a planet, and we as we never saw the aftermath of the explosion, a la DS1 and Alderaan in ANH, that's all we can give it.

Yeah, because it was just claimed, that it was several magnitutes higher.
The 1E16 is the lower limit for both.

You do realize that using something as basic as thermodynamics, such things were calc'd?

Yes, I do. I gave you the cirumstances under which such calculations would be correct.
Do you really think it would be so fucking easy to do such a thing in solar System?

I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

Thats what I did suspect.

Well quite frankly, I have no idea how you could come to that conclusion.

This are the assumption under which the calculations are made! Overcoming gravitational energy...
Lets but it like that, there is more than one possibility where a nuclear blast would be more than enough to rip a planet apart.
Just put him barly stable in the force nihilation point of several black holes.

[Norade]

why the fuck would that suddenly change to describing things in isotons? Care to explain

I don't have to explain. The fact is that it isn't bad science to use different units. The very fact that some people use kilotons (or kilowatt hours or electron volts or even calories and BTUs) instead of the proper Système international d'unités value of joules proves this.

But nobody in an official capacity uses anything but kilotons or megatons for high yield weapons... Funny how that works.

[Norade]

And in Star Trek, nobody in an official capacity uses anything but isotons.

Do you bitch about Galactica having centons and yahren too?

If I knew, then yeah. It's just being lazy and it sounds stupider than most made up words used in scifi.

[Darth Tedious]

That most off the "high end effects" do lack explaination or try to explain it into a manner which has nothing to do with real physics.

Most everyday stuff in both franchises has nothing to do with RL physics.
Blasters use !Tibanna gas!
Phasers use !Nadion particles!
FTL using !Hyperspace!
FTL using !Warp fields!
Amazing shit because !Midichlorians can do it!
Amazing shit because !*Quantum* can do anything!

I could go on. Why are you in a debate on soft sci-fi?

"It isn't real" is not a valid argument when you are debating about something which is imaginary.

Thats why you mostly do not try to elaborate such things, because real physics will bite you in the end.

The imaginary physics which power both SW and ST have been elaborated on to some length. Apparently you refuse to be aware of that, in spite of my quoting Death Star every time you repeat the bullshit claim that there has never been an explanation given.

Does the book you quoted from "Death Star" not state, that the beam somehow transfers normal matter in the hyperspace?

No. No it does not. Please learn to read.

Now you just follow through with the easy assumption like every ship of S8472 contributing the same amount of energy (maybe the big ship double). So it depends on what way of calculation you may want to go, but I guess it would leave one single ships of S8472 with about the firepower of the death star. Maybe more, maybe less.

That assumption has one huge logical flaw- if every ship has DS-level firepower, they could have destroyed the planet with a single ship.
It also runs into massive problems when we compare it with other examples of firepowr we've seen in ST.
If single ships can one-shot planets, why did it take 30 ships to perform a BDZ in DS9:'The Die Is Cast'?
If ship shields can withstand DS-level firepower, how did the Enterprise-D lose its shields to a 400 gigawatt particle beam in TNG:'The Survivors'?

I could go on, but there would be little point. You have already proven the effectiveness of your wall of ignorance.

[Darth Ruinus]

As to that tidbit about fusion reactos containing hypermatter reactions, I was under the impression that a hypermatter reactor had to somehow drag/slow down hypermatter to real splace. So a fusion reactor powers the mechanism that brings hypermatter in, if the fusion reactor is turned off then the hypermatter fuel in the main reactor just sits there as useless junk.

[Whiskey144]

Yeah, because it was just claimed, that it was several magnitutes higher.

DS1's blast is "claimed" as several magnitudes higher because of the fact that the planet was blasted apart at a very appreciable velocity, and reduced to an extremely dense asteroid field.

We saw no such aftermath in the case of the S8472 blast.......in fact, we didn't see any aftermath at all. Hence, we can only assume that the minimum firepower of the S8472 bioship cluster is 5E16 megatons, while the lone DS1 had a superlaser blast of 1E22 megatons.

Keep in mind that the DS1 also has heaps of turbolasers and PD guns and heavy armor and shielding that allow it to still take on enemy fleets and win.

The 1E16 is the lower limit for both.

First of, it's 5E16 megatons. Secondly, do you not understand what a lower limit is? It's the absolute minimum amount of energy required to accomplish something. Like blow up a planet, in this case. The estimate of 1E22 megatons for the DS1 is because of the fact that it appreciably scattered Alderaan's mass in a very short amount of time. It overcame the gravitational binding energy of the planet rapidly enough that it required six orders of magnitude more than the base estimate.

Yes, I do. I gave you the cirumstances under which such calculations would be correct.

Do you have proof that only under those circumstances those calcs would be correct? If so, I'd really like to see it.

Do you really think it would be so fucking easy to do such a thing in solar System?

*fistpalm* We're looking at a civilization that can build tens of thousands of mile long warships at a rate of several per day, and by a single manufacturer. They have ships which putter around at several thousand Gs. I think it's safe to say that they easily wield that much energy on a routine basis.

Thats what I did suspect.

You don't understand; I didn't say that because what you were saying was so "above my head and understanding". It was because it didn't make a bloody lick of sense!

This are the assumption under which the calculations are made! Overcoming gravitational energy...

Is what we saw. In this method of VS debating, WYSIWYG applies. What You See Is What You Get; we saw the DS1 zap a planet, and have said planet explode with enough violence that gravitational binding energy was overcome. It happened in a very simple way.

They shot the planet, immediately after which the planet went boom. Not so much with the S8472 bioships.

Lets but it like that, there is more than one possibility where a nuclear blast would be more than enough to rip a planet apart.

Assuming said nuclear blast is caused by a device with sufficient yield, then I see no reason to suspect that it couldn't be done. That it's likely to occur with any foreseeable technology humans might create at this point, probably not.

Just put him barly stable in the force nihilation point of several black holes.

WUT?

Seriously, this is why I asked what you were saying. You post in gibberish. Also, see Darth Tedious above elaborating on the logical flaw in S8472 bioship firepower.