Fire>
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/12/1213_021213_tvstartrek.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warp_drive
Warp-speed is not completely out of this world scifi nonsense. It basically involves pressing spacetime in front of a vessel and streching it out behind it, so the ship doesn't move faster than light relative to this warp-bubble, but the bubble itself exceeds light-speed. To do this, though, we need matter with some rather peculiar properties.
Well, they do call it science-fiction because it is partially based in science 😛
Is there really a need for this debate?
I don't like Star Trek for the simple reason that it never caught my interest. I don't know why, but I could never get into it.
And I think Lord Melkor wins for best comment in this thread 😂 Go Power Rangers!!!
*feels like a 7 year old again*
Fire> Oh, the time-horizon on this is staggering. But theoretically the Einstein questions don’t go “BEEP-WRONG”. And those equations are a test, if you like, on whether or not a particular kind of spacetime curvature – such as a warp bubble – is possible.
We need
1) more money in theoretical physics.
2) That a lot of theoretical physicist FINALLY abandon string-theory
3) Good, hard old-fashioned research in quantum-gravity
Then… Saturn in an hour or less 🙂
Originally posted by Lana
Meh, they always had crappy villians.....but hey, as a 7 year old (which is how old I was when it started in the US) you don't care much about those kinda details 😉
But as I watch cartoons with my 4 years old nephew, I can see the diffrence between good and bad cartoons.
Like new Scooby Doo and Transformers versus old ones..... No context. And your sig makes me feel dirty. I want my girlfriend 🙁
Re: Star Trek versus Star Wars: The Debate is Opened
Originally posted by Twilight Janick
Widebeam phasers can kill Jedi, since lightsabers can't deflect a widebeam phaser, because they're not wide enough to entirely deflect it. Also, the Death Star superlaser's range is 80,000 km and other SW weapons are not ranged more than 120 km. If you use ST Starfleet Command's scales, the superlaser is equal to 8 and the other weapons is what the game considers point-blank range.
Hah! I like the 'if you use the Starfleet Command scale' comment. So, if you use the insanely proportioned board game, which has ships firing at hundreds of thousands of km away, and not the tv series which... doesn't... then yes, it does that!
And likewise, if I use my totally made up Ush SW board game rules, which I just made using two pieces of cardboard and Sticky back plastic, then SW weapons can fire between GALAXIES! Yeah, man, that, like, totally rocks! And Darth Ush is more powerful than Vader and Yoda and Superman combined!
Re: Re: Star Trek versus Star Wars: The Debate is Opened
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Hah! I like the 'if you use the Starfleet Command scale' comment. So, if you use the insanely proportioned board game, which ha ships firing at hundreds of thousands of km away, and not the tv series which... doesn't... then yes, it does that!And likewise, if I use my totally made up Ush SW board game rules, which I just made using two pieces of cardboard and Sticky back plastic, then SW weapons can fire between GALAXIES! Yeah, man, that, like, totally rocks! And Darth Ush is more powerful than Vader and Yoda and Superman combined!
Yes, be our Dark(Darth) God and lead us to the galactic conquest! I would follow!
Originally posted by The Omega
Fire>http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/12/1213_021213_tvstartrek.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warp_drive
Warp-speed is not completely out of this world scifi nonsense. It basically involves pressing spacetime in front of a vessel and streching it out behind it, so the ship doesn't move faster than light relative to this warp-bubble, but the bubble itself exceeds light-speed. To do this, though, we need matter with some rather peculiar properties.
Yes and a great deal of energy a Prof at Swansea has done some calculations on this🙂
ROFL Ush.....!! That reminds me....
I think the view that Star Trek is always more factually based than Star Wars is flawed...
Sure. It recognises earth-science theories more blatantly, but
Star Trek has also broken its own rules for shaped storytelling....
Like this for example: In Voyager (Centuries of technical evolution later than the first 6 movies) the crew take HOW LONG to get from one side of the galaxy to the other??
Wasn't it a projected 70-odd years at max warp?
Yet in 'ST:The final frontier' The Enterprise just breezes to the center of the galaxy in like a day...?!? Two days....?!??
I recognise that there are at least attempts by Star Trek to explain the physics of what occurrs but they aren't totally impervious to flaws...
Besides... The Falcon is...........cooler. tongue
So given that it is all sci-fi fantasy to a degree, just watch what you enjoy... I love both....