Star Trek vs Star Wars (multiple scenarios)

[Maaruin]

ok first off the Stormtrooper armor sure fine it doesn't break but that doesn't matter as we have still seen it can't stop an arrow. THAT IS NOT a technical glitch either is the asteroid explosions.

 

 

as for your next arguement.... oh man you picked the wrong person. I have my masters in physics and I am working on my Doctorate.

 

You are wrong about lighting. Electrical force is still a force. I use it in my labs to teach my students. I set up a van de graaff generator and I use the force from the electrical discharges to push a small cart that has a metal plate on it. I then have my students use Coulombs law to calculate the force generated.

 

The reason why people survive lighting strikes is because that survive them don't actually get hit by the lighting. Remember electricity ALWAYS follows the path of least resistance. Why do you think lighting can break apart huge trees when it strikes???? It's because of the force that it hits with. So if you get a lightning bolt that has the same force of two logs hitting then yes you can crush an AT AT with a single lightning bolt.

 

http://blog.chicagoweathercenter.com/041812Tree%20damage1.jpg

 

I guess magic just broke apart that tree?

 

Oh hey lol a lightning bolt did more damage to that tree then the AT AT. ROFL.

 

Everyone here says you are really respectful and nice but it turns out your kind of rude especially when you are talking about things that are WAY out of your league.

 

A little of topic and I'm no expert, but what I've heard abou the tree/lightning thing is:

 

The lightning heats the water inside the tree. The water evaporates and has a much bigger volume. That's what split's the tree.

 

Don't know if that's the case...

[jarjarloves]

WRONG!

 

 

 

Star Wars is pretty smart about this.

 

 

 

You also have to take into consideration that physics doesn't work the same way in Star Wars, as in literally in Star Wars there is sound in space.

 

 

Star Trek tech is the most unscientific and inconsistent tech in Science Fiction.

 

I saw this and had to laugh

 

 

But yeah no the calculations are still wrong they also go against the script and movie as well. Like I said before the Asteroid explodes the same way when it is hit by a Turbo Laser and when it hits the Star Destroyer. The explosion is the same even though it is not hit by a turbolaser THEREFORE the power is in the asteroid not the turbolaser.

 

ALSO IF a Turbo laser was a strong as the tech manuals say then 100 Star Destroyers COULD blow up a planet. BUT

 

Remember Han Solo says " The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take

a thousand ships with more fire power than I've..."

 

So clearly the Empire never had the power to destroy a planet before. This is also backed up by how everyone in the Empire talks about how the ability to blow up a planet makes them the ultimate power in the universe. So that means they obviously never had that power before.

[PaerisKiran]

I just watched that Episode like a week ago, they said it was the E. It also had a third warp nacelle even though, according to Star Trek science the third nacelle would cause the warp bubble to collapse and destroy the ship. (According to the "science" they use, and yes I use the term loosely, nacelles need to be in even numbers.)

 

So if you can replay the chat Laforge, Data, Riker and Crusher were having in 10 Forward before Picard bursted in, finally cracking Q's riddle, had about good old days and how Riker saved it

 

And it is question of field geometry and well you do not see borg cubes having any neccels... in reality their probe-shuttles have singular transwarp coils. (And borg can beat warp 10 even in TNG... they did not emerge at earth because at that time there was no transwarp apperature there, and queen wanted Picard... and why bother going slipstream if you do not care about time and shock that rippled from WOLF 359 echoed through quadrant. While collective does not care on it´s own, Queen did.)

 

I do not see necells on Birds of prey either. Federation simply adapted it´s technology acording to newer things. In case of older technology it may very well have been truthful statement.

Edited August 10, 2012 by PaerisKiran

[jarjarloves]

A little of topic and I'm no expert, but what I've heard abou the tree/lightning thing is:

 

The lightning heats the water inside the tree. The water evaporates and has a much bigger volume. That's what split's the tree.

 

Don't know if that's the case...

 

that's an interesting theory but wrong as it happens to dead trees and many other objects that lightning strikes. Ever seen the ground after a lightning strike?

 

In fact a green tree is much more likely to survive a lightning strike.

Edited August 10, 2012 by jarjarloves

[ProfessorWalsh]

I saw this and had to laugh

 

 

But yeah no the calculations are still wrong they also go against the script and movie as well. Like I said before the Asteroid explodes the same way when it is hit by a Turbo Laser and when it hits the Star Destroyer. The explosion is the same even though it is not hit by a turbolaser THEREFORE the power is in the asteroid not the turbolaser.

 

Uh huh...

 

And Star Trek tritanium can be shattered by a normal person throwing a rock. Because it happened on screen. There is no point in discussing with you, you are trying to apply a double standard.

[jarjarloves]

Uh huh...

 

And Star Trek tritanium can be shattered by a normal person throwing a rock. Because it happened on screen. There is no point in discussing with you, you are trying to apply a double standard.

 

again you are arguing with the wrong person about that. I don't know Star Trek lore or canon. I'm here to talk about the bogus Star Wars numbers.

 

Star Wars is my passion, that and Physics.

Edited August 10, 2012 by jarjarloves

[ProfessorWalsh]

I saw this and had to laugh

 

 

But yeah no the calculations are still wrong they also go against the script and movie as well. Like I said before the Asteroid explodes the same way when it is hit by a Turbo Laser and when it hits the Star Destroyer. The explosion is the same even though it is not hit by a turbolaser THEREFORE the power is in the asteroid not the turbolaser.

 

ALSO IF a Turbo laser was a strong as the tech manuals say then 100 Star Destroyers COULD blow up a planet. BUT

 

Remember Han Solo says " The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take

a thousand ships with more fire power than I've..."

 

So clearly the Empire never had the power to destroy a planet before. This is also backed up by how everyone in the Empire talks about how the ability to blow up a planet makes them the ultimate power in the universe. So that means they obviously never had that power before.

 

You are wrong again. Turbolaser bolts don't explode, they "drill" and they would simply drill holes through the planet (note: This actually is something the Empire has done, it is called a Base Delta Zero) not blow it up. They could crack a planet up (canonically that has happened) but Han was talking about literally blowing the planet to pieces.

 

Remember, there were almost no debris after the destruction of Alderaan there was a small smattering of asteroids that was about it.

[jarjarloves]

You are wrong again. Turbolaser bolts don't explode, they "drill" and they would simply drill holes through the planet (note: This actually is something the Empire has done, it is called a Base Delta Zero) not blow it up. They could crack a planet up (canonically that has happened) but Han was talking about literally blowing the planet to pieces.

 

Remember, there were almost no debris after the destruction of Alderaan there was a small smattering of asteroids that was about it.

 

... again no they still have a force equal to that of several nuclear bombs... well according to Saxton. But like I said his calculations are wrong.

 

He basis them ENTIRELY off of the Asteroids being destroyed in ESB. The SAME VISUAL EFFECT is used when the ASTEROID HITS THE STAR DESTROYER AND EXPLODES.

 

THEREFORE IT IS NOT THE TURBO LASER BUT THE ASTEROID. His calculations are based on a incorrect data.

 

But EVEN IF they had the power to Drill at several megatons a 1,000 Star destroyers could EASILY Destroy a planet. However from Han's dialauge and the dialogue of the empire admirals we know for a FACT they never had that kind of power.

 

edit: Yes I know of Delta Base Zero but it goes against canon as I stated those weapons aren't that powerful.

Edited August 10, 2012 by jarjarloves

[PaerisKiran]

You are wrong again. Turbolaser bolts don't explode, they "drill" and they would simply drill holes through the planet (note: This actually is something the Empire has done, it is called a Base Delta Zero) not blow it up. They could crack a planet up (canonically that has happened) but Han was talking about literally blowing the planet to pieces.

 

Remember, there were almost no debris after the destruction of Alderaan there was a small smattering of asteroids that was about it.

 

Ehm what evidence of that statement is anywhere? Han droped out of hyperspace somewhere in vicinity of Alderran probably sufficiently far away so he did not smash into planets mass shadow (that is unhealthy for SW hyperdrives) (or you know... crush accidentaly into leaving ships)

 

So some asteroids made it to where he was, his sensors werent registring a planet... (but since it missed something like a deathstar I would not put much faith in them anyway)... I do not remember Tarkin or Vader discussing how much debries was left of the planet...

(I am sure someone from military filled actual report to science teams and requested improvements but I haven´t read that)

[jarjarloves]

Ehm what evidence of that statement is anywhere? Han droped out of hyperspace somewhere in vicinity of Alderran probably sufficiently far away so he did not smash into planets mass shadow (that is unhealthy for SW hyperdrives) (or you know... crush accidentaly into leaving ships)

 

So some asteroids made it to where he was, his sensors werent registring a planet... (but since it missed something like a deathstar I would not put much faith in them anyway)... I do not remember Tarkin or Vader discussing how much debries was left of the planet...

(I am sure someone from military filled actual report to science teams and requested improvements but I haven´t read that)

true and his first line is

 

"What the...? Aw, we've come out of hyperspace into a meteor

shower. Some kind of asteroid collision. It's not on any of the

charts."

Edited August 10, 2012 by jarjarloves

[PaerisKiran]

edit: Yes I know of Delta Base Zero but it goes against canon as I stated those weapons aren't that powerful.

 

Not really since it is rather vague statement that says that one star destroyer can do it... it just does not specify the timeframe it needs... nor the actual size of planet... If it was, lets say Mars it would be much easier than with Earth.

[Aurbere]

I saw this and had to laugh

 

 

But yeah no the calculations are still wrong they also go against the script and movie as well. Like I said before the Asteroid explodes the same way when it is hit by a Turbo Laser and when it hits the Star Destroyer. The explosion is the same even though it is not hit by a turbolaser THEREFORE the power is in the asteroid not the turbolaser.

 

ALSO IF a Turbo laser was a strong as the tech manuals say then 100 Star Destroyers COULD blow up a planet. BUT

 

Remember Han Solo says " The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take

a thousand ships with more fire power than I've..."

 

So clearly the Empire never had the power to destroy a planet before. This is also backed up by how everyone in the Empire talks about how the ability to blow up a planet makes them the ultimate power in the universe. So that means they obviously never had that power before.

 

The whole asteroid explosion argument is flawed. Remember that technology was limited during the time of filming so they probably used the same animation for the asteroid exploding via turbolaser as they did for it being destroyed by crashing into the ship.

 

As for the Ewok arrow piercing Stormtrooper armor. An arrow fired with enough velocity can do damage to many hard materials(I don't know the exact velocity so I wont name any). And stormtrooper armor is not metal. It is made of plastoid, which is used to protect against energy projectiles and kinetic weaponry. In the movies it is portrayed as being very weak, when it is in fact the best armor a standard soldier could have. The armor is similar to Kevlar. But none of this explains how an arrow pierced the armor. That goes back to simple physics. Physically, a stone arrow with enough mass and velocity could pierce the stormtrooper armor, depending on the circumstances.

[jarjarloves]

The whole asteroid explosion argument is flawed. Remember that technology was limited during the time of filming so they probably used the same animation for the asteroid exploding via turbolaser as they did for it being destroyed by crashing into the ship.

 

As for the Ewok arrow piercing Stormtrooper armor. An arrow fired with enough velocity can do damage to many hard materials(I don't know the exact velocity so I wont name any). And stormtrooper armor is not metal. It is made of plastoid, which is used to protect against energy projectiles and kinetic weaponry. In the movies it is portrayed as being very weak, when it is in fact the best armor a standard soldier could have. The armor is similar to Kevlar. But none of this explains how an arrow pierced the armor. That goes back to simple physics. Physically, a stone arrow with enough mass and velocity could pierce the stormtrooper armor, depending on the circumstances.

 

I would agree with you that it is flawed if it wasn't for 2 things

 

1. Star Wars canon states how it happens in the movies is how it happens there basically is no suspension of disbielf. Like when Anakin jumps out of a speeder and falls 20 stories to land on top of another speeder. The official explination is that happend and he used the force to slow him down.

 

2. Lucas has gone back and added scenes and updated many special effects. He has gotten rid of the technical errors ProffesorWalsh was complaining about. He even updated blaster fire and explosions. So there is no reason to think that the asteroid doesn't explode when it hits the Star Destroyer.

 

If it was any other movie I would agree with you but since Lucas has gone back multiple times to update the special effects it is no longer a flawed argument and must be how it happened.

Edited August 10, 2012 by jarjarloves

[jarjarloves]

Not really since it is rather vague statement that says that one star destroyer can do it... it just does not specify the timeframe it needs... nor the actual size of planet... If it was, lets say Mars it would be much easier than with Earth.

 

Remember Han Solo says " The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take

a thousand ships with more fire power than I've..."

 

 

that's not so vauge.

[PaerisKiran]

Remember Han Solo says " The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take

a thousand ships with more fire power than I've..."

 

 

that's not so vauge.

 

BDZ effectively ends with melting planets crust... they can not make it go away completly... even if empire magnificiently put its 22000 star destroyers and support ships to the job.

 

(And generaly the fleet was actualy rather small compared to volume of space it policed... (which worked mosly just because most planets had negligable populace.)

[Aurbere]

I would agree with you that it is flawed if it wasn't for 2 things

 

1. Star Wars canon states how it happens in the movies is how it happens there basically is no suspension of disbielf. Like when Anakin jumps out of a speeder and falls 20 stories to land on top of another speeder. The official explination is that happend and he used the force to slow him down.

 

2. Lucas has gone back and added scenes and updated many special effects. He has gotten rid of the technical errors ProffesorWalsh was complaining about. He even updated blaster fire and explosions. So there is no reason to think that the asteroid doesn't explode when it hits the Star Destroyer.

 

If it was any other movie I would agree with you but since Lucas has gone back multiple times to update the special effects it is no longer a flawed argument and must be how it happened.

 

See now I didn't know that, I guess I souldn't be surprised, Lucas changes a lot of things as new technology becomes available.

[Nydus]

Star Trek tech is the most unscientific and inconsistent tech in Science Fiction.

 

1/2 disagree (Star Trek is more scientific than Star Wars). Star Trek technology is based on the most futuristic technology that space program engineers could imagine at the time. Literally, the Star Trek team asked the engineers behind the Apollo missions for their wishlist of technology that might seem fantastical, but was based on real science. As such the technology of the OS and TNG was not considered particularly feasible at the tiem, but within the realm of legitimate scientific debate.

 

This is why since the OS much of of the technology has come to pass (e.g. communicators -> the bloody chief engineer of the first mobile phone admits he got the idea from coming across a Star Trek episode), is now considered possible with current technology (e.g. cloaking device -> optical and temporal cloaking technology is being tested right now), is considered theoretically possible but not feasible with current technology (e.g. transporters -> feasible on an atomic level right now, not feasible - potentially ever - on a large scale), or is now being seriously debated by physicists as to whether it was feasible (e.g. warp technology -> Alcubierre Drive).

 

You can literally go on scientific journals right now and read about ALL of the above technologies I mentioned. What makes this interesting is that the average public thought this stuff was ludicrous in the 1960s.

 

There is better science in sci-fi than Star Trek, sure, but every example I can think of comes from written works (e.g. Arthur C. Clarke). However, I can't really think of an example of a TV show that was able to get as much right. Certainly not Star Wars, which is essentially fantasy (i.e. "magic").

 

ProfessorWalsh: I challenge you to name a uniquely futuristic Star Wars device that has comes anywhere close to the above? If you can't, you might just want to drop that part of the argument.

 

How do droids work? I dunno. vs. Data where we have detailed information as to how his brain works, how much memory he can hold, how fast he processes etc.

 

How does the Millennium Falcon have gravity? I dunno vs. the detailed explanation of gravity fields you get from the Star Trek technical manual.

 

How does the force work? Magic... and there are these... things in our blood...

 

Why I 1/2 agree (Star Wars is more consistent than Star Trek) below:

 

Faster speeds are generaly called "transwarp" and it is either quantum slipstream, or some sort of artificial wormhole (like Borg Transwarp hub...). And Romulan Neutral Zone is rather close to Earth. (Archer stumbled into it with warp 4 ship after year of flight which definitely was NOT a straight line...)

 

You pick your series and you get a different answer. In DS9 the trip takes about a week. In TNG and the OS it is implied that it is much further away than this (so "far away" that they can't communicate via subspace with Star Fleet without extensive delays, so they are "on their own").

 

This is then completely contradicted in ST:FC when they listen to a battle with a Borg Cube, live, in the Sol System and then decide to join, and are able to join said battle before the battle ends. Star Trek battles do not take months, weeks, or days. They take hours, as implied in the movie.

 

Unfortunately -- and while it is conceivable that the distance from Earth to the border has wider and closer points -- the idea that Romulan Neutral Zone is "hours" from Earth is a complete contradiction to OS and TNG episodes that take place along the Neutral Zone.

 

Contradictions abound after the end of the TNG series.

Edited August 10, 2012 by Nydus

[PaerisKiran]

1/2 disagree (Star Trek is more scientific than Star Wars). ou pick your series and you get a different answer. In DS9 the trip takes about a week. In TNG and the OS it is implied that it is much further away than this (so "far away" that they can't communicate via subspace with Star Fleet without extensive delays, so they are "on their own").

 

This is then completely contradicted in ST:FC when they listen to a battle with a Borg Cube, live, in the Sol System and then decide to join, and are able to join said battle before the battle ends. Star Trek battles do not take months, weeks, or days. They take hours, as implied in the movie.

 

Unfortunately -- and while it is conceivable that the distance from Earth to the border has wider and closer points -- the idea that Romulan Neutral Zone is "hours" from Earth is a complete contradiction to OS and TNG episodes that take place along the Neutral Zone.

 

 

 

Contradictions abound after the end of the TNG series.

 

At what warp factor? Federation (and generaly all Alpha quadrant species) restricted non-emergency warp travel to warp 6... after producing one subspace rift because of it.

 

And even goind warp 8 was not considered normal during shakedowns of Enterprise D. (It could go 9,5 for really short time, but it taxed the drive too much to point of physical degradation).

 

Plus... the battle they listened to was in SOL system? Here I thought Starfleet tried (and failed) to intercept it sooner. (Since Earth Defence fleet consisted of few Akira´s, Defiant and even some Reliant class (100 years old) cruisers.

 

If you actualy look what Admiral Paris was sending to intercept borg sphere in last episode of Voyager you can clearly see a Constitution class cruiser.

You were most likely only looking on what was left of first interception and few scrapyard ships federation pulled together fast enough.

Not to mention Cube was reported as seriously damaged. (which may indicate it did not aproach Earth at full power.

Edited August 10, 2012 by PaerisKiran

[Smuglebunny]

Hey I realize this thread is supposed to be non magic just tech v tech. But as far as universes go, the most powerfull thing in the ST universe can beat the most powerfull thing in the SW Universe.

 

Cuz the most powerfull thing in the star trek universe is omnipotent. And the most powerfull thing in the star wars universe seems to be this emperor thats currently in the game. And he seems to need to kill things for power or some crap and Q is just omnipotent.

 

So the Star Trek Uni will always beat the Star wars uni cuz you cannot overcome omnipotence unless you have at least the same level of control. And no one is that powerfull in the SW uni.

 

BUT I AGREE that without any force or magic or anything the STAR WARS uni wins hands down. They are like 50000 years more advanced.

[Nydus]

At what warp factor? Federation (and generaly all Alpha quadrant species) restricted non-emergency warp travel to warp 6... after producing one subspace rift because of it.

 

In the OS and TNG (prior to the subspace rift episode) it is established that the Romulan Neutral is significantly distant from Federation Space, so much so that they cannot communicate with Star Fleet without significant delay.

 

We then have an instantaneous communication from the Fleet to the NCC-1701 E in ST:FC. It is then implied that the NCC-1701 E travels from the neutral zone to the Earth in a matter of hours. I've heard it estimated that the trip would take, at Warp 9.6, 4 days based on Star Charts of the Alpha, Beta, Delta and Gamma quadrant that have been released. I have no idea whether these are canon/official, but it doesn't really matter since the main contradictions happen on-screen.

 

Star Trek is (was) better than this. You are allowed to do mental gymnastics to make everything fit, but eventually rationality should prevail and you'll realize you've created your own Ptolemaic Model (i.e. you have an overly complicated explanation for phenomena that are more easily explained by something simpler). In this case, the writing teams of DS:9, Voyager, and the TNG movies simply got it wrong. The Romulan Neutral Zone is not near Earth.

 

Do what I do: consider everything after the TNG series as non-canon. Vastly improves the ST experience. As entertaining as the later series and movies may have been, they went off the rails in terms of consistency and the writers stopped even trying to link events to science. A very different attitude to the first two series, which is why they are superior .

 

- Arcada

Edited August 10, 2012 by Nydus

[Nydus]

Cuz the most powerfull thing in the star trek universe is omnipotent. And the most powerfull thing in the star wars universe seems to be this emperor thats currently in the game. And he seems to need to kill things for power or some crap and Q is just omnipotent.

 

The OPer removed the "force" from his equation, so I think to be fair we have to remove Q. With Q, the Battle is over in a finger-snap. Actually, within a finger snap the battle could never have happened if Q decided to erase the Empire and Republic from all time so they never existed. Not a fair fight .

 

BUT I AGREE that without any force or magic or anything the STAR WARS uni wins hands down. They are like 50000 years more advanced.

 

Really? What about transporters? What about replicators?

 

Everyone keeps trying to make it clear cut when it really isn't. Overall, the technology you see inside a Federation Star Ship is generally more sophisticated than what you see inside an Imperial or Republic Vessel.

 

- Ord'os

[Maaruin]

The OPer removed the "force" from his equation, so I think to be fair we have to remove Q. With Q, the Battle is over in a finger-snap. Actually, within a finger snap the battle could never have happened if Q decided to erase the Empire and Republic from all time so they never existed. Not a fair fight .

 

But Q wouldn't do that. It's far to interesting. If anything, Q would cause it. He would also adjust the tech levels to make the game more interesting.

And then try to teach Picard some kind of lesson with this. I don't know which lesson though.

[Nydus]

But Q wouldn't do that. It's far to interesting. If anything, Q would cause it. He would also adjust the tech levels to make the game more interesting.

And then try to teach Picard some kind of lesson with this. I don't know which lesson though.

 

True 'dat. He'd probably try to make the conflict as convoluted as possible and would flash in to make fun of the key players.

 

Imagine Q flashing in bugging Palpatine.

 

- Arcada

[Sipah]

But Q wouldn't do that. It's far to interesting. If anything, Q would cause it. He would also adjust the tech levels to make the game more interesting.

And then try to teach Picard some kind of lesson with this. I don't know which lesson though.

 

Check out this great piece of fan fic titled, 'Conquest' by Michael Wong: http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Fanfic/Conquest/Conquest.pdf

 

It has it all: Picard, the Death Star, the Borg, and even Q who does what he does best!

 

I'd be interested to hear what anyone else thinks of this work.

[jarjarloves]

Check out this great piece of fan fic titled, 'Conquest' by Michael Wong: http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Fanfic/Conquest/Conquest.pdf

 

It has it all: Picard, the Death Star, the Borg, and even Q who does what he does best!

 

I'd be interested to hear what anyone else thinks of this work.

 

dear god... Fan fac and by Micheal Wong??

 

I consider fan fics to be the lowest form of entertainment. They are just.... ugggghhh. I honestly can't even begin to explain how much I loath fan fiction.

 

Then you add in that Micheal Wong wrote it?? He makes me ashamed to ever admit that I have even watched Star Wars let alone like it.

 

I think i'll pass.