Wong Collision Corrections

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-07-24 01:47pm

Pg.102: "Rocks the size of his ship hurtled toward him, and they weren't the soft carbonaceous chondrites that his weapon might punch a hole through-these were nickel-iron rocks that could smash him to pieces."

Tales of the Bounty Hunter, describing the Hoth Asteroid Belt.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2002-07-24 01:47pm

IIRC, the ESB novelization(Which is Canon) states the belt is nickel-iron. High iron content is also suggested by the hues of the asteroids we see during the chase.

Captain Hornblower · Post by **Captain Hornblower** » 2002-07-24 01:56pm

Thanks for the info guys

2000AD · Post by **2000AD** » 2002-07-24 02:10pm

Can some1 please tell me what IIRC stands for?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2002-07-24 02:16pm

2000AD wrote:Can some1 please tell me what IIRC stands for?

If I Recall Correctly.

Aaron2 · Post by **Aaron2** » 2002-07-24 03:58pm

The ESB novel does mention that the ship was destroyed. Here's the appropriate quote (chapter

:

"As Vader watched, one of his smaller ships disintegrated under the impact of an enormous asteroid." ... "The image of the commander was fading rapidly, almost as quickly as the glowing particles of his exploded ship were being flung to oblivion."

Sound like it was destroyed by secondary explosions as shown onscreen since the holotransmitter was functioning after the impact. Curiously, it describe the ship as an "Imperial battleship".

The novel, at least this one, does not describe the asteroids as nickel-iron. It doesn't really describe them at all.

Aaron

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2002-07-24 04:07pm

'Course, onscreen, we never saw the entirety of the ship "disintegrate"... at most, only the bridge tower was affected (and the level at which it was affected is a matter of debate in and of itself).

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-07-24 04:09pm

Aaron2 wrote:The ESB novel does mention that the ship was destroyed. Here's the appropriate quote (chapter :

"As Vader watched, one of his smaller ships disintegrated under the impact of an enormous asteroid." ... "The image of the commander was fading rapidly, almost as quickly as the glowing particles of his exploded ship were being flung to oblivion."

Sound like it was destroyed by secondary explosions as shown onscreen since the holotransmitter was functioning after the impact. Curiously, it describe the ship as an "Imperial battleship".

The novel, at least this one, does not describe the asteroids as nickel-iron. It doesn't really describe them at all.

Aaron

1. How do you know that was the same incident? The novel is unclear.
2. The asteroids are thought to be nickel-iron because that is consistent with their appearance onscreen.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-07-24 04:34pm

It cannot be the same ship It describes a holo-converance with 20 captains. the one seen on screen was 3.

On and the novel says there are 20 ships in the asteroid belt searching. They can't be ISDs as there are only 5 in Death Squad. So they must be smaller warships.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-24 04:43pm

I like the way Trekkies elevate the novel above the film when it suits them. I also like the way they think a scene describing an "enormous" asteroid must be the scene we saw in the film.

What idiot thinks that this 70m wide asteroid would look "enormous" from Vader's vantage point on the Executor bridge, at least 10 km away? Look at the quote in context; Vader is watching this through the bridge windows.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-07-24 04:51pm

Well, they are also fond of elevating dialogue above visuals, so I guess it isn't THAT much of a stretch for them to move the novel above the movie.

Aaron2 · Post by **Aaron2** » 2002-07-24 05:16pm

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:It cannot be the same ship It describes a holo-converance with 20 captains. the one seen on screen was 3.

You can only see three onscreen at once. Heck, if your not watching the Widescreen version, you only see two.

On and the novel says there are 20 ships in the asteroid belt searching. They can't be ISDs as there are only 5 in Death Squad. So they must be smaller warships.

I don't really see the contradiction. Certainly other ships could have shown up later. Bounty hunters did.

This whole think is kinda nitpicky. What difference does it make if the ISD afterwards by some sort of internal explosion? It doesn't affect the energy calculations in any way. Certainly in both the book and the movie parts of the ship remain functional after the impact. The ISD wasn't instantly vaporized.

BTW-According to Lucas' own continutity rules, the novel is canon unless directly contradicted by onscreen evidence. The movie doesn't show a bridgeless ISD limping along still intact. Thus the movie doesn't contradict this particular passage.

Aaron

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-07-24 05:19pm

The movie certainly does not contradict this passage, because we never see the said conference on screen. Clearly they were two different incidents, and the ship destroyed was smaller and less powerful than an ISD.

Aaron2 · Post by **Aaron2** » 2002-07-24 05:33pm

Master of Ossus wrote:The movie certainly does not contradict this passage ...

I know you actually meant to say "does contradict", however, being an Imperial I will use the moment to declare ...

ULTIMATE VICTORY!

There is no onscreen evidence to suggest that the ISD survived this impact. None. Thus the novel description stands. If you think this passage described a different event, then why does Captain Needa say the exact same thing he said in the movie a second time. (part of his conversation is lost due to the static of the explosion, just like in the movie)

Aaron

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2002-07-24 05:38pm

'No onscreen evidence to prove the ISD survived the Impact'

...

Besides, you know, plainly seeing it's bridgeless hull continue on, unaffected.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2002-07-24 05:45pm

There is no onscreen evidence to suggest that the ISD survived this impact. None. Thus the novel description stands.

Unfortunately, no. We do not see the ISD in the movie destroyed by the asteroid impact. As I mentioned earlier, the extent of the damage is hotly disputed.

Given the oddities in the novelisation description, and given its description of "20 ships" instead of just 5, it jibes with a greater totality of evidence to conclude that the novelisation is describing a different incident than that seen in the movie. Possibly with a much larger asteroid and/or a smaller ship.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-07-24 05:47pm

No, I meant that there is no onscreen evidence to dispute this passage. I was saying that it is entirely possible that there was a 20 person holo-conference going on, and one of the smaller ships was destroyed. There IS onscreen evidence to support that the ISD survived the impact. You can see the bridge after the asteroid hit. You can also see the captain standing several seconds after the asteroid impact on the holo-conference. That would not be possible if the ship was destroyed.

Aaron2 · Post by **Aaron2** » 2002-07-24 05:48pm

SirNitram wrote:'No onscreen evidence to prove the ISD survived the Impact'

Besides, you know, plainly seeing it's bridgeless hull continue on, unaffected.

Exactly! In both the novel descriptions and the movie the sequence of event is:

Ship hit by asteroid.
Hologram still active (i.e. ship not totally destroyed)
Hologram fades away.
Captain Needa says "blah blah considering the damage we've sustained".

From this point on, we never see the ISD again onscreen. The novel says that it exploded after his image faded. (or more correctly, as it faded).
I don't know why you guys are fighting the fact that the ship was destroyed. It doesn't affect the energy calculation because it is clearly shown that most of the structure of the ship survived the initial impact. Whether or not an ISD can survive having is bridge tower torn off make no difference on how easily it can blow up ST ships.

Aaron

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-07-24 05:51pm

We're fighting this because that is not what was seen onscreen, or in the novel. The novel was clearly referring to a seperate event, and the ship that WAS hit by the asteroid still had a bridge tower. You can see it, if you look closely. The ISD did not explode, or at least, was never SEEN to explode. The novel was referring to a smaller ship.

DarkStar · Post by **DarkStar** » 2002-07-24 11:09pm

DasBastard wrote:I notice that he evaded the questions regarding justification of his scaling and assumption of total bridge destruction, and obsession with KE rather than momentum (the answer is obvious - because the ISD was struck with a far more massive object and the momentum ratio is therefore greater than the KE ratio). Ignorant and cowardly... impressive.

I didn't evade it. I thought it was stupid of you to claim it. The momentum of the JH ship is 26,334,000,000 kg m/s, and the asteroid's momentum is 130,300,500,000 kg m/s. That's only five times more. I was actually making it sound better for you by using KE, but if you really don't want me to...

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-07-24 11:16pm

DarkStar wrote:
DasBastard wrote:I notice that he evaded the questions regarding justification of his scaling and assumption of total bridge destruction, and obsession with KE rather than momentum (the answer is obvious - because the ISD was struck with a far more massive object and the momentum ratio is therefore greater than the KE ratio). Ignorant and cowardly... impressive.
I didn't evade it. I thought it was stupid of you to claim it. The momentum of the JH ship is 26,334,000,000 kg m/s, and the asteroid's momentum is 130,300,500,000 kg m/s. That's only five times more. I was actually making it sound better for you by using KE, but if you really don't want me to...

That's using YOUR calculations, which are clearly erroneous.

DarkStar · Post by **DarkStar** » 2002-07-24 11:41pm

DasBastard wrote: A) You fucking dumbass! The number is clearly ~11; the ones digit is perfectly inline with those of nearby values, and there is no space for a decimal, nor is there even a single pixel of black indicating one was lost in the scan. Concession accepted.

Concession? My ass. You're going to have to do better than a questionable scan-job.

1. You are forced to defend the notion that this one asteroid out of all the ones we have found has somehow managed to be the only one that is even close to being that dense.

2. You must also defend the notion that, if you can do #1, this one asteroid's existence offers weight to Wong's overestimation.

Good luck.

B)Jesus h Christ! Are you completely impervious to both simple math and simple logic?!? The asteroids with listed densities (other than 165) are all C and S class. They are NOT the same type!

Whoops. Looks like we both misread something in this thread. You got the degree thing, and I didn't read the legend. I thought it was talking about A-type asteroids (rare), and didn't even bother looking at all the other 'A's beside all the asteroid. We're even.

M-class asteroids are made of fucking iron and nickel, and the minor consitutents are often higher-Z (and higher density) metals like Pt, Pd and Au! The specific density of iron? 7.9 The specific density of nickel? 8.9. By all means, show me a composition of iron and nickel (much less the heavier metals) that weighs in at less than 7000kg/m^3.

Asteroids.

I challenge you to name a single m-class asteroid with a density of 3000kg/m^3 or less.

Hey, that's a cute trick, given that we don't have much of that kind of data about less-common types. For instance, we know Kleopatra and her companion are low-density, but few are willing to venture a numerical guess.

http://occsec.wellington.net.nz/planet/ ... ws0005.htm

Only a complete moron could suggest that a solid mixture of two materials of densities greater than 7000 kg/m^3 would produce an object with a density less than 7000kg/m^3.

Ah, but there's the catch. You mistakenly assume that asteroids are usually solid.

To reiterate: you should do a little homework before you post your idiotic delusions as fact, you ignorant fuckwit.

Idiotic delusions? You're the one demonstrating the idea.

DarkStar · Post by **DarkStar** » 2002-07-24 11:44pm

DasBastard wrote:
His "correction" was itself erroneous, you idiot.
This is the perfect demonstration of your level of argument, namely equating 'contains an error ' to 'erroneous'. You clearly do not understand that this is a fallacy, or why. M-class asteroids can, will and do have densities of 7000kg/m^3 or more; this remains true no matter how many typos or reading errors I commit.

False. I really don't understand how you could be so mistaken.

Since you are incapable of your own research to try to disprove my figures:

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/hilton/asteroid_masses.htm
2 points here:

1) none of those are fucking m-class asteroids. How many times do you need to be corrected in this?

We don't have much data on M-type asteroids, though we know enough about one, Kleopatra, to know that she disproves your ravings.

While we're on the subject, though, what makes you think the asteroid is M-type?

2) The density of Vesta (V-class, mixed composition) is 4300kg/m^3 accordsing to your reference. I will do the math, since it seems to eluded you:

4300 > 3000.

You lose.

7000 > 3000 ... you lose, too. Besides, weren't you bitching just two seconds ago about the data not being for M-types?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-07-24 11:54pm

DumbShit, you still have not proven that Wong's estimates are unreasonable, AND your estimates are ludicrous. Fix your estimates, and then come back and try again.

Post by **Edi** » 2002-07-25 01:26am

Ok, DarkStar, my figures for the densities of metals were wrong in my first post, but that happens when trying to remember something I last needed in physics class several years ago. Doesn't change anything though, as has been painstakingly pointed out to you time and again. You're still a lying, nitpicky, egotistical idiot who cannot admit he's wrong and that his pet theories hold no water..

As for your ridiculous assumption of asteroids not usually being solid objects, care to provide evidence? Are they perhaps hollow spheres, or a collection of rocks held together by webs of vacuum spiders or something equally inane? If we could somehow harness your stupidity and ego as power sources, that'd solve all energy shortage problems for humanity for the lifespan of the whole star system.

Edi

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Wong Collision Corrections

Thanks

Re: Wong Collision Corrections