Warp-combat superiority

For polite and reasoned discussion of Star Wars and/or Star Trek.
Locked
User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Praeothmin » Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:13 pm

MauriceWindows wrote:
Praeothmin wrote:
MauriceWindows wrote: Translation: my logical explanation flew over your head like planes over gophers, and so you trampled it into the mud like pearls before swine.

Since you've failed to prove they're different when challenged, you forfeit.
In other words:
You can't prove it, and so your assumption is baseless and worthless...
Got it... :)
Sure I can prove that phasers move faster than ships in hyperspace, it's not even a question.

You're the one who can't prove it's different from hitting a star, other than quibbling over irrelevancies like "gravitons vs. nadions" when we KNOW that Starfleet uses BOTH.
When you dodge around the point like that, you've clearly lost the argument.
Well, we're all impatiently waiting for you to prove it then...

When you dodge around proving things, you've clearly lost the argument... :)

KSW
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by KSW » Wed Mar 21, 2012 3:59 am

Just as soon as you prove whether hyperspace is inaccessible to phasers, since we know it's accessible to a star's gravity.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Praeothmin » Wed Mar 21, 2012 12:34 pm

Wow, you really don't understand the Burden Of Proof, do you?

YOU first declared that ST ships could detect ships in Hyperspace, without evidence...
You then declared that, in addition to detecting them, they could shoot at them with Phasers, still without evidence...
And thirdly, you declared that Hyperspace and Subspace were the same, again without any evidence...

So when you prove this, KirkSkyWalker (because we all know it's you), then I will put some efforts in proving Hyperspace is inacessible to Phasers...

But I won't do too much research on the subject, because I know you'll still try to dodge the bullet, as you always do... :)

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5839
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:15 pm

All right, this has gone on far enough. I cut some slack because you were doing fairly good for a while there, KSW, but no more. You are being given a warning for your current behavior, and if you continue to do so, I'll just keep giving you a warning until you are banned. This time it will be a permaban since the rules call for anyone banned longer than a year's time to be stepped up to that.

You need to knock off not only with the insults, but also show your evidence. As it is, when you do show something, it is very flimsy. A starship's phasers do not equal a supernova, black hole, or star. Also the EU states this and other bodies effect hyperspace through mass shadows as has been pointed out to you repeatedly.
-Mike

KSW
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by KSW » Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:55 am

edit
Last edited by KSW on Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Khas
Starship Captain
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Khas » Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:06 am

Quit lying. You haven't proven a single Goddamn thing. We've already explained that a ship at warp is effectively standing still, simply being carried by the space-time bubble that the warp drive generates. Not to mention the fact that you're basing your claims on things that were never seen in the shows or movies. Not even the infamous Timothy Jones was as bad as you.

KSW
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by KSW » Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:29 am

Mike DiCenso wrote:All right, this has gone on far enough. I cut some slack because you were doing fairly good for a while there, KSW, but no more. You are being given a warning for your current behavior, and if you continue to do so, I'll just keep giving you a warning until you are banned. This time it will be a permaban since the rules call for anyone banned longer than a year's time to be stepped up to that.

You need to knock off not only with the insults, but also show your evidence. As it is, when you do show something, it is very flimsy. A starship's phasers do not equal a supernova, black hole, or star. Also the EU states this and other bodies effect hyperspace through mass shadows as has been pointed out to you repeatedly.
-Mike
And I've ANSWERED it repeatedly, only to receive evasive quibbling in responnse that "phasers are nadions not gravitons" and other non-sequitur arguments which completely ignore that Starfleet can generate gravitons on a whim.
Pardon me if I don't make 3-page arguments that go in circles, like some others; I don't beat dead issues into the ground, or like to repeat myself ad nauseum, and so I tend to get PO'ed when noobs force me to do so.

The notion of a ship moving faster than its weapons, is fairly absurd in itself; we can see quite clearly onscreen as in "Balance of Terror," "Journey to babel" etc. that phasers move many times in excess of Warp 9, that phasers are used by ships at speeds as high as Warp 10. The very idea of phasers moving lightspeed is awkward at best in explaining how that would work; it would be like fighter-jets trying to drop bombs on each other at Mack 3!

Likewise, I challenge you to show evidence behind your statements that Starfleet's weapons and technology (tractors, deflectors etc) project less graviton-intensity than a star over the area of impact. Deflectors DO travel faster than the ship, as is necessary to sweep debris from the ship's path with nav-deflectors; and battle-deflectors are even more powerful.

Also again, a star's gravity cannot be greater than 28,000 G's at any given point, and so a starship should be able to project that much intensity in a focused beam by the main deflector. over a small area for a brief instant.

A hyperdriven ship moves at least 20,000C,which is 6.0E+12m/s, while a star is about 1.5E+6m in diameter, leaving a maximum period of only of 2.5E-7 seconds of impact, at an intensity of less than 28,000G's.
That seems reasonable for a Starship to be able to be able to manufacture a graviton-pulse of that magnitude for that duration., requiring only 12 Joules per ton of ship affected.
Last edited by KSW on Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Praeothmin » Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:38 am

So, again, you can't prove anything...

Got it!

KSW
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by KSW » Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:04 pm

Praeothmin wrote:So, again, you can't prove anything...

Got it!
Circular trolling. I further proclaim your lack of counter-argument to be a concession that you have none, and therefore a forfeit.
Byeeeeeee!

User avatar
Khas
Starship Captain
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Khas » Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:16 pm

So says the man who never backs up his claims with anything substantial.

KSW
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by KSW » Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:43 pm

Khas wrote:So says the man who never backs up his claims with anything substantial.
Just facts, figures and cited examples-- none of which you've countered either, simply evaded with offpoint non-sequiturs.

Meanwhile I'm still waiting for you to show ANYTHING to prove that ships in hyperspace are impervious to Starfleet tech, when we know that Federation starships are capable of producing high-energy graviton pulses that could easily mimic flying through a star.

Examples:
In 2369, a coherent graviton pulse was used to close the subspace rupture that was allowing solanogen-based lifeforms into "normal" space. (TNG: "Schisms")


In 2373, two Ferengi marooned in the Delta Quadrant as a result of the unstable Barzan wormhole used a graviton pulse to prevent USS Voyager from transporting them off their shuttle. Subsequently, the pulse caused a gravitational eddy from the wormhole to pull the shuttle in. (VOY: "False Profits")

In 2375, a graviton pulse was used by a small Klingon fleet to disrupt the warp drives of several pursuing Jem'Hadar attack ships. (DS9: "Once More Unto the Breach")
Again, this is just a matter of concentration, since it only requires 12 joules/ton.
Last edited by KSW on Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Khas
Starship Captain
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Khas » Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:47 pm

Your "facts" are as valid as the ones used by a creationist. And there's a difference between a graviton pulse and a spatial distortion. Big Difference.

KSW
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by KSW » Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:54 pm

Khas wrote:Your "facts" are as valid as the ones used by a creationist.
Circular contradition = forfeit-- et two?
And there's a difference between a graviton pulse and a spatial distortion. Big Difference.
Only temporally; and as I've proven-- and you failed to counter, thus yielding the point (and a simple contradiction is not a counter)-- the duration of impact with that distortion in hyperspace, at most, would be 2.57 nanoseconds, yielding an energy difference of 12 joules/ton.

And it's axiomatic that graviton-streams of nav-deflectors can move faster than the starships, while likewise a fast starship can move faster than 20,000C.
Do the math.

User avatar
Khas
Starship Captain
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by Khas » Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:03 pm

Subspace ain't hyperspace. It's been said twice in ST. And warp drive and hyperdrive are two completely different things.

KSW
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Warp-combat superiority

Post by KSW » Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:58 pm

Khas wrote:Subspace ain't hyperspace. It's been said twice in ST.
Yes, and I'm SURE they were referring to Han Solo's ship-propulsion systems, right?

Do you seriously not realize your own faux pas in confusing semantics between separate genres, or are you too busy ignoring the facts of basic hyperdimensional physics?
nd warp drive and hyperdrive are two completely different things
But Transwarp and hyperdrive aren't, all the elements match... but that never bothered you before, since you're either intellectually dishonest or just plain honestly disintellectual-- the twin banes of all online debate.
Either way you're dismissed from this one, sayanora.

Locked