The superlaser "trick"?

[Dooey Jo]

I know this have been discussed before but I couldn't find the old topic so I don't know how it all ended up.
Anyway, I read, back at DorkStars (whoops! I mean DarkStar, sorry! ) site about that thing about "the Superlaser is some kind of reversed Genesis device" and that "band of destruction" going from the point where the superlaser hit the surface to the other side of the planet.
Is it impossible that that "band" is the shockwave from the blast? I mean, such a powerful blast as the superlaser sure should create quite a big shockwave when it enters the atmosphere. And that second explosion could be shockwave "hitting itself" on the other side of the planet.

And now you might think: "A shockwave in air can't travel faster then the speed of sound in air". Well, perhaps it's not a normal shockwave, it could be some kind of EMP-thingy.

It's just a thought and it has probably been answered before.

Ignore this if you're not interested:
(I have some more thoughts on this but I don't have the time to write 'em down. A big, bad, black fricking thundercloud is closing in on me and I wouldn't want it to wreck my computer now would I? I just wanted you all to know.)

[TheDarkling]

Even in DarkStars theory the Death Star destroys Alderaan but it doesnt use DET to do it.

[Cpt_Frank]

Nonetheless his crazy interpretation of the visuals is completely without evidence.

[Jadeite]

Is that the Seydlitz or Von der Tann in ur sig Capt Frank?

[SPOOFE]

The problem with Darkstar's theory is that he needs to invent an as-yet-unheard-of mechanism in order for it to work... in other words, he makes the theory more complicated without any evidence that this is so. He utterly failed to explain why the funky "ring" shockwave explains his theory or disproves the DET theory... in either theory, that ring is an unexplainable phenomenon. There is no reason for the shockwave to create a ring... under both theories, it should be a sphere.

In any case, the DET theory has all the evidence it needs to be valid, unless you follow Darkstar's route of ignoring official EU evidence (based on his faulty notion that Lucasfilms and/or Lucas himself has completely flip-flopped on its/his previous stance that the EU is a part of the saga).

[Master of Ossus]

I have no explanation for the shockwave effect, but it seems clear that in order for it to be there, additional energy would have needed to come from somwhere (to make that part of the debris travel faster). Alternatively, it could be some kind of energy shockwave, stemming from some as-of-yet completely undescribed device. In either case, though, the energy would have to come from somewhere, and I think it probably came from either the DS or from power that was being produced on Alderaan itself (and the DS, in the case of the DS's explosion).

Also, his theory appears to contend that the shockwave somehow accelerated all of the matter of Alderaan, even though it clearly did not interact with nearby particles any more than it did with bits of debris far away from it. I think his idea that the DS inputed only enough energy to JUST break up Alderaan is ludicrous, and his idea that inputing the velocity of debris into energy calculations is somehow dishonest is hilarious.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

All the Trekkie explanations either violate the laws of physics, refute canon evidence, or require a yield higher than 1E38 joules.

[Master of Ossus]

All the Trekkie explanations either violate the laws of physics....

Where do you think the Trek writers get it from?

[Cpt_Frank]

Is that the Seydlitz or Von der Tann in ur sig Capt Frank?

It's the Russian Gangut class battleship Sewastopol. It was launched 1911, and like all battleships of that time, patterned after the infamous HMS Dreadnought.

[Dooey Jo]

These rings created by explosions in space is quite common in movies aren't they? They are there in ID4 when they blow up the mother ship. I don't where they get from. The shock wave should be a sphere (as someone stated before). Maybe the ring is a sphere but the rest of it is invisible, but that doesn't make any sense.
Anyway, this whole idea about the super laser being a kind of a Genesis device is ridicoulus. Would anyone have thought about if the genesis device had never been invented in Star Trek? Of course not. No-one would have said: "Hey, if I carefully examine Alderaan blowing up, frame by frame in a microscope, I see that the superlaser really is an energy-conserving device which is using a never before heard of mechanism to make the planet blow it self up".
(not a very good point, 'cause we can't change what happened in the past)

[beyond hope]

Star Trek VI started the trend with those when the moon blows up at the beginning of the movie... it is becoming an annoying cliche and I was unhappy to see it thrown into Star Wars for no reason except to make the visuals flashier. Look on the bright side: Lucas didn't choose to have large extra chunks of Alderaan spinning away from the explosion, which would have had every rabid trekkie alive screaming to lower the energy output because the planet wasn't *totally* fragmented. I like the theory that the hypermatter reactor is somehow responsible for the explosion ring: why is anyone's guess, but since the properties aren't defined anywhere it makes the most sense.

[omegaLancer]

I read the explaination, and I have just one thing to say, " it just does not make sense"..

A shock wave powerful enought to fragment the planet, would still require the energy to destroy it.. Would not the energy needed to create such a shock wave be greater than the shock wave itself, upping the enought of power needed to destroy a planet..

The fact is the genesis device itself would also require an un believable amount of energy.. Converting inorganic matter to organic, on a planetary scale, and the time scale involved. Wow

Hell it may have required more energy than destroying a planet...

But most of the site os very illogical, and make wild assumptions and leaps of logic that are truily unbelievable...

The fact is if you compare SW and ST universe, there is no way that the tiny federation can compare to the Empire, ship per ship and fleet to fleet...

[Ryoga]

You know what I find most amusing about this whole affair?

DorkStar seems to have forgotten the truly atrocious arguments he made in that little debacle. At least, that's the impression I got when he expressed ignorance of my sig.

[DarkStar]

You know what I find most amusing about this whole affair?

DorkStar seems to have forgotten the truly atrocious arguments he made in that little debacle. At least, that's the impression I got when he expressed ignorance of my sig.

Given that I have no recollection of writing that, and that you have provided no source for it, even when asked, I can't help but assume your sig is a fabrication.

Now, if you'd care to provide a source, I'd happily change my mind.

[DarkStar]

The problem with Darkstar's theory is that he needs to invent an as-yet-unheard-of mechanism in order for it to work... in other words, he makes the theory more complicated without any evidence that this is so.

We've already established that the DET idea also requires an additional "as-yet-unheard-of mechanism" in order for it to work (i.e. explain what we see).

He utterly failed to explain why the funky "ring" shockwave explains his theory or disproves the DET theory... in either theory, that ring is an unexplainable phenomenon.

In DET, it is unexplainable. In mine, it is at least a plausible outcome of the mechanism.

There is no reason for the shockwave to create a ring... under both theories, it should be a sphere.

I'm intrigued by your ability to predict that my theory suggests a sphere, when I disagree and the theory itself makes no such prediction.

In any case, the DET theory has all the evidence it needs to be valid,

Except, of course, those pesky canon visuals.

But, really, gentlemen . . . do you want to get back into this? The thread will simply end up closed again.

[TheDarkling]

Hmm and here come the flames.

You said the quote from the sig when you said the Death Star was using a Nuclear fusion reactor therefore the death star couldnt produce enough to destroy a planet using DET.

You said somethingn along those lines anyway but it was twisted to make out as if you were saying the Death star couldnt destroy a planet full stop ala classic strawman.

[SPOOFE]

We've already established that the DET idea also requires an additional "as-yet-unheard-of mechanism" in order for it to work (i.e. explain what we see).

All right, then your theory requires the creation of TWO additional "as-yet-unheard-of-mechanisms"... the cause of the shockrings AND the non-DET abilities of the superlaser.

I've asked you several times in the last thread, and you have been unable to answer why your theory explains the shockrings any better than the DET theory... you simply reasserted that "It caused it somehow".

In DET, it is unexplainable. In mine, it is at least a plausible outcome of the mechanism.

No, it is not. Your theory absolutely fails to explain why such "rings" would be created. In either theory, a shockwave would appear as a sphere. Furthermore, using the existence of the shockrings as proof of your non-DET theory also fails due to the two instances in which the superlaser fails to reproduce the same effect - a primary explosion and a secondary explosion - when used against starships.

I'm intrigued by your ability to predict that my theory suggests a sphere, when I disagree and the theory itself makes no such prediction.

ANY explosive shockwave creates a sphere. Are you contending, then that Alderaan didn't explode?

Obviously, there was a similar mechanism at work in the destruction of the planet and the destruction of the two Death Stars (although an odd mechanism, as the ring is off-axis in the DS1 explosion, but not the second), but not the destruction of the two Mon Cal cruisers in ROTJ.

The problem is that your "matter-eating" theory does not explain WHY such a ring would occur. Admittedly, neither does the DET theory, although there are numerous suppositions.

Except, of course, those pesky canon visuals.

You have never adequately explained HOW the canon visuals disprove the DET theory... you have simply continued to assert that it does. Argumentum ad infinitum, a debating fallacy.

[beyond hope]

This is how I see it:

DET theory: does not explain the shockwave ring, it is a mysterious secondary effect of the planet's explosion or the explosions of the Death Stars.

DarkStar's theory: does not explain the shockwave ring, it is a mysterious secondary effect of the planet's explosion or the explosions of the Death Stars.

DET theory: requires that the Death Star fired upon Alderaan with enough energy to blow up the planet.

DarkStar's theory: requires that the Death Star used some unknown "reverse Genesis effect" to blow up the planet.

Neither theory explains the shockwave ring. The DET theory only requires that the Death Star fired a massively powerful energy bolt. DarkStar's theory brings in all manner of unknown technologies and a "reverse Genesis effect" who's scientific feasability is questionable at best. So, the conclusion is that we take Occam's Razor to the "reverse Genesis effect" and put it out of it's misery.

[SirNitram]

All logical debators have done this, Beyond Hope, but Dark Star has the title of Village Idiot for a good reason.

[SPOOFE]

Neither theory explains the shockwave ring.

Darkstar claims that, since there were two shockrings (an initial one at the point of impact, and a larger one when the bulk of the planet exploded), this proves his theory. His reasoning is that the "reverse Genesis effect" travelled around the planet, and when the "RGE" shockwave met on the far side, it created the second ring.

However, as I've said, he fails to explain WHY this RGE effect, when meeting up with itself, would create the secondary ring. He also fails to explain why the rings would exist in the first place, so we are back to square one.

NOTE: The DET theory also explains why there are two rings, even if it fails (like Darkstar's theory) to explain why the shockwave is planar and not spherical... assuming that the rings are simply a side effect of the superlaser (an assumption that both theories use), then the initial impact - when the superlaser strikes Alderaan's planetary shield - would create the smaller ring, while the destruction of the planet would create the second, larger, and faster (read: more powerful) ring.

The point of confusion on my part is simply this: Why is the shockwave flat? I can't think of any scientific or rational reason why this is so. And neither can Darkstar. I would love to hear him offer a theory as to its planar nature, and keep that discussion independent of the rest of his theory.

[SPOOFE]

Oh, and Darkstar... if I have summed up your theory inaccurately, I apologize. Feel free to correct my summation if this is so.

[DarkStar]

All right, then your theory requires the creation of TWO additional "as-yet-unheard-of-mechanisms"... the cause of the shockrings AND the non-DET abilities of the superlaser.

Two? Why? One seems more than sufficient, given the evidence.

I've asked you several times in the last thread, and you have been unable to answer why your theory explains the shockrings any better than the DET theory... you simply reasserted that "It caused it somehow".

Your question is illogical.

Furthermore, using the existence of the shockrings as proof of your non-DET theory also fails due to the two instances in which the superlaser fails to reproduce the same effect - a primary explosion and a secondary explosion - when used against starships.

The theory does not fail due to a lack of multiple explosions against starships. In case you hadn't noticed, those are far less massive than either planets or Death Stars, and the situation has already been addressed in prior arguments. You might recall, for instance, the fact that I mentioned there would probably be some level of DET in any beam of such size and intensity.

ANY explosive shockwave creates a sphere. Are you contending, then that Alderaan didn't explode?

I am not obliged to respond to insanity.

You have never adequately explained HOW the canon visuals disprove the DET theory... you have simply continued to assert that it does.

I find it amusing how you can say that DET does not explain the rings, and then turn around and say that I have not disproved DET.

[DarkStar]

So, the conclusion is that we take Occam's Razor to the "reverse Genesis effect" and put it out of it's misery.

On the contrary . . . Occam's Razor slices the DET theory, because it fails to explain . . . indeed, doesn't even bother trying to explain . . . what we see. That is the first step that is required.

[DarkStar]

Neither theory explains the shockwave ring.

Darkstar claims that, since there were two shockrings (an initial one at the point of impact, and a larger one when the bulk of the planet exploded), this proves his theory. His reasoning is that the "reverse Genesis effect" travelled around the planet, and when the "RGE" shockwave met on the far side, it created the second ring.

More or less. However, I still must point out that the Warsies, yourself included, have taken the "Genesis" aside way too far. The use of the term to describe the effect is only in reference to meaning (planet-creating vs. planet-destroying), and not technology.

However, as I've said, he fails to explain WHY this RGE effect, when meeting up with itself, would create the secondary ring. He also fails to explain why the rings would exist in the first place, so we are back to square one.

That is your opinion, but logic disagrees. My theory need not go into the astrophysical details of ring formation in order to be far more consistent with the evidence than the foolish DET theory. Do we know how any of the unimaginably wondrous technologies really work? No. We watch their behavior, and that is how we know.

Your argument requires that I ignore their behavior, and perform armchair predictions based on evidence that you do not want me to be able to use.

That may work fine for the sort of theorizing you engage in (the same sort of evidence-ignoring that led to DET theory in the first place), but it will not suffice where more rigor is desired.

NOTE: The DET theory also explains why there are two rings, even if it fails (like Darkstar's theory) to explain why the shockwave is planar and not spherical... assuming that the rings are simply a side effect of the superlaser (an assumption that both theories use), then the initial impact - when the superlaser strikes Alderaan's planetary shield - would create the smaller ring, while the destruction of the planet would create the second, larger, and faster (read: more powerful) ring.

Illogical. There is no evidence of a planetary shield, nor is there any logical reason why a shield failure and a planet destruction event would produce similar rings. Further, the secondary explosion occurs after the termination of the superlaser.

[Cpt_Frank]

So there's no evidence of a planetary shield, eh?

The glow of the planetary shield. Concession accepted.

Quote:
I've asked you several times in the last thread, and you have been unable to answer why your theory explains the shockrings any better than the DET theory... you simply reasserted that "It caused it somehow".

Your question is illogical.

This question is valid. The DET theory is the most obvious.
Your theory is completely unproven and relies on many unknown factors involving completely unknown technologies. So please do something to back it up.

Quote:

You have never adequately explained HOW the canon visuals disprove the DET theory... you have simply continued to assert that it does.


I find it amusing how you can say that DET does not explain the rings, and then turn around and say that I have not disproved DET.

It is a theory which apart from the shockwave corresponds with all the visuals and the official evidence.

Your theory on the other hand does not only fail to explain the shockwave, it also assumes the existence of a strange, completely unknown technical device without a shred of evidence.

Which theory is superior? Go figure.