StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Edam, don't be a jack-ass. The air was clear; if they were lasers, they would have been invisible, and they certainly wouldn't exert significant force on Maul's lightsabre on contact.

As for those laser-light shows at concerts, you DO know that they deliberately pump smoke into the air to make them visible, right?

Connor MacLeod wrote:
Basically again, we've proven the use of charged particles (particularily electrons in this instance) in "laser" weapons rather than mere photons, burden of proof is on Edam to disprove otherwise (the fact the were deadly is implicit in Wayne's proof.)

For that matter, we can get into other instances of "Deadly force field" technologies as well.

Do you have the "Inside The Worlds" of TPM? What does it say about the Theed station?

Lord Poe wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:
Basically again, we've proven the use of charged particles (particularily electrons in this instance) in "laser" weapons rather than mere photons, burden of proof is on Edam to disprove otherwise (the fact the were deadly is implicit in Wayne's proof.)

For that matter, we can get into other instances of "Deadly force field" technologies as well.

Do you have the "Inside The Worlds" of TPM? What does it say about the Theed station?

Yes I do. Let me check

"Laser doors lock into position in response to potentially lethal power outputs that occur intermittently during plasma activation process."

Darth Wong wrote:Edam, don't be a jack-ass. The air was clear; if they were lasers, they would have been invisible

We have canon and EU descriptions ofthem as lasers. Obviously the air wasn't as clear as it appears.

and they certainly wouldn't exert significant force on Maul's lightsabre on contact.

And I say again, watch the film. They don't exert significant force on Maul's lightsabre. He touches it to the screen, then removes it.

In any case, we have no indication of how lightsabres would react to lasers, so there's no need to go insisting canon is wrong simply because of your opinion.

Connor MacLeod wrote:EGW&T page 80:
Basically again, we've proven the use of charged particles (particularily electrons in this instance) in "laser" weapons rather than mere photons,
burden of proof is on Edam to disprove otherwise (the fact the were deadly is implicit in Wayne's proof.)

All your quote proves is that lasers can be used to energise plasma. No shit. Burden of proof ison you to prove laser != laser

Lord Poe wrote: Hmm... the hand phasers in TNG season one look like dustbusters. Maybe they clean the corridors with them, too?

If they were ever described as vacuums you might have a point. They aren't, so you don't.

snip quotes - more intermingling of laser and electron rays. Theburden of proof is still on you to prove they are not lasers, as described in canon and EU source.

Lord Poe wrote: That sure sounds like a physical barrier to me, Edam. The only other time I've known walls to be deadly is when they're about to fall on someone, or you're heading into one at about 50mph.

If the lasers are high enough power to be dangerous to people trying to walk through them then they would be deadly. duh.

Connor MacLeod wrote: No, what you're claiming is that we should believe the "Lord Edam" Definition of the laser.

Don't repace my claims with what you wish them to be. I am claiming we should believe something repeatedly called a laser is a laser.

Its not the first time "laser" has been taken to mean something else in SW. And lasers HAVE been inferred to be charged particle weapons, if it came down to semantics (which you seem to insist on dragging it down to.)

Weapons that use lasers to energy gasses have been mistakenly asusmed to be laser weapons.

or, alternatively, should we ignore your nitpick entirely and concentrate on the fact that MoO was mistaken when he said the novellisation clearly described the fields as vaporising anything that passed through them, or even go slightly OT for this forum and accept that every description given for the fields still makes them different to ST forcefields?

What nitpick?
[/quote]

Whether the fields are lasers are electrons does little to change the fact that MoO was wrong in his claims of what the novellisation clearly states, and that these fields are nothing like Trek fields. You are attacking what is, at best, a minor error that does not change the subject of discussion.

Robert Treder wrote: All right, smartass...then why didn't the Jedi walk through them? How is a "rock concert" laser supposed to prevent the Jedi from passing?

For fucks sake, Bobby-boy. are you entirely incapable of thinking for yourself?

rock concert lasers are so low power that they'd struggle to heat a cup of tea. These lasers are obviouslyso high-powered that they are a danger to anyone trying to pass through them.

And how do you explain the way they turn on and off? I've never seen any lasers do that. Maybe I should attend more rock concerts.

That all depends on where they are generated from, and how. It's all just a light show - you can do all sorts of fancy things in a light show.

Fact: the novellisation does not clearly state the jedi would have been vaporised had they tried to walk through the field. MoO was wrong when he stated this.

Fact: neither description of the fields is anything like Trek shields, so the OP should tell his trekkies that

Fact: The field clearly did not repel Maul's Lightsabre.

These were the points considered and made in my original post. I also included a minor factoid that the beams were clearly stated to be lasers (as confirmed by Wayne's quotes and the number I referenced)

No one has considered the three points made. Everyone has concentrated on the minor factoid which doesn't affect any of them. Nitpicking.

You want to focus on your three points, fine.

Lord Edam wrote:Fact: the novellisation does not clearly state the jedi would have been vaporised had they tried to walk through the field. MoO was wrong when he stated this.

It does refer to them as deadly. Sure, it doesn't technically say "vaporize" but you're not going to argue that they were harmless, so why bother nitpicking MoO's wording?

Fact: neither description of the fields is anything like Trek shields, so the OP should tell his trekkies that

Nobody is saying that they are similar to Star Trek forcefields.

Fact: The field clearly did not repel Maul's Lightsabre.

Well, I guess we have a difference of opinion as to the meaning of "clearly." Are you suggesting that Maul could have penetrated the field with his sabre? If so, what evidence do you have of this? Why is it that everyone else who watched the film got the impression that the lightsabre was having the same reaction it has when it touches another lightsabre?

These were the points considered and made in my original post. I also included a minor factoid that the beams were clearly stated to be lasers (as confirmed by Wayne's quotes and the number I referenced)

No one has considered the three points made. Everyone has concentrated on the minor factoid which doesn't affect any of them. Nitpicking.

Edam, you do know that it's not wise to assume that they're lasers simply because the term 'laser' is used, right? Or have you forgotten "phaser rifles," "turbolasers," and "disruptor cannons"?

Maybe this discussion will be easier if we understand you better. Just what do you think the walls were? Because this is what I'm gathering that you think they were:

They were high-powered lasers (as in light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation), with some sort of fine mist to make the strange translucent effect. These lasers were deadly, but would not go so far as to literally vaporize you if you walked through them. When in contact with lightsabre blades, there is a lot of light and noise, similar to when two lightsabre blades contact each other. The Naboo went through the trouble to make these lasers activate and deactivate with pretty effects...after all, "it's just all just a light show - you can do all sorts of fancy things in a light show."

Lord Edam wrote:We have canon and EU descriptions ofthem as lasers. Obviously the air wasn't as clear as it appears

Doubtfull they are lasers as in L.A.S.E.R.'s, when the forcefields retracted it took several frames for them to retract, a laser should have been instantenous.
It might be some unknown application of SW laser tech.

And I say again, watch the film. They don't exert significant force on Maul's lightsabre. He touches it to the screen, then removes it.

The rippling like effects seen when Maul touches the field are not something I would associate with lasers though.

I can provide screenshots later if anyone would like them

Lord Edam wrote:Don't repace my claims with what you wish them to be. I am claiming we should believe something repeatedly called a laser is a laser.

Well in the real world that would work, however much of what is definitly not lasers are reffered to as lasers in SW.
It seems to be a colloquialism(sp?)

Robert Treder wrote:

Lord Edam wrote:Fact: the novellisation does not clearly state the jedi would have been vaporised had they tried to walk through the field. MoO was wrong when he stated this.

It does refer to them as deadly. Sure, it doesn't technically say "vaporize" but you're not going to argue that they were harmless, so why bother nitpicking MoO's wording?

There's a lot between deadly and vaporise. I noticed someone making a false claim, and I called him on it. It can be assumed that the lasers arepowerful enough to vaporise the Jedi, butthisis by no means clear from the novellisation (or any other source quoted in this thread).

Fact: neither description of the fields is anything like Trek shields, so the OP should tell his trekkies that

Nobody is saying that they are similar to Star Trek forcefields.

By using this example to claim LS are similarly useless against Trek forcefields the implicit assumption is that they work on similar principles. MoO said this was not the case, I confirmed it with specific differences,

Fact: The field clearly did not repel Maul's Lightsabre.

Well, I guess we have a difference of opinion as to the meaning of "clearly."

If you watch the film the meaning of clearly should be clear.

Are you suggesting that Maul could have penetrated the field with his sabre? If so, what evidence do you have of this?

Nope. I'm not claiming that at all. We don't know if he would have got through or not.

Why is it that everyone else who watched the film got the impression that the lightsabre was having the same reaction it has when it touches another lightsabre?

If everyone else got the idea the lightsabre had the same reaction as when it touched other lightsabres, why is everyone claiming the sabre bounced off the field? Lightsabres don't bounce off each other, this muchis obvious from any lightsabre fight.

Edam, you do know that it's not wise to assume that they're lasers simply because the term 'laser' is used, right? Or have you forgotten "phaser rifles," "turbolasers," and "disruptor cannons"?

Phaser rifles - stocked weapons based on phaser energy.
turbolasers - use lasers to activate the plasma/whatever
disruptor cannons - fire big blobs of disruptor material from a barrel.

All fit easily with one or more colloquial or technical definitions of the words. Yet here we have something repeatedly described as laser beams bouncing off buffers that...aren't lasers in any way shape or form.

Maybe this discussion will be easier if we understand you better.

Maybe it would be easier if you stopped trying to re-write my posts for me.

They were high-powered lasers (as in light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation), with some sort of fine mist to make the strange translucent effect.

Lasers, as canonically and officially described, that had some effect that showed the light, be it a fine mist, ionisation of the air and other particulate matter, or something else entirely.

These lasers were deadly, but would not go so far as to literally vaporize you if you walked through them.

Other than them being deadly we do not know how far they would go - anyone claiming the novellisation clearly describes them being able to vaporise Jedi is either mistaken or lying.

When in contact with lightsabre blades, there is a lot of light and noise, similar to when two lightsabre blades contact each other.

But theydon't bounce off each other.

The Naboo went through the trouble to make these lasers activate and deactivate with pretty effects...after all, "it's just all just a light show - you can do all sorts of fancy things in a light show."

Either purposely or as a side-effect the lasers are a visible deterrent to travelling down that corridor. Maybe it was done for aesthetic reasons, or maybe it's just how it turned out in the end.

His Divine Shadow wrote: Doubtfull they are lasers as in L.A.S.E.R.'s, when the forcefields retracted it took several frames for them to retract, a laser should have been instantenous.

They retract centre to the side, don't they? So, you assume the lasers are all generated at the side? What if they weren't?

What if the glow is, as Bobby suggests, some form of mist generated specifically to show the lasers (let people know they are there)? then it is the mist that is gradually vanishing, not the lasers.

The rippling like effects seen when Maul touches the field are not something I would associate with lasers though.

And yet again I am forced to repeat myself - we have no idea how lightsabres would react to laser fields. It could induce a standing wave, it could be the energy of the lightsabre itself that gives the ripple effect. It could be any other explanation. Your opinion isn't enough to overide canon fact.

There could be another reason other than a ligthsabre not possessing the capability to pierce force fields.In Shadow Hunter,Darth Maul pursues Pavan into the deep undergrowth of Corsucant,and were attacked.The initial part of the ambush was by an electro-shock net.Maul declined to use his lightsabre to cut through it,as the resulting electricity from the net will still shock and stun him.

This is a more likely explaination for the Theed incident.Without knowing how,a lightsabre is probably conducive to electricity,and if either Qui Gon or Obiwan have attacked through the field,they would have been electrocuted.

When lightsabres are put into electric fields the user gets a shock - Maul did not get a shock, ergo the fields were not electrons (at least, not enough to be deadly)

We have repeated canon description of the shields being lasers, and a single description(appering in two sources) of them being electrons. We have official description of the shields being lasers. We have official reason to believe the shields are not largely electrons. The only thing left is "lasers"(canon) or "something else entirely"(unsupported supposition)

Lord Edam wrote:They retract centre to the side, don't they? So, you assume the lasers are all generated at the side? What if they weren't?

What if the glow is, as Bobby suggests, some form of mist generated specifically to show the lasers (let people know they are there)? then it is the mist that is gradually vanishing, not the lasers.

Seems a bit far fetched to me.
I'd prefer the explanation that they where SW laser fields, which are not lasers.

And yet again I am forced to repeat myself - we have no idea how lightsabres would react to laser fields. It could induce a standing wave, it could be the energy of the lightsabre itself that gives the ripple effect. It could be any other explanation

Why is that prefferable given that other force-field technologies shown in TMP has similar reactions to weaponry?

Your opinion isn't enough to overide canon fact.

Excuse me? You pretend to pass of your opinion of what the laser-field might be as fact?
Nor would my opinion override any facts of canon either.

So Maul didn't get a shock from the field Edam? Have you ever considered that a Lightsaber's handle is INSULATED?

Darth Pounder wrote:So Maul didn't get a shock from the field Edam? Have you ever considered that a Lightsaber's handle is INSULATED?

Well, if he would've got a shock from the first example, as PainRack posted back at the start of this thread, why wouldn't he get a shock in the second?

His Divine Shadow wrote:Seems a bit far fetched to me.

Hardly. you could do it with tech we've had for 20 years. Nothing complicated involved at all.

I'd prefer the explanation that they where SW laser fields, which are not lasers.

You keep insisting lasers aren't lasers, yet you feel this is preferable to simple theories that explain everything?

Why is that prefferable given that other force-field technologies shown in TMP has similar reactions to weaponry?

Are those forcefields described as lasers? Are the weapons based no similar pricipled to lightsabres? You assume both of these things.

Your opinion isn't enough to overide canon fact.

Excuse me? You pretend to pass of your opinion of what the laser-field might be as fact?

No, I provide the fact that the field is made of lasers, and then opinions of how this may be the case. You are free to provide alternatives, provided you continue to accept the fact that they are laser fields.

Nor would my opinion override any facts of canon either.

paraphrase of you: "they're aren't really what they are called"

Why bother assuming this, if not to over ride canon fact?

Lord Edam, would you please stop it with the holier than thou attitude? Thats my game.

Anyway, yes I feel the "laser is just a colloquialism" theory is simpler than saying they are lasers and make up a bunch of explanations as to how they might exhibit similar properties as seen in the movie.

Ofcourse the material in question being adhered to is also important, let's tally it up:
Your theory - 1 quote ignored(electron stream)
Our theory - 0 quotes ignored

His Divine Shadow wrote:Ofcourse the material in question being adhered to is also important, let's tally it up:
Your theory - 1 quote ignored(electron stream)
Our theory - 0 quotes ignored

my theory: 1 subjective quote ignored in favour of objective description

your theory: objective descriptions means something you can't or won't explain, as long as they aren't taken at face value, all because you want to make the subjective quote right (even though you are yet to show a wall of electrons would glow red and act as we see the shields act)

All because you are more interested in nitpicking than dealing with the actual subject of discussion.

YHBT.

End of discussion.

Edam, quit acting like some bizzare spawn of Timothy Jones and Robert Scott Anderson, you naughty little boy.

Lord Edam wrote:my theory: 1 subjective quote ignored in favour of objective description

No, it's subjective of you to assume the quote being wrong, or is it assumptious? Anyway...

your theory: objective descriptions means something you can't or won't explain, as long as they aren't taken at face value, all because you want to make the subjective quote right (even though you are yet to show a wall of electrons would glow red and act as we see the shields act)

All because you are more interested in nitpicking than dealing with the actual subject of discussion.

Nope.
Simply that laser has never fitted in on it's description in SW and we have another quote that we cannot dismiss without seriously good cause, sofar none has been seen that would violate the standard method.

YHBT.

Which means what?
Is this some secret declaration of homoerotic desire on your part?
You're just setting yourself up for a fall.

End of discussion.

Cool!

Anyway, here's the image of the laser field:
http://www.hisdivineshadow.com/misc/ima ... _field.jpg