ICS canon issues

[Mad]

Nope. Thats why I say we are left with this current theory.

I didn't think so, but I wanted to check. I'm open to alternative if they explain things better than my theory.

Its just very very complicated. I tend not to like compliated theories. However, if you'd actually read my post, you'd have seen that I do accept this theory because it does fit the facts. I just don't like it.

May I ask what about it makes it "very very complicated"? I try to make as few assumptions as possible, so any complications in it should be necessary.

In concept, it's pretty simple, I think: the bolt propagates along the beam, exactly as ICS2 says. The beam starts at low power, initiating the bolt, then jumps to high-power as it charges up, thus explaining the delay, and why the delay tends to be consistent.

It should be noted that the theory I'm discussing is mostly mine. HDS has referred to it several times, and in a large number of those instances (if not all), has referred to it as mine. He's also come up with his own ideas, both before and after I presented my theory. I'm not sure if people in here are referring to mine or one of HDS' other ideas.

SirNitram: this issue of LS propgation vs STL propgation is rather important, because my theory means that the damage propagates at C, and that the beam can be re-aimed while the bolt is in flight. That means turbolasers have capabilities that a slower-than-light theory won't allow... basically, it means greatly enhanced accuracy at long ranges. (For vs debates, that's a great thing for the pro-SW side.)

[Howedar]

The idea of variable speed shots and such just seem over complex. My poor overtaxed brain would prefer simple lasers or simple plasma shots. You follow?

[Howedar]

Wait a moment. Are you saying that the visible bolt is a sort of wave along the distance of the beam, into which energy is pumped from the backside of the beam? Its a neat idea although I don't see how it allows the bolt to be steered as Newton's 1st Law ought to keep it moving in the old direction.

[His Divine Shadow]

The idea of variable speed shots and such just seem over complex. My poor overtaxed brain would prefer simple lasers or simple plasma shots. You follow?

Yes that would be easy, if we just shat on the visuals since they pretty much piss on both plasma and laser definitions.

[SirNitram]

SirNitram: this issue of LS propgation vs STL propgation is rather important, because my theory means that the damage propagates at C, and that the beam can be re-aimed while the bolt is in flight. That means turbolasers have capabilities that a slower-than-light theory won't allow... basically, it means greatly enhanced accuracy at long ranges. (For vs debates, that's a great thing for the pro-SW side.)

I care less about advantage in vs debates than I do about not having stupid theories. This theory is contrived, it's trying to fit the canon visuals into a lesser description. I could be wrong, but trying to make a higher source fit a lesser one(As I hope no one here will be trying to argue the ICS supercedes the movies) is fucking stupid.

Finally, there's the whole issue of misses. If it's as you say, Darth Vader's shots should have changed course in the trench and tagged Luke's starfighter, instead of flying straight into the walls. On less firm ground, I beleive there are also brief moments in AOTC's space fight where the fighter bobs and weaves so that if we did rely on some beam travelling from behind the visible bolt, it would hit the fighter.

In short, it's the same as every theory trying to justify the 'propagates at c' passage: Ridiculously convulted, while trying to explain away everything in the films instead of being useful for making predictions.

[SirNitram]

The idea of variable speed shots and such just seem over complex. My poor overtaxed brain would prefer simple lasers or simple plasma shots. You follow?

Yes that would be easy, if we just shat on the visuals since they pretty much piss on both plasma and laser definitions.

Not to mention how they set fire to c-speed TL's. Visuals do not support you, HDS, they support a projectile whose core is visible and whose outer edges are invisible(Hence early destruction), who has minor course-correction abilities(Hence changing direction), and, which can defy gravity. This is all within the scope of a civilization who casually bypasses the speed of light, creates artificial worlds, and who commutes across a Galaxy.

[His Divine Shadow]

Wait a moment. Are you saying that the visible bolt is a sort of wave along the distance of the beam, into which energy is pumped from the backside of the beam? Its a neat idea although I don't see how it allows the bolt to be steered as Newton's 1st Law ought to keep it moving in the old direction.

Well to quote Saxton:
The visible bolt is a wave or ripple in the beam: a pattern in which the local decay rate is enhanced and probably self-stimulated to some degree.
A pattern does not necessarily move at the same speed as the quanta comprising the medium. Think of it being something like a strobe effect, except that the invisible quanta of the beam really are turning into visible photons locally.

[Mad]

The idea of variable speed shots and such just seem over complex. My poor overtaxed brain would prefer simple lasers or simple plasma shots. You follow?

The visuals give us both variable speeds, and even bolts that change speed in mid-flight. Any theory that doesn't allow for variable speed bolts would be too simple, as it would disagree with canon visuals.

Wait a moment. Are you saying that the visible bolt is a sort of wave along the distance of the beam, into which energy is pumped from the backside of the beam? Its a neat idea although I don't see how it allows the bolt to be steered as Newton's 1st Law ought to keep it moving in the old direction.

I'm not sure if you're referring to omegaLancer's idea, HDS' alternative theory posted earlier in this thread, or mine. In my theory, the bolt is a decay distortion that travels along the beam, and thus "sticks" to the beam, even if the beam is moved. Energy isn't pumped into the bolt, at least in my theory. (Remember, damage befor impact in canon.. the damage can be either before or after the bolt, depending on timing.)

I care less about advantage in vs debates than I do about not having stupid theories.

Nothing wrong with that. I was noting one of the advantages of my theory, however. If it's accurate, then the implications are rather helpful. (And, no, my theory was not designed to have specific advantages; it was designed to fit as much data together as possible.)

This theory is contrived, it's trying to fit the canon visuals into a lesser description. I could be wrong, but trying to make a higher source fit a lesser one(As I hope no one here will be trying to argue the ICS supercedes the movies) is fucking stupid.

Canon visuals has damage before impact, bolts changing direction in mid-flight, and other oddities that all but requires an invisible beam to direct the bolt. The bolt redirection alone is enough to show that some kind of invisible beam is directing the bolt after it appears.

Any theory that doesn't address those canon issues is too simple, and will not fit with canon visuals.

Finally, there's the whole issue of misses. If it's as you say, Darth Vader's shots should have changed course in the trench and tagged Luke's starfighter, instead of flying straight into the walls.

Why? The bolts were heading where the ship's sensors thought the ship was. Did you forget about jamming?

On less firm ground, I beleive there are also brief moments in AOTC's space fight where the fighter bobs and weaves so that if we did rely on some beam travelling from behind the visible bolt, it would hit the fighter.

The beam is along (both before and after) the visual bolt, but is not powerful enough to do damage for the majority of the time. You'll also have to be a bit more specific as to what you mean.

In short, it's the same as every theory trying to justify the 'propagates at c' passage: Ridiculously convulted, while trying to explain away everything in the films instead of being useful for making predictions.

My theory has actually made quite a few predictions. In fact, I proposed that my theory allowed for bolt redirection in midflight before HDS found the redirected bolt from the ISD firing at the asteroid. In other words: my theory made a prediction, and the prediction was found to be true.

[Howedar]

GOD DAMNIT WILL PEOPLE FUCKING READ MY POSTS IN THEIR ENTIRITY, INSTEAD OF PICKING AND CHOOSING AND THEN TAKING IDEAS FAR TOO SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?!


HDS: I do not suggest that TLs are just lasers or just plasma. I know that these ideas do not fit the facts. I said I'd fucking prefer if they did. Learn to fucking read so you don't waste my time, please.

HDS again: I own the ICS. I've read the passage. I was asking him a fucking question. I was not fucking asking what the ICS says. I am quite familiar with what the ICS says.

Mad: Yes, I fucking know that the visuals give us these things! I've said that several times in this thread! I acknowledge that this is the simplest theory that fits the facts! You don't need to tell me yet again!

[SirNitram]

I care less about advantage in vs debates than I do about not having stupid theories.

Nothing wrong with that. I was noting one of the advantages of my theory, however. If it's accurate, then the implications are rather helpful. (And, no, my theory was not designed to have specific advantages; it was designed to fit as much data together as possible.)

Good, I worried.

This theory is contrived, it's trying to fit the canon visuals into a lesser description. I could be wrong, but trying to make a higher source fit a lesser one(As I hope no one here will be trying to argue the ICS supercedes the movies) is fucking stupid.

Canon visuals has damage before impact, bolts changing direction in mid-flight, and other oddities that all but requires an invisible beam to direct the bolt. The bolt redirection alone is enough to show that some kind of invisible beam is directing the bolt after it appears.

Yes, a magical and impossible thing called a 'targetting laser'. None of this supports the idea of c-propagation. In fact, the timing of early damage disproves it, as the recoil from the barrels never matches either early or normal destruction.

Any theory that doesn't address those canon issues is too simple, and will not fit with canon visuals.

Which is why mine does, even though it's more a listing of capabilities than a full on 'theory', just as those scientists studying the sun before we discovered things about fusion didn't declare it can't be making that much heat.

Finally, there's the whole issue of misses. If it's as you say, Darth Vader's shots should have changed course in the trench and tagged Luke's starfighter, instead of flying straight into the walls.

Why? The bolts were heading where the ship's sensors thought the ship was. Did you forget about jamming?

Conceded as a possibility, but even the changing of direction isn't proof for a lightspeed beam.

On less firm ground, I beleive there are also brief moments in AOTC's space fight where the fighter bobs and weaves so that if we did rely on some beam travelling from behind the visible bolt, it would hit the fighter.

The beam is along (both before and after) the visual bolt, but is not powerful enough to do damage for the majority of the time. You'll also have to be a bit more specific as to what you mean.

I'm afraid I can't be more, as, as I hope I implied, I don't remember it well enough. This idea baffles me, though, where does the energy go? This is so often lamented by the c-propagation group(Not that they ever properly explain how their theory handles it..). Without more firm evidence and a screenie, I will drop this.

My theory has actually made quite a few predictions. In fact, I proposed that my theory allowed for bolt redirection in midflight before HDS found the redirected bolt from the ISD firing at the asteroid. In other words: my theory made a prediction, and the prediction was found to be true.

Shots being off-kilter like that was noticed long before SDnet, Mad.

[His Divine Shadow]

HDS: I do not suggest that TLs are just lasers or just plasma. I know that these ideas do not fit the facts. I said I'd fucking prefer if they did. Learn to fucking read so you don't waste my time, please.

I was jus making a pie in the sky kinda comment, I was not aware you would go apeshit if I engaged in conversation with you.

HDS again: I own the ICS. I've read the passage. I was asking him a fucking question. I was not fucking asking what the ICS says. I am quite familiar with what the ICS says.

Look through the ICS again, you'll see that what I provided you with is not written anywhere in it, that was from an email message.
Again, I did not realize you would be pissed off if I offered an explanation to one of your questions, I'll just make a mental note then not to answer your questions anymore.

[Howedar]

HDS: I do not suggest that TLs are just lasers or just plasma. I know that these ideas do not fit the facts. I said I'd fucking prefer if they did. Learn to fucking read so you don't waste my time, please.

I was jus making a pie in the sky kinda comment, I was not aware you would go apeshit if I engaged in conversation with you.

It was like the third time in this thread alone someone took something I said too far. Its getting old.

HDS again: I own the ICS. I've read the passage. I was asking him a fucking question. I was not fucking asking what the ICS says. I am quite familiar with what the ICS says.

Look through the ICS again, you'll see that what I provided you with is not written anywhere in it, that was from an email message.

Damnit! I certainly feel the fool now.

Again, I did not realize you would be pissed off if I offered an explanation to one of your questions, I'll just make a mental note then not to answer your questions anymore.

I asked Mad a question. I appreciate your input, but unless you can read Mad's thoughts it didn't really answer my question very well.

[Dark Hellion]

Howedar just exploded.
Now do you think he released the energy at light speed of STL.

[Mad]

Howedar: Sorry. But the way you worded it did make it a bit confusing. For example, you said you'd prefer a simplier explanation and give an example. But, at the same time, you note that a simplier explanation wouldn't fit the facts. It makes me wonder what the point of you mentioning it is. It feels like an attack on my theory, so I am going to feel compelled to clarify anything I need to. Not always for the sake of you, but for others reading the thread, as well.

I've always known that if a simplier theory that still fits all the facts comes around, it'll trump mine.

Dark Hellion: the gamma rays traveled at lightspeed, while the shockwave propagated STL.

Yes, a magical and impossible thing called a 'targetting laser'. None of this supports the idea of c-propagation.

How would a targetting laser redirect a bolt in-flight?

I will admit, however, that I don't know of any canon visuals that support lightspeed beam propagation in capship level turbolasers. On the other hand, several official materials (both tech books and novels) mention lightspeed propagating turbolasers, and there exists a theory to rationalize the known behavior. Thus, the theory is valid because it doesn't throw any data out. Canon doesn't have to support it. The only limitation is that the official data cannot irreconcilably be in conflict with canon data.

In fact, the timing of early damage disproves it, as the recoil from the barrels never matches either early or normal destruction.

What about the recoil of the beam weapons in AotC? They show recoil at the start, and then the barrels go back to the original position even though the beam is still visibly firing. My theory matches up with that exactly, except that most of the beam is invisible.

Which is why mine does, even though it's more a listing of capabilities than a full on 'theory', just as those scientists studying the sun before we discovered things about fusion didn't declare it can't be making that much heat.

I may have found some instances of damage after impact. Got any ideas for those? (For what it's worth, my theory already allows for damage after impact.)

I'm afraid I can't be more, as, as I hope I implied, I don't remember it well enough. This idea baffles me, though, where does the energy go? This is so often lamented by the c-propagation group(Not that they ever properly explain how their theory handles it..). Without more firm evidence and a screenie, I will drop this.

I'm not sure what you mean by "where does the energy go?" The energy from what, and under what circumstances? In a miss?

Shots being off-kilter like that was noticed long before SDnet, Mad.

I hadn't seen any discussion of it until after I proposed the theory, though I wasn't anything close to a regular lurker of ASVS. Still, though, an implication of my theory that I had noted without knowledge that such an event had occured turned out to have actually occured. Thus, the prediction was true, as far as I'm concerned.

[SirNitram]

Yes, a magical and impossible thing called a 'targetting laser'. None of this supports the idea of c-propagation.

How would a targetting laser redirect a bolt in-flight?

Same was a targetting laser can correct the course of a missile. Oh, you mean how does the actual projectile correct it's course? No idea. It does, though.

I will admit, however, that I don't know of any canon visuals that support lightspeed beam propagation in capship level turbolasers. On the other hand, several official materials (both tech books and novels) mention lightspeed propagating turbolasers, and there exists a theory to rationalize the known behavior. Thus, the theory is valid because it doesn't throw any data out. Canon doesn't have to support it. The only limitation is that the official data cannot irreconcilably be in conflict with canon data.

The theory actually shovels a great deal of data out from various tech material, including, IIRC, the OT ICS, which identify Turbolasers differently. In short, it shits all over everything that identifies turbolasers as anything but lightspeed, and there's quite a bit of that.

To my knowledge, the novels the behavior is exhibited in are NJO, and can be explained by advancement in TL's. They may also be merely very close to c, much like the Superlaser. The highly variable speeds of TL's is well established in the films, so any instance where the bolts do go near c can be rationalized as going incredibly fast, and seeming to be c to an observer.

In fact, the timing of early damage disproves it, as the recoil from the barrels never matches either early or normal destruction.

What about the recoil of the beam weapons in AotC? They show recoil at the start, and then the barrels go back to the original position even though the beam is still visibly firing. My theory matches up with that exactly, except that most of the beam is invisible.

The AOTC recoil is, of course, a problem. Never claimed it wasn't. Doesn't remove the fact that when these multi-MT and multi-GT weapons fire the actual damaging part, the barrel should recoil as much as when it disperses a few hundred kilos of gas.

Which is why mine does, even though it's more a listing of capabilities than a full on 'theory', just as those scientists studying the sun before we discovered things about fusion didn't declare it can't be making that much heat.

I may have found some instances of damage after impact. Got any ideas for those? (For what it's worth, my theory already allows for damage after impact.)

I will need the examples to be able to examine for myself.

I'm afraid I can't be more, as, as I hope I implied, I don't remember it well enough. This idea baffles me, though, where does the energy go? This is so often lamented by the c-propagation group(Not that they ever properly explain how their theory handles it..). Without more firm evidence and a screenie, I will drop this.

I'm not sure what you mean by "where does the energy go?" The energy from what, and under what circumstances? In a miss?

Pardon my incoherency.

It's basically a rant about how the c propagation side has been known to go on and on about where does the energy of the bolt go. Disregard it.

Shots being off-kilter like that was noticed long before SDnet, Mad.

I hadn't seen any discussion of it until after I proposed the theory, though I wasn't anything close to a regular lurker of ASVS. Still, though, an implication of my theory that I had noted without knowledge that such an event had occured turned out to have actually occured. Thus, the prediction was true, as far as I'm concerned.

'Predicting' behavior already observed isn't a true prediction.

[Mad]

Same was a targetting laser can correct the course of a missile. Oh, you mean how does the actual projectile correct it's course? No idea. It does, though.

A STL "energy" projectile that can redirect its path in mid-flight sounds more complicated than my theory.

The theory actually shovels a great deal of data out from various tech material, including, IIRC, the OT ICS, which identify Turbolasers differently. In short, it shits all over everything that identifies turbolasers as anything but lightspeed, and there's quite a bit of that.

I've incorporated a number of old quotes into my full theory. Perhaps you can give me quotes you believe to be in conflict, and I'll see what I can do with them (assuming they haven't already been handled).

To my knowledge, the novels the behavior is exhibited in are NJO, and can be explained by advancement in TL's. They may also be merely very close to c, much like the Superlaser. The highly variable speeds of TL's is well established in the films, so any instance where the bolts do go near c can be rationalized as going incredibly fast, and seeming to be c to an observer.

There's a difference between "lightspeed" and "near-lightspeed." You're also trying to play around with the semantics of several quotes in order to throw out one particular quote. I'm trying not to throw out any quotes.

The AOTC recoil is, of course, a problem. Never claimed it wasn't. Doesn't remove the fact that when these multi-MT and multi-GT weapons fire the actual damaging part, the barrel should recoil as much as when it disperses a few hundred kilos of gas.

Why would the barrel itself have to recoil? Obviously, the barrel itself, when it recoils, is not due to the beam itself thanks to AotC. Starting the beam causes the visible recoil. There may be something inside the turbolaser, that we can't see, that recoils for the beam itself in both the AotC beams and turbolasers.

I will need the examples to be able to examine for myself.

The TIE strafing run on the Falcon while escaping the Death Star in ANH. The TIE fires 6 pairs of bolts in groups of 2. Each group follows the same lines relative to the fighter (despite the fighter's movement -- another case of bolt redirection if viewed from a non-maneuvering point).

When the 5th and 6th bolt pairs are about to hit, there's an explosion each time that was in line with a previous bolt pair, indicating a possibility of damage after impact from previous shots.

You can get the clip (clip1.avi) in the first page of this thread (link points to my theory of turbolasers). I can provide some crude pictures showing what I'm talking about, if you wish.

'Predicting' behavior already observed isn't a true prediction.

I gather you know what I mean, though.