StarDestroyer.Net BBS

***Edit*** I have withdrawn this proposal due to canon evidence to the contrary.

===================

Browsing along in the forums, I found several references to an ostensibly nonsense power output used in Star Trek called "isotons." So far, this has been interpreted as "the energy output of 1E0 tons of exploding TNT," which obviously makes no sense considering its observed actual power. Thus far this has been, by and large, acknowledged as nonsense/bad writing and ignored.

I propose an alternate interpretation of "isoton". In our world, TNT is the obvious choice for the power output of explosives, since it offers a nice convenient reference point. If you know how powerful a stick of dynamite is, you will have a good feel for how powerful an explosive is when referenced against that. However, in the future of Star Trek this is no longer the case. Sticks of dynamite are probably things people read about in history books and see in museums. In the future of Star Trek, the obvious choice for the power output of an explosive is antimatter annihilation, which is used in photon torpedoes and powers the warp core in starships.

Therefore, I propose that "isoton" means "the energy output of one ton of matter completely converted to energy." Assuming metric tonnes, E = mc^2 = 1E3kg * (2.998E8m/s)^2 = 8.998E19 J.
Converting to tons of TNT (divide by 4.18E9) gives us roughly 20 gigatons.

Therefore, 1 isoton of antimatter annihilation = 20 gigatons of TNT.

Problem

They have used ISO as a prefix for lots of other things

i.e Isogram, Isolinear, etc

More then likely, ISO means "ONE", just like Kilo means 1,000, Mega means 1,000,000 etc

I do like your idea, just it doesnt' appear to hold weight

However, it is FEASIBLE. And should open up a large debate.

Then again, the other manuals all measure explosive power compared to TNT. It would be a hold over.

The thing is, wouldn't that make a TNG Technical Manual maximum load of 1.5 kg of antimatter for a photon torpedo the eqivalent of a yield of .003 isotons? That does not strike me as quite right.

Iso still means "one" as I have described it. 1 isoton = 1 tonne of antimatter annihilation.

Patrick Ogaard wrote:The thing is, wouldn't that make a TNG Technical Manual maximum load of 1.5 kg of antimatter for a photon torpedo the eqivalent of a yield of .003 isotons? That does not strike me as quite right.

I see no problem with this, I don't recall standard photon torpedoes ever being measured in isotons.

trackball wrote:Browsing along in the forums, I found several references to an ostensibly nonsense power output used in Star Trek called "isotons." So far, this has been interpreted as "the energy output of 1E0 tons of exploding TNT," which obviously makes no sense considering its observed actual power. Thus far this has been, by and large, acknowledged as nonsense/bad writing and ignored.

I propose an alternate interpretation of "isoton". In our world, TNT is the obvious choice for the power output of explosives, since it offers a nice convenient reference point. If you know how powerful a stick of dynamite is, you will have a good feel for how powerful an explosive is when referenced against that. However, in the future of Star Trek this is no longer the case. Sticks of dynamite are probably things people read about in history books and see in museums. In the future of Star Trek, the obvious choice for the power output of an explosive is antimatter annihilation, which is used in photon torpedoes and powers the warp core in starships.

Therefore, I propose that "isoton" means "the energy output of one ton of matter completely converted to energy." Assuming metric tonnes, E = mc^2 = 1E3kg * (2.998E8m/s)^2 = 8.998E19 J.
Converting to tons of TNT (divide by 4.18E9) gives us roughly 20 gigatons.

Therefore, 1 isoton of antimatter annihilation = 20 gigatons of TNT.

That would seem spiffy, if it fits with the SFX's your set. However, if you use the SFX's, then the scale based off of TNT is probably correct.

The ST:E clearly states that Isoton was used as a fictional firepower rating to give the authors some breathing room. The problem is the people who thought it up didn't realize Isoton is real. That said, their intent of obvious and its clear that a direct translation is no aplicable here. Isoton in trek has a different meaning then real life.

trackball wrote:

Patrick Ogaard wrote:The thing is, wouldn't that make a TNG Technical Manual maximum load of 1.5 kg of antimatter for a photon torpedo the eqivalent of a yield of .003 isotons? That does not strike me as quite right.

I see no problem with this, I don't recall standard photon torpedoes ever being measured in isotons.

I would not doubt that it was done somewhere in Voyager (but have no quotes to back that up, so that's a pointless avenue for me to pursue).

On the other hand, the remarkably horrible DS9 Technical Manual lists the explosive yield of late model photon torpedoes as 18.5 isotons, with 25 isotons being listed as the "theoretical maximum explosive yield" for matter-antimatter reactions. The quantum torpedo's explosive potential is supposed to be 52.3 isotons.

Patrick Ogaard wrote:On the other hand, the remarkably horrible DS9 Technical Manual lists the explosive yield of late model photon torpedoes as 18.5 isotons, with 25 isotons being listed as the "theoretical maximum explosive yield" for matter-antimatter reactions. The quantum torpedo's explosive potential is supposed to be 52.3 isotons.

I don't believe the technical manuals are canon. While we're on the subject of the tech manuals, however:

Solauren wrote:Then again, the other manuals all measure explosive power compared to TNT. It would be a hold over.

These manuals are written by contemporary authors for a contemporary audience, who still understand explosive power in terms of TNT.

trackball wrote:Therefore, I propose that "isoton" means "the energy output of one ton of matter completely converted to energy." Assuming metric tonnes, E = mc^2 = 1E3kg * (2.998E8m/s)^2 = 8.998E19 J.
Converting to tons of TNT (divide by 4.18E9) gives us roughly 20 gigatons.

Therefore, 1 isoton of antimatter annihilation = 20 gigatons of TNT.

There are no Star Trek incidents in which a photon or quantum torpedo explosion is consistent with multiples of 20 gigatons of released energy. There aren't even any incidents in which the explosion is consistent with multiples of 20 megatons (which would be roughly equivalent to a ton of fissionable material being detonated).

trackball wrote:

Patrick Ogaard wrote:On the other hand, the remarkably horrible DS9 Technical Manual lists the explosive yield of late model photon torpedoes as 18.5 isotons, with 25 isotons being listed as the "theoretical maximum explosive yield" for matter-antimatter reactions. The quantum torpedo's explosive potential is supposed to be 52.3 isotons.

I don't believe the technical manuals are canon. While we're on the subject of the tech manuals, however:

Solauren wrote:Then again, the other manuals all measure explosive power compared to TNT. It would be a hold over.

These manuals are written by contemporary authors for a contemporary audience, who still understand explosive power in terms of TNT.

No problem. The strictly unofficial status of the Technical Manuals is well established.

Ted C wrote:There are no Star Trek incidents in which a photon or quantum torpedo explosion is consistent with multiples of 20 gigatons of released energy.

I don't recall any canon references to either photon or quantum torpedoes being measure in isotons.

trackball wrote:

Ted C wrote:There are no Star Trek incidents in which a photon or quantum torpedo explosion is consistent with multiples of 20 gigatons of released energy.

I don't recall any canon references to either photon or quantum torpedoes being measure in isotons.

I recall quite a few in Voyager. A modified Torpedo being 40~, a special Borg mine being 5,000,000. Needless to say, none of the incidents with such stated yields had GT level effects. Therefore, your whole theory is bunk, so please stop insisting it's right when it's so arbitrary(I might as well insist Isoton is the explosive power of one ton of gunpowder).

SirNitram wrote:I recall quite a few in Voyager. A modified Torpedo being 40~, a special Borg mine being 5,000,000. Needless to say, none of the incidents with such stated yields had GT level effects. Therefore, your whole theory is bunk, so please stop insisting it's right when it's so arbitrary(I might as well insist Isoton is the explosive power of one ton of gunpowder).

Please drop the attitude. I have been nothing but respectful to you and you have been nothing but rude in return.

I never insisted I was right, I merely have not seen any canon evidence yet that I was wrong. From the beginning I stated that this was only a proposal for an interpretation. I back this up by stating that antimatter annihilation is a common enough occurrence in Trek to be a reasonable translation of the meaning.

As for your examples, the 5 million isoton Borg mine was the one used in Scorpion, Part II to scatter the modified nanoprobes all over Borg space to defeat Species 8472, correct? Since Borg space is so vast, that's a lot of power. I don't think that's unreasonable.

I am unfamiliar with the 40 isoton modified torpedo you mentioned. Please give me more details.

trackball wrote:

SirNitram wrote:I recall quite a few in Voyager. A modified Torpedo being 40~, a special Borg mine being 5,000,000. Needless to say, none of the incidents with such stated yields had GT level effects. Therefore, your whole theory is bunk, so please stop insisting it's right when it's so arbitrary(I might as well insist Isoton is the explosive power of one ton of gunpowder).

Please drop the attitude. I have been nothing but respectful to you and you have been nothing but rude in return.

So far you've started a thread simply to say 'I don't think it's possible because the number looks impossible!', and this thread where you are trying to make up an arbitrary figure for an openly acknowledge nonsensical unit. Neither of these engenders much respect from me.

I never insisted I was right, I merely have not seen any canon evidence yet that I was wrong. From the beginning I stated that this was only a proposal for an interpretation. I back this up by stating that antimatter annihilation is a common enough occurrence in Trek to be a reasonable translation of the meaning.

Consider it considered and thrown out for being fucking stupid. The 'absense of evidence' bit you pull is just as bad.

As for your examples, the 5 million isoton Borg mine was the one used in Scorpion, Part II to scatter the modified nanoprobes all over Borg space to defeat Species 8472, correct? Since Borg space is so vast, that's a lot of power. I don't think that's unreasonable.

You are an idiot, I see now. It doesn't matter how much power is behind the mine. The probes will never exceed lightspeed, so they won't even leave the system they are deployed in anytime soon, and most will be vaporized, especially with a high-yield explosion. Or was that too hard for you to work out?

I am unfamiliar with the 40 isoton modified torpedo you mentioned. Please give me more details.

The anti-Omega weapon. I also recall the full yield of Voyager being described by Seven as '400 Isotons'. Yet it certainly never shows off GT firepower when it could help.

SirNitram wrote:

I am unfamiliar with the 40 isoton modified torpedo you mentioned. Please give me more details.

The anti-Omega weapon. I also recall the full yield of Voyager being described by Seven as '400 Isotons'. Yet it certainly never shows off GT firepower when it could help.

I found this dialogue in a review of Scorpion II: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Labyrin ... pion2.html

[Seven] goes back to the viewscreen and informs them that Voyager has 32 photon torpedoes with class six warheads and a explosive yield of 200 isotons.

Even if we interpret this as all 32 torpedoes combined having the stated yield, giving each torpedo 6.25 isotons (125 gigatons), it obviously contradicts my theory.

I withdraw the proposal.

Ted C wrote:

trackball wrote:Therefore, I propose that "isoton" means "the energy output of one ton of matter completely converted to energy." Assuming metric tonnes, E = mc^2 = 1E3kg * (2.998E8m/s)^2 = 8.998E19 J.
Converting to tons of TNT (divide by 4.18E9) gives us roughly 20 gigatons.

Therefore, 1 isoton of antimatter annihilation = 20 gigatons of TNT.

There are no Star Trek incidents in which a photon or quantum torpedo explosion is consistent with multiples of 20 gigatons of released energy. There aren't even any incidents in which the explosion is consistent with multiples of 20 megatons (which would be roughly equivalent to a ton of fissionable material being detonated).

We have Garak wanting to destroy the Founders with the USS Defiant, however, in an episode I cannot remember the name of.

*L* what if isoton means one megaton to the Trek people?

I have never seen the iso- prefix be used to mean 1E0 except in vs debates. It's not a standard, unless someone can point to a standardized source using it.

Also, from http://www.m-w.com:

Main Entry: is-
Variant(s): or iso-
Function: combining form
Etymology: Late Latin, from Greek, from isos equal
1 : equal : homogeneous : uniform <isentropic>
2 : isomeric <isocyanate>
3 : for or from different individuals of the same species <isoagglutinin>

It does not mean "one." It means "equal" (not "equal to") or "uniform." Making it mean "one" is a bit of a stretch. The term "isoton" is non-sensical in the way the prefix has been used. (If used like "isobaric" or "isothermal," for example, then it'd mean the mass of the torpedo doesn't change... but we know it does when the M/AM meet...)

ALI_G wrote:We have Garak wanting to destroy the Founders with the USS Defiant, however, in an episode I cannot remember the name of.

Not knowing how much of the planet's surface the Great Link actually covers, destroying them with the Defiant's weapons might well have been feasible. The covered an the vicinity all the way to the horizon, leaving on a small island of rock in their midst where Sisko waited, but we have no idea of the depth of their combined mass, and the area need not have extended more than a few dozen kilometers in any direction.

Isoton~tanslation~eqaul to a ton of TNT

that was my thought

Ted C wrote:

ALI_G wrote:We have Garak wanting to destroy the Founders with the USS Defiant, however, in an episode I cannot remember the name of.

Not knowing how much of the planet's surface the Great Link actually covers, destroying them with the Defiant's weapons might well have been feasible. The covered an the vicinity all the way to the horizon, leaving on a small island of rock in their midst where Sisko waited, but we have no idea of the depth of their combined mass, and the area need not have extended more than a few dozen kilometers in any direction.

I don't remember: did Garak state that he was going glass the area, or just kill everyone? The Founders may not take a lot of power to kill.

Seven said Voyager torpedoes are 200 isotons.

Howedar wrote:

Ted C wrote:

ALI_G wrote:We have Garak wanting to destroy the Founders with the USS Defiant, however, in an episode I cannot remember the name of.

Not knowing how much of the planet's surface the Great Link actually covers, destroying them with the Defiant's weapons might well have been feasible. The covered an the vicinity all the way to the horizon, leaving on a small island of rock in their midst where Sisko waited, but we have no idea of the depth of their combined mass, and the area need not have extended more than a few dozen kilometers in any direction.

I don't remember: did Garak state that he was going glass the area, or just kill everyone? The Founders may not take a lot of power to kill.

Try watching the episode in which the Martok impersonator is spotted. Takes a fucking barage of disrupter shots from the Klingons.

And it takes one disruptor to blow up Odo in "Crossover" and even it possible to stun a changling ("Homefront")