Why do people think the Andromeda is so powerful?

[SirNitram]

Take a small magnet. Pick up a peice of metal with it. That tiny magnet is overpowering the gravity of the entire planet. Gravity is a weak force. That does not mean all gravitational fields are weak, just that you have no fucking clue what you're on about.

Put enough mass in a star and the pressures generated at the core will overcome the strong force, hence this neutronium we're all so excited about. Maybe this isn't direct enough for you, but without gravity, the strong force wouldn't have any problems in this situation and neutronium wouldn't be so well-known.

You could always email those research groups I mentioned earlier and ask them exactly why they consider gravity important in neutron star formation

You could always realize that the Strong Force is what's preventing the Neutron Star from collapsing further, into a black hole(Unless it's a particularly massive star). But that would require you to think. Again, gravity is not required to hold neutronium together. That you are twisting this around isn't particularly impressive.

[ClaysGhost]

You could always realize that the Strong Force is what's preventing the Neutron Star from collapsing further, into a black hole(Unless it's a particularly massive star). But that would require you to think. Again, gravity is not required to hold neutronium together. That you are twisting this around isn't particularly impressive.

Gravity is required to hold neutronium together. A piece of neutronium is one big transuranic nucleus, and I seem to remember that not much stability is expected of those materials. The strong force won't hold transuranics together for very long, and that's just atom-sized transuranics. A piece of any appreciable size? Forget it. The only way to have it stable is to put a great big energy barrier in the way of decay, and gravity performs that task in neutron stars. As for thinking, you still haven't stated on what you base this assumption about high heat capacities on; as I stated, the equation of state for neutronium such as survives in neutron stars is still unknown in detail. So what do you base it on?

[NecronLord]

This has been gone over x times before
look around some old threads

now let's just say this

knowlage of 25,000 year + spacefaring civiliasation > modern human knowlage

[ClaysGhost]

This has been gone over x times before
look around some old threads

now let's just say this

knowlage of 25,000 year + spacefaring civiliasation > modern human knowlage

So they're unlikely to be daft enough to use neutronium, then.

[NecronLord]

Either that or, the govenment reserch you claim looks pitiful by their standards.

[ClaysGhost]

There are good reasons for these super armours not to involve neutronium. They're therefore something else, which we don't have a cool-sounding name for.

[SirNitram]

There are good reasons for these super armours not to involve neutronium. They're therefore something else, which we don't have a cool-sounding name for.

Glad you've put forth these reasons.. Oh, wait, you haven't.

Enlighten us as to what material can absorb the thermal energy we've seen absorbed, then.

[ClaysGhost]

Glad you've put forth these reasons.. Oh, wait, you haven't.

I have. It's on page 6. I took my time about it, so when it did appear we were well onto page 7, so I don't think anyone saw it. Sorry about that.

Enlighten us as to what material can absorb the thermal energy we've seen absorbed, then.

Not neutronium? Really, materials science is not static as NecronLord pointed out, and we can't expect to have a name or even a conception of a material built by SW civilisations to withstand the highest demands a space battle can make upon it. No solution is better than a bad one, and neutronium is a bad solution. There's the other components of this material mixture that I don't think we have a (real-life) name for, as well; I assume that if SDs are as big as they look, they would have to have some fearsome mechanical strength just to avoid structural collapse during a turn.

[NecronLord]

There are good reasons for these super armours not to involve neutronium. They're therefore something else, which we don't have a cool-sounding name for.

I don't know, Living Metals usualy sound cool, if not impressing the great unwashed in the way durasteel does.

[His Divine Shadow]

So they're unlikely to be daft enough to use neutronium, then.

Hardly, the daftness of the imperials will suprise you
Honestly though, it is neutronium, I asked Saxton and for the permission to post his quote, so here:

Therefore I told him, with a wink, that the neutronium was mentioned to annoy the Trekkies, because they have so many ridiculous episodes with solid neutronium structures that by rights should gravitationally mash bystanders into a thin layer of paste on the walls.

Then I explained that one key to effective armour in SF is to have high conductivity: thermally, electrically etc. When a surface is hit by an energy weapon, it is better to spread the heat over a wide area (a big warm patch) rather than a small patch of violently vaporised hull matter at the point of incidence. Neutronium is a fantastic conductor, so I invoked it in an (as yet unspecified) composite with whatever other conventional or exotic forms of matter constitute naval armour plating in SW.

[His Divine Shadow]

Oh yes ClaysGhost, do note the inclusion of possible exotic materials also in the armor plating so this might not be as simple as just neutronium impregnated metal(not that there is anything simple about that)

[Guest]

damn the ICS to hell.
AHHH!!!!!! WARSIES BEING IGNORANT and recycling trekkie arguments.
That should be reserved for trekkies....
Warsies seem to be more intelligent on ASVS....
Then again, that is in comparison to trekkies
After all reading ASVS convinced me to become a wars fan instead of a trek fan- wars fan not warsie.

Anyways, neutronium cannot exist anywhere outside a neutron star. The neutron star has a huge amount of mass, much larger than earth's, therefore it's gravity is stronger. Maybe you could hold it together with a trekkie structural integrity field, but the armor would'nt absorb anything, and that would be trekkie style engineering, since the moment that goes down the ship explodes. A better explanation would be that neutronium is some superconducting material which radiates energy back into space- read Wong's debating fallacies. Or I can cheat and say the ICS contradicts with canon, since I don't personally accept official stuff. Besides, how could any impulse engine, even huge ISD engines, push anything with neutronium armor. It would take a looooooooooooooong time for it to get anywhere. Also, what says that the Andromeda armor doesn't have superconducting properties. Chances are it doesn't in a world of KE weapons, however. I would also think that a turbolaser bolt would go through the Andromeda, doing damage similar to a PSP, but no more, unless it hit something critical. The hull seems pretty strong, but not really dense and thick. Of course it WILL do a lot of damage, but survivable. The main problem here is how to penetrate Imp shields. I believe there is a weakness to KE weapons. However the SW universe must have used KE weapons at some point in it's history. Then again, things tend to be lost after years of lack of use.

[Antediluvian]

Wasn't an ISD fired on by a huge railgun and took no damage?

That doesn't bold well for Andromeda's KE missiles if true.

[Crossover_Maniac]

Which makes Imperial armor useless against low energy-high momentum weapons like the OM-5's and smart-missiles that causes all of its damage by momentum transfer.

Particle shields, however, will easily block them.

The particle shields didn't even stop the Hoth asteroids from doing damage to the ISD's, and they were slow-moving pieces of rock. What makes you think it's going to stop the relativistic missiles from the GHC.

[SirNitram]

Which makes Imperial armor useless against low energy-high momentum weapons like the OM-5's and smart-missiles that causes all of its damage by momentum transfer.

Particle shields, however, will easily block them.

The particle shields didn't even stop the Hoth asteroids from doing damage to the ISD's, and they were slow-moving pieces of rock. What makes you think it's going to stop the relativistic missiles from the GHC.

Prolly cause the shields were down when the rock hit the bridge(To facilitate the holonet transmissions we see). On the other hand, we do clearly see an asteroid strike the shields on the underside of the hull and be vaporized.

[Crossover_Maniac]

Ignoring the idiots who actually think the Strong Nuclear Force could be held back by gravity(Hint for the stupid: Gravity is a weak force),

Explain black holes you zit-faced loser. Gravity is proportional to mass and inversely proportional to distance squared. IOW: a lot of mass (at least the mass of the sun) in a small compact space (a neutron star) will create intense gravitational fields (several hundred billion g's).

Take a small magnet. Pick up a peice of metal with it. That tiny magnet is overpowering the gravity of the entire planet. Gravity is a weak force. That does not mean all gravitational fields are weak, just that you have no fucking clue what you're on about.

Uh...you do know electromagnetic force and the strong nuclear force two totally different things. Magnets work using the electromagnetic force.

[SNIP]

In short, my theory wins by staying within known elements and not throwing out evidence. As for the neutronium on the planet? 250,000 years of FTL travel. Something could have easily crashed there mileenia ago, and the hull is still on the surface.

Did you steal that argument from the Trekkies to explain the existance of duranium deposits under the surface of planets?[/quote]

No. Did you take your excuse for a brain from Igor's trash?[/quote]

You're the retard that confused the strong nuclear force with the electromagnetic force and you're calling me 'stupid'. ROTFLMAO!!!!

[Crossover_Maniac]

SirNitram, read was is in this website before you post anything else about the strong nuclear force

[Crossover_Maniac]

Wasn't an ISD fired on by a huge railgun and took no damage?

That doesn't bold well for Andromeda's KE missiles if true.

What was the mass of the projectiles? What was their velocity? Don't assume SW railguns=CW projectiles without looking at all of the facts.

[Crossover_Maniac]

Particle shields, however, will easily block them.

The particle shields didn't even stop the Hoth asteroids from doing damage to the ISD's, and they were slow-moving pieces of rock. What makes you think it's going to stop the relativistic missiles from the GHC.

Prolly cause the shields were down when the rock hit the bridge(To facilitate the holonet transmissions we see). On the other hand, we do clearly see an asteroid strike the shields on the underside of the hull and be vaporized.

Captain Needa 'the damage we substained' not 'the damage substained by having the fancy holo-conference with our shields down while in the asteroid field'. And I don't buy this notion that holo-com signals can't be sent between shielded vessels.

[Crossover_Maniac]

Maximum acceleration for projectile weapons

SW: proton torpedo-72,000 g's

CW: defensive missiles-9,000,000 g's and offensive missiles at 4,200,000 g's.

Time it takes a proton torpedo to accelerate from rest to 0.1 c: 42 seconds

Time it takes for an offensive missile to accelerate from rest to 0.9c: 15 seconds.

The proton torpedo can't even make 0.1c by the time the offensive missiles hit c. This is why the SW universe doesn't make use of projectile weapons. They lack the ability to accelerate projectiles to the speeds in a relatively short time necessary for combat, while TL fire travels at c.

[Crossover_Maniac]

There's a reason why the Andromeda universe seems so powerful. In the episode, "The Mathematics of Tears", a woman by the name of Lt. Jill Pearce claimed that the reason why their ship, the Pax Magellanic's slipstream drive was damaged was because they were in orbit around a planet destroyed by the Nietzcheans (the term 'destroy' as in the planet was shattered in a million pieces that could not be pulled by together by their mutual gravitational attraction). Dylan pretty much accepts what Pearce tells him. Then Tyr comes to Dylan and tells him the Nietzcheans were not the ones to destroy that planet. Why? Was it because the ability to blow up a planet is beyond Nietzchean technology? No. The Nietzcheans do have a planet destroying weapon. They call it the Maxim charge. The reason why they wouldn't have blown up the world that the Pax Magellanicbecause the Nietzcheans never blow up habitable worlds even to destroy their enemies. We later learn that Lt. Pearce lied. It turned out the Pax Magellanic's AI destroyed the planet by ejecting its slipstream drive and sent it crashing it into the planet, destroying it, and scattering the pieces at the same rate of expansion as the debris from Alderaan. Note that even though Nietzscheans compose a minority population (Nietzcheans compose 8% of the human population), they have planet-destroying capability. Also, in the Thrawn triology, the Noghri homeworld undergos an environmental catastrophe when a capital ship crashed on their planet. However, the planet wasn't destroyed and still was somewhat habitable. Had that been a GHC that crashed into the Noghri homeworld, there would have been no Noghri in existance. And planet-destroying weapons isn't even considered to be stragetic weapons. For a weapon to be considered 'stragetic', they have to be able to destroy whole star systems. That's where the Nova Bombs come in. The cause a star to supernova destroying an entire star system. And GHC are armed with 40 Nova Bombs each. What is considered to be the "crap in your pants/end of the world" superweapon in the SW universe is just another ordinance in the Andromeda universe. That's why Andromeda seems so powerful.

[HemlockGrey]

The Death Star wasn't so terrifying because it could skrag planets. All ISDs can skrag planets.

The Death Star was considered powerful because it could break shields as easily as a hammer can break a mirror.

[Crossover_Maniac]

The Death Star wasn't so terrifying because it could skrag planets. All ISDs can skrag planets.

All ISD's can render the surface of a planet uninhabitable, but a GHC could not only do that, but also destroy a planet in the same manner as the Death Star by ejecting its slipstream drive. The ship is no longer able to go FTL without a new slipstream drive, but it can be done.

The Death Star was considered powerful because it could break shields as easily as a hammer can break a mirror.

But the Death Star can't destroy a star. And although it would be a suicide run, a nova bomb can be attached to a slipstream fighters ("To Loose the Faithful Lightning") making a fighter more powerful than the Death Star .

[Crossover_Maniac]

Actually, I take that back. I don't know if a GHC can do the sort of damage that a BDZ. The missiles don't carry the raw firepower for that operation but the AP cannons might bombard the surface of the planet with enough gamma radiation to slag the surface of the planet. Renewed_Valour1 might be able to answer that.

[HemlockGrey]

But the Death Star can't destroy a star. And although it would be a suicide run, a nova bomb can be attached to a slipstream fighters ("To Loose the Faithful Lightning") making a fighter more powerful than the Death Star

Flak bursts.

Although, I think in 'Battle For Bunker Hill' or whatever that episode was called, Andromeda was going to drop into the system and wipe out the Dragan armor units. That indicates precision, but BDZ's don't exactly require pinpoint accuracy.

Plus, those funky resonance torpedoe-thingies can destroy stars, and technically they're not lost tech.