The Prime Necromancer wrote:Anyone who cares about making their hypothesis fit the scene, rather than twisting the scene to fit their hypothesis, fucktard.
They
do have variable yields, you realize. I simply told you that not all energy transfer will result in Hiroshima explosions.
SW materials have very high strengths and specific heats, and there are weapons which posess a yield but cause damage through exotic means.
Case you don't remember. AOTC ICS is canon, moron.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:As for the thermal detonator, you've given no good reason why we should accept the idea of a DET weapon that violates CoE. Your reasoning is essentially "well seismic charges exists and my magic missiles exist, so thermal detonators must be DET too", neglecting to realize that you're citing thermal detonators as a reason the other two work like you claim.
That's called circular logic, moron.
Strawman dipshit, I never said anything about DET.
Only you did, and I'm not entitled to prop up your unsubstanciated demands.
I said the hypothesis of how thermal detonators work is that they have a technobabble desintegration reaction which consumes the initial energy released which would be the listed yield.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:A seismic charge most likely emits a forcefield with the KE of the yield.
Been watching too much Trek, buddy? Force fields are neither visible nor so sharply defined.
Force fields are not planar.
You totally distorted the hypothesis. Why don't you plug in Ep. II and notice that the mines explode, then the explosion is squashed into a planar disk.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:If a thermal detonator acted like a seismic charge did, as the blast effect expanded, material would not be instantly disintegrated, but pulverized and possibly hurled far, as the effect would act as akin to a wall moving at immense speeds. Moreover, any air in the area would be forced out, creating a massive change in pressure, and generating a shockwave that would affect things outside the blast radius. A thermal detonator doesn't do that.
No shit, Sherlock. They both deal with apparently self-confined detonations or something to that effect. I never said their means of operation was identical. You're distorting the analogy, and you don't know what a force field is.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:Who says they can't? What canon doesn't support is the ludicrous idea that the excess energy just disappears.
Maybe if you read you'd see the hypothesis is that the energy is consumed to drive whatever technobabble desintegrates the target matter; I never claimed DET.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:Beyond the fact that you have proven neither to be true, there's also the little matter that seismic charges and thermal detonators behave quite differently from anything else we've seen.
Fine and dandy. The point was merely to illustrate that there exists the means in SW of having very destructive weapons with negligible collateral damage or energy waste.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:See above.
'fraid it doesn't work so easily asshole. We know for a fact that the armor is extraordinarily durable and has enormous specific heats. What, did you think the SPHA/T's wattage is below that of fighter cannon? And what of LAAT/i attacks on the Core Ships?
We know hull-cladding can take nuke hits, and the Core Ship is supposed to be composed of the starship equivalent of wet paper towels according to you?
The Prime Necromancer wrote:It gives us a funky effect, yes. I'd like to see your evidence for it being DET other than "I would like it to be," though.
Never said DET, asshole. But exotic weapons do still have an energy content, and thus a yield, y'know.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:Yes it does. What it doesn't say is that they're *always* fired on that yield.
Well then when are they exactly? I personally don't believe you're getting mid-kt range detonations against wheel droids, but the Core Ship hits have to be at least around full-yield. That's
Starship Armor. And there's no Hiroshima there either.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:I'm trying to rectify the ICS with what we see on screen. You're trying to do the same, but doing it in a way that introduces far more unknowns and makes it far more complicated.
I'm trying to draw stuff from official we've already seen, and apply it.
Again, I ask, when do you think we did see them fire at 200 kt? Were the hits on the Core Ship only in the high GJ range?
The Prime Necromancer wrote:So sorry, I misread your statement. Although I hope you can understand my mistake, since your hypothesis that the blast wave affects solid objects but not air is so stupid, you might as well be claiming the wave is immaterial.
It will effect air, but hardly as violently as an Atomic explosion, which is what this whole thing is about.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:Who's trying to claim canon is wrong? You're the only one who seems to think that dialing down the yields is utterly against canon. Even DW seems to think it's a valid compromise.
Do you really think warheads stretch several orders of magnitude in firepower?
The Prime Necromancer wrote:"Blah, blah, blah." Once again, *prove* thermal detonators work by DET, AND that it is reasonable to assume that *all* of their ground weapons use the same unknown effect, rather than going with the simpler answer.
More strawmen.
The Prime Necromancer wrote:Concession accepted, asshole. Once again, what's more reasonable? They dialed down the power, or "magic?" And this time, keep in mind that just because we see funky effects in a few places doesn't give you carte blanche to fall back on them whenever you feel like it.
Then what are you left with? Warheads with several orders of magnitude in their dials? Give me a break. What about their "non KT" performance against Starship Hulls?
The Prime Necromancer wrote:Beyond the fact that that's a Red Herring, I seem to recall the SPHA-T's doing most of the work on the Core Ships.
Who the fuck cares? Did those create "kt-range" explosions you seem to think should be there? The point of the matter is that the missiles did penetrate the hull.
(snip redundencies)
Let's hop back to the beginning, shall we?
The Prime Necromancer wrote:Illuminatus Primus wrote:One of the major misconceptions is high-energy weapons must be analogous to modern explosives; the 200 kt warheads are "blast-effect" warheads which implies damage without thermal explosions.
Even if you are correct, I believe that much kinetic energy will still cause thermal effects. Part of the energy will not go where it is intended, and cause the rapid expansion of the atmosphere surrounding the impact point. And we're right back to where we started.
This is what I asked you to quantify. You said, yeah, but some of the energy will go to waste.
Well then's just cute, but how much? Will that be irreconcilable with the explosions against the hulls of the Core Ship and Techno Union Transports?
If they're canonically not putting their energy into heat predominantly, and not relying on atmospheric concussion effects, than what?
I don't actually know what Saxton means by "blast-effect," really. Perhaps it uses a focused-blast effect akin to the seismic charge and sends a focused blast of mostly KE into the target. Maybe it irradiates it with x-rays or gamma rays. Maybe a combination of all the above, and the extreme strength and specific heats of the materials involved pick up most of the slack.
Point was, I disproved there that it was simple DET, or a straight explosion, and your analogy with Hiroshima does not work. Little Boy is not a comparable weapon, and Hiroshima not a comparable attack. The analogy is false.