It's raining asteroids! TESB topic.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Okay, fair enough. Forgive me for "bringing this up again", but what evidence is there that they're shield/bolt interactions..? The turbolasers seem to be exploding quite aways away from the Falcon.

We don't know where the shield's end in the Falcon, do we?

Is it possible that the Falcon's shields (and other vessels') fade out from the ship for some distance and the TL bolts explode when they make contact with the more difuse area of the shield?

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Again?????

In any case it points to the fact that the Falcon can be rendered incapacitated by only tons of explosive power. Unless they were effectively shooting it with blanks, trying to scare the ship into damaging itself.

You're kind of ignoring the point that all of these yield figures are so much lower than the figures claimed that it's not even funny. Sure, there's an obvious difference between a light turbolaser shot or fighter-weapons and M/HTLs, but the differences shouldn't be in multiples of billions or hundreds of billions.

They cannot be tons of explosives because, they hit asteroids and vaporize them, easily requiring dozens or hundreds of kilotons minimum.

[Howedar]

A couple of things I'd like to say before I go on to crunching the numbers.

First, I'm disturbed that so many of you decided to try and flame me before I even put any numbers out. It just goes to show how unwilling most of you are to even consider other information. You're going to believe what you want no matter what.

You're being flamed because you have not put numbers out, yet dare to criticize other people's calculations.

Look, this is very easy. There are two possibilities.
1. You have run the calcs, and have a reason to say Brian Young's calcs are wrong. Solution: show us the fucking calcs post haste so we can bow before your wonderful numbers.
2. You have not run the calcs. You therefore have no reason to say Brian Young's calcs are wrong. Solution: put a gun to your fucking face because you are fucking moronic enough to criticize without cause.

Lmao. Dumbass, read the thread, I already did.

Lmao. Dumbass, I want your calculations. Not somebody else's that you copied and pasted.

[seanrobertson]

A couple of things I'd like to say before I go on to crunching the numbers.

First, I'm disturbed that so many of you decided to try and flame me before I even put any numbers out.

Aww, poor baby!

That's bullshit, Vexx.

From the outset, you knew you were going to catch flak for your thread, a thinly veiled attempt at trolling.

How did you put it...ah, yes: you said,

Hi. I'm going to go through my own hazing. So be happy.

So, what did you expect? Saying Brian Young, long regarded as one of the most respected men in ALL of sci-fi analysis, is "untrustworthy" is BOUND to garner some flames. Then you hesitate to show what we all KNOW will be tired old figures about an old subject, covered many years ago.

And believe me, I was easy on you. I'm still trying to be but you make this difficult.

It just goes to show how unwilling most of you are to even consider other information. You're going to believe what you want no matter what.

When that other information is hardly something we don't know, which I have no doubt it will be, yep--I won't "consider it."

It has nothing to do with "belief," a quasi-religious mindset that is typical of people like you, not of me.

Second, I'm surprised by Ossus. I had heard he was one of the worst "rabbid Warsies" but he was one of the only ones (if not THE only) that's actually willing to look at and consider my figures.

He probably didn't see any reason to kick a man when he's down.

Hats off to you Ossus, and I owe you an apology, you actually seem to be a fair person.

I think he is, but here you go again with this "fair," "biased" and "untrustworthy" horseshit. Ossus is a good guy. Does that have any influx on the validity of his arguments?

NO.

You're the one who should be willing to broaden his horizons. Your best move would've been to take my advice and study those fallacies.

Instead, you continue to flaunt your ignorance, and have the GALL to try and speak down to us.

Bad move, bro. Get your head out of your ass and LISTEN for a change!

The Empire is not the United States Military. Trying to make the two seem the same is baseless and quite irrelevant. I don't understand how you can try to make an arguement by comparing two completely different things.

1--It's "argument."

2--I'm happy you chose to nitpick this, easily THE most insignificant thing as it relates to your initial post. I would rather you have spent this time talking about something...oh, well, like you promised you would.

Anyway, onto the bridge tower asteroid hit.

For this I used the asteroid impact calculator. It has 3 main criteria for determing the relative yield in TNT that an asteroid will create through impact on something. The 3 criteria are: Diameter, Density and Velocity.

What the fuck is wrong with you?

I already told you how to do this yourself.

.5 times mass times velocity^2 (that's squared).

Rather than piss around with cubic cm density figures, let's save ourselves some time and use something more applicable--like square meters.

A roughly spheroid rock ~70m wide has a volume of 179,594 cubic METERS. Iron is 7.8 metric tons/m^3.

Therefore, the rock masses 1.4 million metric tons (1.4 bil. kilos).

So multiply that with the squared velocity (250,000), inaccurate as your estimate of said velocity is.

Then divide that by two.

It's very simple. .5mv^2. You couldn't have missed it.

You'll get 175 terajoules (that's 1.75E14J...much easier than writing all those nos. out).

One kiloton is equivalent to 4.18 terajoules. So you divide 175 to figure out the kinetic energy in kilotonnage--41.8.

The diameter, according to SD.net, is 70 meters.

Why do you accept THAT, yet you haven't read or have chosen to ignore Mike's other estimates?

The average density of
iron is 8.0grams/cm^3, according to earthsci.terc.edu.

Had you looked at the page I TOLD YOU TO, you wouldn't have needed to go anywhere else. I could've told you that off the top of my head, and been more precise to boot.

The velocity I figured was about 500 meters per second.

And how did you measure that? Did you estimate its velocity per frame of video?

Eyeballing things is VERY imprecise. And your estimate of the impactor's velocity is very flawed, about half what it should be.

That changes things dramatically.

Nonetheless, I ran with your 500 m/sec. figure to illustrate a point--that you're turning to some funky calculator on the web where we know how to do this work independently, and with considerable ease.

The resulting energy according to the calculator was 179594380030216 joules. That equals about 50 kilotons of TNT. How?

Uhh...Vexx, we know how. See above.

According to www.csulb.edu, 1 kilogram of TNT equals 4x10^6 joules (4000000).

4.18 megajoules, actually.

I used a rounded 200000000000000 (2x10^14) figure for the amount the calculator gave, divided that by 4x10^6 to find out how many kilograms of TNT it would take to create that much energy, and then multiplied that by 1000 because there are 1000 kg in a metric ton. That came out to 50,000(tons), or 50 kilotons, the same figure given by www.csulb.edu. SD.net claims the asteroid had a kinetic force of 5 x 10^14 joules, which actually is only 2.5 times larger, and equals 125 kilotons of TNT.

So why are you complaining?

You say it's "only" 2.5 times larger. You aren't being consistent; one minute, Mike's nos. are a "little off" your own, but the minute before that, Mike is a "fanatic."

And a min. before THAT, you're not talking about MIKE AT ALL--you're talking about BRIAN YOUNG!

Make up your mind already. This inconsistency is about enough to just not bother with the rest of your post, but I don't want to be accused of "not addressing all your important points" or somesuch nonsense, so here ya go--one last favor from Uncle Sean.

So anyway, that's how I came up with those figures. What do you think?

I think you should've listened to me, but I'm not surprised that you just soldiered on, stubborn as a fucking mule.

You knew the consequences of coming in here and saying something stupid. You go so far as to say it's a "hazing."

Then you whine about being picked on?

Methinks if you do not make efforts to improve your thinking, and fast, you'd be better off just letting SD.net go altogether.

Keep on your present path, and I guaran-fucking-tee you, you'll wind up branded as a "village idiot" in no time flat. Or perhaps "WTPF" would be more appropriate?

Do you see anything wrong with the calculations?

Yes. See above.

You also said NOTHING about vaporization calculations, which you claimed Brian got "all wrong because he was not an expert."

You didn't HONESTLY think we would forget that, did you?

Most importantly, how can an ISD, which is designed to take 300GT (according to SD.net) HTL shots, be destroyed (or atleast heavily damaged) by an equivilent 50 kiloton blast?

READ THE SITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is more to impacts than kinetic energy, Mr. Perpetually Vexxed. It might be over your head, but THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN COVERED BEFORE.

I will give you ONE hint, then I leave you to wallow in ignorance:

Momentum.

I've heard the arguement, "The shields were weakened by asteroid hits", but that's not a very good excuse..

Why the fuck NOT?

That fleet was in there for many hours or DAYS. Every ship in the fleet was pounded by asteroids non-stop.

You of course ignore the possibility that the shields were totally down to allow for the Holonet transmission. Yep, buck-o, that's right: shields won't allow their holographic communications through.

You think Vader cared? "Asteroids do not concern me, Admiral" rings a bell.

But even if it's assumed a Star Destroyer is only able to take a single of its own HTL shots before being destroyed, it would have to have been hit by 5,999,999,999 70 meter wide asteroids. That's not very likely.

No, it wouldn't.

READ THE SITE. Read everything you can about Imperial shields and shield technology in general. Michael covered this in exhaustive detail, and you're ignoring it.

Go to http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... mples.html. Please do not come back until you have absorbed that. We'll leave the logic lesson for another time.

On a related side-topic, in TESB a TIE fighter is destroyed by a meteor crashing into it. I don't have screen-caps on hand but I can estimate a generous 10 meter diameter for the asteroid, and the same 8mg/cm^3 density, and, let's say, 200 meters a second velocity. That equals to being only 19 tons of TNT!

*Turns to audience*

Can this guy truly be this clueless?

I'm thinking this is an act...I simply don't get how someone can be so arrogant yet so thick-headed at the same time. He MUST be a troll, one more and more deserving of a custom title.

Even if every variable is included, that number won't be going up very much. What the hell good is a TIE fighter in a universe where capital ships are designed to take many hundreds of gigatons of energy? That would mean that a single HTL bolt could vapourize billions of TIE fighters.

Anyway, these are just the figures I've come up with. If you see anything wrong, tell me and I'll do my best to answer to them.

You can't, dude.

I'm breaking it to you: you're clueless about this versus shendig. You've no understanding of logic and proper debate, and I've seen you whine a few times about being treated badly. You are no more fit for Stardestroyer.net's BBS than a gorilla in a tutu might be.

IF you are not a troll, I will you one last piece of advice. If you ignore it, I'll completely write you off as a waste of time.

That is, shut your trap for awhile. If you're really interested in the truth, you'd do far better listening to the rest of us than you would trying to arrogantly presume you're on to something.

Look at this thread for a moment, beyond the "you guys are mean" and/or "you guys are biased" crap; set aside your own bias concerning yourself. You'll see a no. of things:

1--You're using a fricking internet calculator where I (or most anyone else in this thread, save you) can give you the necessary math, for God's sake.

2--We've told you that certain argument forms you've employed are invalid, citing such terms as "abusive ad hominem fallacy" and the like. Do you have ANY idea what that means, BEFORE you run off to Google to dig something up?

3--You've totally ignored the differences between physical impacts and those of energy weapons. You evidently have no understanding of momentum.

4--You eye-ball estimates, which are highly imprecise, AFTER you tell us that one of our best and brightest's nos. are off.

5--You KNOW, or at least should know, that you're due for a real roasting, then you complain about some of the language used as if you're some stuffy old woman. You want your cake and eat it too.

6--You fail to respond to most of our points. They're largely the same; you could've easily addressed many of us all at once if you tried to explain why you thought your argument was NOT an ad hominem fallacy.

I also get the impression that you're one of those teenagers who "thinks he knows everything."

I'll say this one more time: if you're not a troll, and have a geniune desire to one day be a good debater, stop being so damn arrogant and presuming you've picked up on something that we've just fudged all over for years on end. Keep that lid closed and just READ for some time. Read up on how to carry on a logical debate, and learn the ropes of sci-fi analysis.

But if you are a troll, you're a rather poor one...not worthy to keep around even as a jester for my amusement, to be sure. I'm sure your reply, or lack thereof, will reveal how earnest you truly are.

[Vexx]

Actually.. I think you're right. I should have waited longer, but I don't really have patience. I like to get things out when I think of them because usually they don't last very long.

I'll be the first to admit I'm not good with numbers. The post I made that showed the figures actually had to be re-written several times because I noticed several errors I made and by the end of it I was so brainwashed I barely knew up from down.

Anyway, yes, it was probably a mistake to try and do this while I'm still so "green" but it did bring up an interesting point or two or three or, whatever. There are some things in your post that I wanted to bring up but I think it would be best if I didn't.

But from the offset I said if there's something wrong with these numbers, then I'd be more than happy to look at it. I didn't mean to act like I know more than Young or Wong or you or anyone for that matter. I just researched the matter in my own way, came up with something different, and wanted to try and put that result out to see what's what.

I would go deeper in depth but I have something important to take care of, but I'll be back to talk about it more if you'd like.

[Vexx]

Btw, who was the second person that voted for DS/G2K?

[Vympel]

One of the few things people can agree with in regards to Darkstar. In all likelyhood the captain of the ship was in the secondary bridge or the CIC. Both are locations the captain can command from and they would likely have the proper communication centers.

Why? Vader wasn't in the secondary bridge or CIC. Also, what's the point of a secondary bridge or CIC if the transmission is lost anyway if the primary bridge is put out of action?

We know that a Captain is expected to stay on the bridge (you went into a red herring about Darth Vader, who is not an officer and is not bound by military protocol). We know where the communications is in relation to the bridge.

http://www. angelfire.com/scifi2/iimperium/images /isdbridge.jpg

As already posted.

[Alyeska]

One of the few things people can agree with in regards to Darkstar. In all likelyhood the captain of the ship was in the secondary bridge or the CIC. Both are locations the captain can command from and they would likely have the proper communication centers.

Why? Vader wasn't in the secondary bridge or CIC. Also, what's the point of a secondary bridge or CIC if the transmission is lost anyway if the primary bridge is put out of action?

We know that a Captain is expected to stay on the bridge. We know where the communications is in relation to the bridge.

http://www. angelfire.com/scifi2/iimperium/images /isdbridge.jpg

As already posted.

And yet we know the bridge was destroyed... My, what could this mean? Did the captain magicaly survive his bridge beind blown to smithernes, or was he possibly elsewhere on the ship? The evidence indicates the bridge was completely blown up (hence its complete disaperance) yet the Captain survived...

[Vympel]

And yet we know the bridge was destroyed...

No, we don't.

My, what could this mean? Did the captain magicaly survive his bridge beind blown to smithernes, or was he possibly elsewhere on the ship? The evidence indicates the bridge was completely blown up (hence its complete disaperance) yet the Captain survived...

The camera cuts away far too quickly to establish that.

[Sea Skimmer]

And yet we know the bridge was destroyed... My, what could this mean? Did the captain magicaly survive his bridge beind blown to smithernes, or was he possibly elsewhere on the ship? The evidence indicates the bridge was completely blown up (hence its complete disaperance)

So if a napalm canister is dropped on a tank and engulfs it in flames that means the tank has been disintegrated? No ISD model was smashed making ESB, so there's no way the footage could actually have shown the vessels bridge to be missing.

[Alyeska]

No, we don't.

Yes, we do.

The camera cuts away far too quickly to establish that.

Incorrect. The camera stays long enough to positively establish the bridge was destroyed. The explossion actualy travels slower and not far enough to totaly encompas the bridge by the final two frames and the bridge SHOULD be visible. The fact that it is not is proof it was destroyed.

[Alyeska]

And yet we know the bridge was destroyed... My, what could this mean? Did the captain magicaly survive his bridge beind blown to smithernes, or was he possibly elsewhere on the ship? The evidence indicates the bridge was completely blown up (hence its complete disaperance)

So if a napalm canister is dropped on a tank and engulfs it in flames that means the tank has been disintegrated? No ISD model was smashed making ESB, so there's no way the footage could actually have shown the vessels bridge to be missing.

If the Napalm fire disapears and no tank is visible AND you see background behind where the tank was, then yes it was vaporized.

I don't care if an ISD model was blown up or not, critical elements of the bridge are NOT visible and the ONLY explination is it was destroyed.

[Vympel]

I have the .avi file on my computer. You CANNOT see the background after the asteroid hits the bridge. The explosion hasn't even finished when the scene changes. You have zero basis for your claim.

[Alyeska]

Here is the ending scene.



Here is where the bridge SHOULD be if it still existed.



Lets make it easier.

Here is the bridge super imposed with critical aspects marked.



Where is the bridge eh?



You can clearly see the explossion cloud can NOT be shrowding those portions of the bridge. Both the forward leading edge of the bridge and the dome is COMPLETELY MISSING and there is nothing covering those locations up sufficently. There is proof enough of this by seeing how the main body of the ISD is not being clouded by the debris thus if the bridge survived it should be visible.

Obvious conclussion, the bridge was destroyed.

[Alyeska]

I have the .avi file on my computer. You CANNOT see the background after the asteroid hits the bridge. The explosion hasn't even finished when the scene changes. You have zero basis for your claim.

I have the AVI clip and I can clearly see the debries cloud has sufficently abated.

[Darth Garden Gnome]

The only remaining bridge elements I can see is the rear of the neck (#3). Just an observation.

[Alyeska]

The only remaining bridge elements I can see is the rear of the neck (#3). Just an observation.

And as previously indicated I state it survives.

[Vympel]

You'll forgive me if I take any superimosing jobs done by Darkstar with a grain of salt- especially considering I have the video for my own use and you cannot make out the Executor's details behind either the bridge or the bridge globes- the explosion does not finish.

Noone's saying the bridge survived unscathed- what I am saying is that it was not completely destroyed down to the neck. The asteroid struck the side of the bridge face.

[Alyeska]

You'll forgive me if I take any superimosing jobs done by Darkstar with a grain of salt- especially considering I have the video for my own use and you cannot make out the Executor's details behind either the bridge or the bridge globes- the explosion does not finish.

Noone's saying the bridge survived unscathed- what I am saying is that it was not completely destroyed down to the neck. The asteroid struck the side of the bridge face.

Funny, my DVD rip agress with Darkstars superimposing...

[Vympel]

Funny, my DVD rip agress with Darkstars superimposing...

Explain how it 'agrees'.

We can't see the bridge after the explosion. We know that the Captain is still on his feet after impact. We know where he was (not only in the tower, but mere metres away from the pits). We know where the asteroid struck (practically side on). Therefore, the bridge was not completely destroyed.

[Darth Garden Gnome]

We can't see the bridge after the explosion. We know that the Captain is still on his feet after impact. We know where he was (not only in the tower, but mere metres away from the pits). We know where the asteroid struck (practically side on). Therefore, the bridge was not completely destroyed.

How do you know he was near the pits?

If he was, however, I'm inclined to believe the blast did NOT destroy the bridge. As I previously stated, since the windows are the weakest section of the bridge, if anything is going to be destroyed in that impact its them. If the officer was in fact on the main deck at the time of the impact and NOT sucked into space (or even fall down) then the damage musn't have been great enough to harm the bridge in any significant way.

[Alyeska]

Funny, my DVD rip agress with Darkstars superimposing...

Explain how it 'agrees'.

We can't see the bridge after the explosion. We know that the Captain is still on his feet after impact. We know where he was (not only in the tower, but mere metres away from the pits). We know where the asteroid struck (practically side on). Therefore, the bridge was not completely destroyed.

Its very simple. You advance the film and watch the rate at which the ship moves and you reattach the bridge at the proper point. Much as you dislike Darkstar, its pretty damned low to claim he fakes evidene.

I have used my copy to determine how close the bridge was to certain elements to visible parts of the main hull. Darkstar kept the bridge in its proper location. Thus critical elments are missing. The captain piece of evidence is meaningless. We see the bridge disapear thus the captain can NOT be on the bridge. The asteroid impacts on one side of the bridge yet the whole bridge is destroyed. Stop looking at the captain, he is secondary to the outside footage. Look at that footage, then try and rationalize where the captain was located from that point onward.

[JodoForce]

Recorded? WTF? Bridge slams into asteroid. Cut. Captain's image is still being transmitted while Needa speaks to Vader. Fades out as he puts his hand over his face. What's the big mystery? I need to PROVE it actually happened after, even though that's what is explicitly shown on screen? That's an incredibly stupid argument from visual effects.

Recorded? Yes, recorded. I quote the movie:

'That Lord Vader was the last time they appeared in any of our scopes.'

Hence, a recording.

[Alyeska]

We can't see the bridge after the explosion. We know that the Captain is still on his feet after impact. We know where he was (not only in the tower, but mere metres away from the pits). We know where the asteroid struck (practically side on). Therefore, the bridge was not completely destroyed.

How do you know he was near the pits?

If he was, however, I'm inclined to believe the blast did NOT destroy the bridge. As I previously stated, since the windows are the weakest section of the bridge, if anything is going to be destroyed in that impact its them. If the officer was in fact on the main deck at the time of the impact and NOT sucked into space (or even fall down) then the damage musn't have been great enough to harm the bridge in any significant way.

Yet we see the bridge destroyed... Decisions decisions, where was the captain?

[Darth Garden Gnome]

Yet we see the bridge destroyed... Decisions decisions, where was the captain?

The captain is important Alyeska.

If Vympel has concrete proof that the Captain was on the main deck at the time of the impact, and not harmed in any signifacnt way (aside from reeling at what might be a blinding light) then we must rationlize why the bridge is still there.

If he does not, than we already know the answer to our question. It ALL depends on the captain's location.