Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war

  • 1084 Replies
  • 183189 Views
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #30 on: October 24, 2010, 07:52:01 AM »
You're forgetting that wars are based on strategy and tactics, , not who's got the biggest/most efficient gun. Obviously this comes into it, but because most Star Destroyer captains in Star Wars tend to be complete retards then I'll say Star Trek.

Actually, with all due respect this is an argument on ignorance.  Star Wars has plenty of good generals.

And even if Star Trek has superior tactics/strategy (which they don't, given that they use ancient galley style warfare and get stomped by melee weapon charges), it wouldn't really matter.  As I have calculated, a Star Trek ship would do as much damage to a star destroyer as a guy with a stick would do to a tank.  Not to mention that they wouldn't even be able to reach the Star Wars galaxy.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #31 on: October 24, 2010, 08:09:54 AM »
Lrn2 guerilla warfare.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #32 on: October 24, 2010, 12:16:14 PM »
Lrn2 guerilla warfare.
hard to do with capital ships which appears to be all the federation has.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #33 on: October 24, 2010, 12:19:17 PM »
If the numbers in the OP are correct (not like I'm going to check them) then I agree with the OP.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #34 on: October 24, 2010, 12:31:48 PM »
Lrn2 guerilla warfare.
hard to do with capital ships which appears to be all the federation has.
Still, a torpedo up a destroyer's jet pipe (w/ever it is in sci-fi) should blow it to shizzle.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12744
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #35 on: October 24, 2010, 12:46:32 PM »
The numbers are irrelevant when we don't know what the SW universe has by the 24th century...

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #36 on: October 24, 2010, 01:26:35 PM »
How could I forget rule 87b part 3.5.8 of the "rules of imaginary battles between fictional individuals, species, factions, organisations or groups"?:

"All imaginary battles must take into account the relevant time-frames of each competitor and a specific time-frame for the battle must be set"




*

Lorddave

  • 18295
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #37 on: October 24, 2010, 01:37:59 PM »
Quote
It has been suggested that laser gun/rifle/cannon, ect. is simply a slang term and so-called lasers operate like other blasters, but use an actual laser to superheat the blaster gas into plasma or energise it into charged particles, rather than a superconductor or other medium.
That's the same thing as a phaser.  So for arguments sake, let's say a blaster/turbolaser works on the same principal.

Imperial II-class Star Destroyer
>9.28 10^24 W power output.
To get this, their ship must use over 103,111 Tons of fuel per second.

Venator-class Star Destroyer's main reactor annihilated the equivalent of 40,000 tons of matter each second using hypermatter to generate 3.6x10^24 W.
Matter/Anti-matter reaction using the same fuel would create 3.6x10^27 W.
So Federation power generation is far more efficient.


What is the efficiency of Federation power generation?  Even if it's antimatter I don't remember there being any mention of their efficiency since a real life antimatter reactor still wouldn't be 100% efficient.

Granted, antimatter is probably more efficient, but the matter that Star Trek uses for antimatter isn't as dense as hypermatter.  Therefore, a Star Wars reactor of a certain size would be orders of magnitude more powerful than a Star Trek reactor of the same size.

As an example, the Death Star's reactor core was equivalent to millions of our sun.
Actually it is 100%.  They take the wasteful byproducts such as radiation and convert it back into usable energy.
And BTW: Total BS.  The Death Star's reactor is not more powerful than a million suns.  If it really did have that much energy the explosion from the Death Star being destroyed would have destroyed several SOLAR SYSTEMS!  Since the explosion was minor, it's not that powerful.  I don't care what fan-boy site says otherwise, just because someone says "The Death Star has all the energy of the Universe" doesn't make it true.

Quote
Quote

Not only that but Star Wars ships require the use of exotic matter called Hyper Matter which doesn't exist in the Star Trek Universe.  

And?
Well if you want to compare two different universes with two different laws of physics go ahead but then I'll just add in Red Matter and say that you're fucked because I could wipe out your galaxy with one shot.
Red Matter + Subspace Weapons = Subspace powered supernova.  End of all life in a galaxy.

Quote
Quote
Star Wars may have bigger numbers but they require HUGE amounts of fuel and reactors to do it as well as expoti matter.  It should be noted that an equal amount of Hypermatter reaction does not equal anti-matter/matter reaction.

Yet Star Wars in terms of industrial production FAR, FAR outmatches Star Trek by at least an order of magnitude of 1000, so they can make more hypermatter than Star Trek can make antimatter.  A single star destroyer has a greater power generation than the entire Federation fleet.

Also, hypermatter is EXTREMELY dense, and therefore a HUGE amount of it can fit into the reactors of star destroyers.  In comparison, antimatter may be more efficient, but a Star Trek reactor of the same size as a Star Wars reactor would not be NEARLY as powerful as the Star Wars hypermatter reactor.
Yes, the industrial capacity is greater but slower.  Plus, the Empire is AT WAR!  When you're at war, your industrial production tends to be higher than if you're mostly at peace.

And if hypermatter is as dense as you say then a single ship landing on another ship would increase the fuel requirements incredibly.  The wiki says that 6.4kg of fuel are used every second by a starfighter.  Hell, the starfighters should have a significant gravitational pull when fully fueled up.  Just crashing into snow, for example, would kill any inhabitant of the fighter since the momentum (V*M) would be greater than a small asteroid hitting the surface of the Earth.  Assuming those starfighters could fly for several hours fully fueled up.
[/quote]

Quote
Quote

Also, Star Wars ships use hyperspace paths, limiting safe movement to only explored areas.  So in the Milky Way Galaxy, they would not have any navigational information or hyperspace paths so they would not be able to travel.


Yet they've mapped out every part of the Star Wars galaxy.  The Federation has yet to explore 1/10th of their galaxy, and their slow warp drive would take decades or more to mount any attack on Star Wars.  Meanwhile, Star Wars can send probe droids to scout Star Trek territory and plot routes.  Star Trek wouldn't even be able to reach Star Wars.

It's like comparing the United States to the Roman Empire.  If the two were somehow in a war, the latter wouldn't even be able to reach the former.
No they haven't.  Show me where it claims every single system has been mapped out.  Give quotes please.

Quote
Quote
Next, a federation phaser, standard issue, is capable of vaporizing a human, cutting through thick metal, ect....  An imperial blaster is not.

Federation phasers generally don't have iron sights and don't even have trigger guards.  Oh, and the Federation doesn't have armor, tanks, artillery, etc.  In a ground battle even modern day Earth would curbstomp an equal Federation "army".  I'm not kidding.  Heck, the gungans from Star Wars: TPM would have a good chance against an equal Federation army.
1. They do.  This clearly shows your ignorance of Star Trek:
http://images.auctionworks.com/hi/3/3282/phaser_rifle_2-21.jpg

2. As for armor: They do.  Tanks and artillery?  Probably but since Star Trek is all about space, you don't see those in the shows.  It's like seeing a tank while watching McHale's Navy.  Only a few times did we see ground warfare and that was in a cave.  Also, they had subspace cloaked mines which is something your universe does not have.  Very deadly stuff.

3. Third, the gungan shields blocked energy but not physical matter.  Makes me wonder what kind of shield they are using because all you need is a transporter and a torpedo.  Done.

Quote
Quote
They also lack transporters as well as sophisticated computer systems.  Star Trek computers run using subspace communication which allows faster than light communications between two modules of the core.  The Millenium Falcon took over a minute to calculate a hyperspace path using an extremely fast Nav computer.  


With all due respect, this is bullshit.  Sentient droids are commonplace among Star Wars, including C3PO, made by Anakin when he was a slave using random parts, and holds more languages than Data does.  The reason why it took the Falcon longer is because said hyperspace path was thousands of light years.  A small model globe that fit in Obi Wan's hand mapped out every planet in the galaxy and the gravitational orbits.
No that's BS.  C3PO isn't said to be sentient but I'll give you that. Data's language capability is nearly infinite.  Universal Translator > Pre-programed languages.  Also, Data is stronger, faster, a hell of a lot harder to destroy, and has full range of motion with his limbs.

Ooohhh, thousands of lightyears.  So a straight line isn't good enough?  What, is there galaxy so densely packed that you can't go a few lightears without hitting a star in any direction?  Please... you don't even know how far Allderan is from Tattoine.  It's never stated.
Also, The Falcon can only make .5 past light speed.  And if you're going to tell me that it's "non-Hyperdrive" speed then I'm going to have to tell you that it's in violation of physics and therefore impossible.

Quote
Frankly, Star Wars only has bigger numbers because they build bigger, not smarter.  The Enterprise-D doesn't use the same amount of power because it doesn't have to.  
I will say that production is not as great but since much of the galaxy is under one rule, that helps.

As for transporters, they can't go through shields, and a Federation boarding party would get stomped by defensive crew from Star Wars.

No, Star Wars is far more powerful in practically every way.  They're stronger, faster, more durable, larger, etc.

To put it in perspective, a Pelleaon class star destroyer could take on the entire Federation fleet and come out unscathed.  Star Wars is simply far more powerful than Star Trek.
[/quote]
No it couldn't.  Not unless it's in God Mode.  What's the armor made of?  Hypersteel, capable of flying through a black hole without any damage? Hell, why don't I just throw in neutronium which is virtually indestructible.  And Omega which is the single most powerful source of energy in the Universe.  Since you're going to claim that both of those are incredibly inferior to a hand held Star Wars blaster and armor, the argument is clearly irrelevant since you bend the laws of physics to your own will.

Quote
Quote
Also, Starfighters are the primary way to attack capital ships.  

With all due respect, bullshit.  Where did you get this from?  Evidence suggests that starfighters are mainly for striking at critical systems while the main damage is done with turbolasers, which even the ones from a transport ship have the firepower tens of millions of nuclear bombs per blast.  Also, starfighters are perhaps more powerful than Federation ships.  I'm not kidding.
10s of millions of nuclear bombs per blast?  Wow, that's total BS.  Are you telling me that a single transport ship could wipe out a planet with one shot?  Wow, it's amazing that the Empire had to build a Death Star....  ::)
You're just BSing.  Nothing ever seen in the shows, books, ect... would indicate that a single transport ship's turbo lasers could wipe out a whole planet surface in one shot.  It takes a fleet of ships constantly firing to reduce a city to ruins which indicates that each blast is not nearly as powerful as you claim.

Quote
Quote
Since a federation targeting system can take those things out (they're much too slow) starfighters wouldn't even make it within firing range.  

Again, bullshit.  Federation ships had to go within a few kilometers to hit a HUGE BORG CUBE!

Also, starfighters outrange Federation ships.

Besides, a single blast from a turbolaser would literally blast a Federation ship into smithereens.  
Yes, about 10 KM.
A starfighter needs what?  2 before it's lasers will hit?
Starfighers do not outrange Federation ships.  How much fuel do they have?  Probably only a few hours worth.  Any more would require more space than the ship likely has.  Unless Hypermatter has more density than a Black Hole.

And, again, your premesis is false.  How much energy does each single turbolaser produce?  No wait, let me guess...
1x10^100000000 Joules.
You know, enough to blast clean through a planet with one shot.   ::)

Quote
Quote
 That leaves only capital ships.  Since hyperspace is not safe within an unknown galaxy and Star Wars starships lack long range sensors, All federation ships could easily escape and see any fleet coming 30 lightyears away.

Bullshit.  Star Wars hyperdrives are faster than Star Trek FTL sensors.

Oh, and again, bullshit.  Star Wars does indeed have FTL sensors.  In fact, they're so advanced that said sensor waves or whatever they are could travel across the galaxy without any noticeable lag.  Seriously.  Star Wars technology may be somewhat made up super-magi-tech, which is why they win.
Uh huh...
Where is it stated the exact travel time between one end of the Galaxy to the other and the exact distance?  

And if it's super-magi-tech then they can win anything, even against itself.  And it's not somewhat, it's ALL of it.  Or all of what you're talking about anyway.

Quote
Quote

And since they lack replicators, any damage dealt could not be repaired until they set up some kind of industrial processing on a planet or traveled between galaxies.

"Any damage dealt" - did you read my calculations?  Any damage dealt by the Federation would be completely insignificant.  Like, as much damage as a caveman with a stick would do to a tank.
Again, what are the hulls made of?  Hypersteel, capable of surviving almost any damage?  Why don't you just say what you want to say: Star Wars ships are invulnerable to anything except other Star Wars ships.

Quote
Quote
Of course since hyperspace requires a tachyon based energy field, a simple tachyon pulse on the inverse wavelength would neutralize any hyperdrive.  In fact, flooding the ship with tachyons at an inverse frequency would probably neutralize their entire power grid since hypermatter is tachyon based.  That's something a standard federation deflector array could do.

Where did you get this?
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Tachyon
Quote
Hypermatter was composed of tachyonic particles and when these charged particles were exposed to the constraints of the lower dimensions of realspace produced near-limitless energy.
Of course since the energy is near-limitless SW wins due to ignoring the laws of physics.  So congrats:
SW wins based on magic.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #38 on: October 24, 2010, 02:17:59 PM »
Quote
It has been suggested that laser gun/rifle/cannon, ect. is simply a slang term and so-called lasers operate like other blasters, but use an actual laser to superheat the blaster gas into plasma or energise it into charged particles, rather than a superconductor or other medium.
That's the same thing as a phaser.  So for arguments sake, let's say a blaster/turbolaser works on the same principal.

Imperial II-class Star Destroyer
>9.28 10^24 W power output.
To get this, their ship must use over 103,111 Tons of fuel per second.

Venator-class Star Destroyer's main reactor annihilated the equivalent of 40,000 tons of matter each second using hypermatter to generate 3.6x10^24 W.
Matter/Anti-matter reaction using the same fuel would create 3.6x10^27 W.
So Federation power generation is far more efficient.


What is the efficiency of Federation power generation?  Even if it's antimatter I don't remember there being any mention of their efficiency since a real life antimatter reactor still wouldn't be 100% efficient.

Granted, antimatter is probably more efficient, but the matter that Star Trek uses for antimatter isn't as dense as hypermatter.  Therefore, a Star Wars reactor of a certain size would be orders of magnitude more powerful than a Star Trek reactor of the same size.

As an example, the Death Star's reactor core was equivalent to millions of our sun.
Actually it is 100%.  They take the wasteful byproducts such as radiation and convert it back into usable energy.
And BTW: Total BS.  The Death Star's reactor is not more powerful than a million suns.  If it really did have that much energy the explosion from the Death Star being destroyed would have destroyed several SOLAR SYSTEMS!  Since the explosion was minor, it's not that powerful.  I don't care what fan-boy site says otherwise, just because someone says "The Death Star has all the energy of the Universe" doesn't make it true.

[/quote]

Sorry, maybe it was more like that of a single standard star.  Either way, to generate a planet busting attack would require a reactor of amazing power.


Quote
Quote
Quote

Not only that but Star Wars ships require the use of exotic matter called Hyper Matter which doesn't exist in the Star Trek Universe.  

And?
Well if you want to compare two different universes with two different laws of physics go ahead but then I'll just add in Red Matter and say that you're fucked because I could wipe out your galaxy with one shot.
Red Matter + Subspace Weapons = Subspace powered supernova.  End of all life in a galaxy.

What?  Red matter took several minutes to destroy Vulcan.  Oh, and they needed to use a giant drill that a 200 gigaton turbolaser could easily destroy.  

If you want to add in superweapons, Star Wars wins even more.  Centerpoint station can destroy planets and stars (or even MOVE them) from across the galaxy.
Quote
Quote
Quote
Star Wars may have bigger numbers but they require HUGE amounts of fuel and reactors to do it as well as expoti matter.  It should be noted that an equal amount of Hypermatter reaction does not equal anti-matter/matter reaction.

Yet Star Wars in terms of industrial production FAR, FAR outmatches Star Trek by at least an order of magnitude of 1000, so they can make more hypermatter than Star Trek can make antimatter.  A single star destroyer has a greater power generation than the entire Federation fleet.

Also, hypermatter is EXTREMELY dense, and therefore a HUGE amount of it can fit into the reactors of star destroyers.  In comparison, antimatter may be more efficient, but a Star Trek reactor of the same size as a Star Wars reactor would not be NEARLY as powerful as the Star Wars hypermatter reactor.
Yes, the industrial capacity is greater but slower.  Plus, the Empire is AT WAR!  When you're at war, your industrial production tends to be higher than if you're mostly at peace.

And if hypermatter is as dense as you say then a single ship landing on another ship would increase the fuel requirements incredibly.  The wiki says that 6.4kg of fuel are used every second by a starfighter.  Hell, the starfighters should have a significant gravitational pull when fully fueled up.  Just crashing into snow, for example, would kill any inhabitant of the fighter since the momentum (V*M) would be greater than a small asteroid hitting the surface of the Earth.  Assuming those starfighters could fly for several hours fully fueled up.

"greater but slower"?  Firstly, since when were we talking about the Empire?  Secondly, Star Wars is in terms of planet count at least 1000 times larger than the Federation.  Star Wars planets are also far more populated than Star Trek planets (given that Star Wars planets have mostly been settled for tens of thousands of years compared to most Federation planets which are a few hundred years old at best except for Earth).  Thirdly, Star Wars has lots of droids and repulsorlift craft.

Hypermatter is indeed dense; that's the only way they could fit that much fuel into that small of a space.  As for the gravitational issues, Star Wars has anti-gravity tech, as cited in numerous sources.



Quote
Quote

Also, Star Wars ships use hyperspace paths, limiting safe movement to only explored areas.  So in the Milky Way Galaxy, they would not have any navigational information or hyperspace paths so they would not be able to travel.


Yet they've mapped out every part of the Star Wars galaxy.  The Federation has yet to explore 1/10th of their galaxy, and their slow warp drive would take decades or more to mount any attack on Star Wars.  Meanwhile, Star Wars can send probe droids to scout Star Trek territory and plot routes.  Star Trek wouldn't even be able to reach Star Wars.

It's like comparing the United States to the Roman Empire.  If the two were somehow in a war, the latter wouldn't even be able to reach the former.
No they haven't.  Show me where it claims every single system has been mapped out.  Give quotes please.

[/quote]

Did you watch AOTC or read the novel?  The Jedi Archives had a database of every star system in the galaxy (except for Kamino since it was deleted from the archives).  Jocasta said that if a planet doesn't show up in the archives, it doesn't exist.  That's pretty darn absolute.

Quote

Quote
Quote
Next, a federation phaser, standard issue, is capable of vaporizing a human, cutting through thick metal, ect....  An imperial blaster is not.

Federation phasers generally don't have iron sights and don't even have trigger guards.  Oh, and the Federation doesn't have armor, tanks, artillery, etc.  In a ground battle even modern day Earth would curbstomp an equal Federation "army".  I'm not kidding.  Heck, the gungans from Star Wars: TPM would have a good chance against an equal Federation army.
1. They do.  This clearly shows your ignorance of Star Trek:
http://images.auctionworks.com/hi/3/3282/phaser_rifle_2-21.jpg

2. As for armor: They do.  Tanks and artillery?  Probably but since Star Trek is all about space, you don't see those in the shows.  It's like seeing a tank while watching McHale's Navy.  Only a few times did we see ground warfare and that was in a cave.  Also, they had subspace cloaked mines which is something your universe does not have.  Very deadly stuff.

3. Third, the gungan shields blocked energy but not physical matter.  Makes me wonder what kind of shield they are using because all you need is a transporter and a torpedo.  Done.


1. I said GENERALLY
2. No, we don't see tanks and artillery in situations where they could have been helpful.
3. Really?  Then what about those AAT cannon shells hitting the shields?
Quote
Quote
They also lack transporters as well as sophisticated computer systems.  Star Trek computers run using subspace communication which allows faster than light communications between two modules of the core.  The Millenium Falcon took over a minute to calculate a hyperspace path using an extremely fast Nav computer.  


With all due respect, this is bullshit.  Sentient droids are commonplace among Star Wars, including C3PO, made by Anakin when he was a slave using random parts, and holds more languages than Data does.  The reason why it took the Falcon longer is because said hyperspace path was thousands of light years.  A small model globe that fit in Obi Wan's hand mapped out every planet in the galaxy and the gravitational orbits.
Quote
No that's BS.  C3PO isn't said to be sentient but I'll give you that. Data's language capability is nearly infinite.  Universal Translator > Pre-programed languages.  Also, Data is stronger, faster, a hell of a lot harder to destroy, and has full range of motion with his limbs.

Ooohhh, thousands of lightyears.  So a straight line isn't good enough?  What, is there galaxy so densely packed that you can't go a few lightears without hitting a star in any direction?  Please... you don't even know how far Allderan is from Tattoine.  It's never stated.
Also, The Falcon can only make .5 past light speed.  And if you're going to tell me that it's "non-Hyperdrive" speed then I'm going to have to tell you that it's in violation of physics and therefore impossible.


More ignorance.  Class 0.5 doesn't mean 0.5 past light speed.  This is typical Trekkie ignorance.  The Falcon was capable of crossing the galaxy in a matter of hours, and yet you claim that it can only go 0.5 past light speed?



Quote
Frankly, Star Wars only has bigger numbers because they build bigger, not smarter.  The Enterprise-D doesn't use the same amount of power because it doesn't have to.  
I will say that production is not as great but since much of the galaxy is under one rule, that helps.

As for transporters, they can't go through shields, and a Federation boarding party would get stomped by defensive crew from Star Wars.

No, Star Wars is far more powerful in practically every way.  They're stronger, faster, more durable, larger, etc.

To put it in perspective, a Pelleaon class star destroyer could take on the entire Federation fleet and come out unscathed.  Star Wars is simply far more powerful than Star Trek.
[/quote]
Quote
No it couldn't.  Not unless it's in God Mode.  What's the armor made of?  Hypersteel, capable of flying through a black hole without any damage? Hell, why don't I just throw in neutronium which is virtually indestructible.  And Omega which is the single most powerful source of energy in the Universe.  Since you're going to claim that both of those are incredibly inferior to a hand held Star Wars blaster and armor, the argument is clearly irrelevant since you bend the laws of physics to your own will.

It's called shielding.  Enough shielding so that, as I have calculated, the Enterprise would have to fire at over 1 billion times to get through.  Note that these are canon numbers.  If you don't agree with them, then I guess you'll have to concede.


Quote
Quote
Also, Starfighters are the primary way to attack capital ships.  

With all due respect, bullshit.  Where did you get this from?  Evidence suggests that starfighters are mainly for striking at critical systems while the main damage is done with turbolasers, which even the ones from a transport ship have the firepower tens of millions of nuclear bombs per blast.  Also, starfighters are perhaps more powerful than Federation ships.  I'm not kidding.
Quote
10s of millions of nuclear bombs per blast?  Wow, that's total BS.  Are you telling me that a single transport ship could wipe out a planet with one shot?  Wow, it's amazing that the Empire had to build a Death Star....  ::)

10s of millions of nuclear bombs could not destroy a planet.  I got that number from the 200 gigaton figure compared to the about 15 kiloton figure of the nuclear bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.

Quote
You're just BSing.  Nothing ever seen in the shows, books, ect... would indicate that a single transport ship's turbo lasers could wipe out a whole planet surface in one shot.  It takes a fleet of ships constantly firing to reduce a city to ruins which indicates that each blast is not nearly as powerful as you claim.


Star Wars: ICS states that the firepower of a medium turbolaser is 200 gigatons.



Quote
Quote
Since a federation targeting system can take those things out (they're much too slow) starfighters wouldn't even make it within firing range.  

Again, bullshit.  Federation ships had to go within a few kilometers to hit a HUGE BORG CUBE!

Also, starfighters outrange Federation ships.

Besides, a single blast from a turbolaser would literally blast a Federation ship into smithereens.  
Quote
Yes, about 10 KM.
A starfighter needs what?  2 before it's lasers will hit?
Starfighers do not outrange Federation ships.  How much fuel do they have?  Probably only a few hours worth.  Any more would require more space than the ship likely has.  Unless Hypermatter has more density than a Black Hole.

And, again, your premesis is false.  How much energy does each single turbolaser produce?  No wait, let me guess...
1x10^100000000 Joules.
You know, enough to blast clean through a planet with one shot.   ::)


More ignorance.  Why do you need that much fuel in space?  An X wing would need to thrust to max speed and then could cruise because THERE'S NO FRICTION IN SPACE (or no significant amount of it).

Actually, that many joules would not go through an Earth sized planet.  Nice try though.

Quote
Quote
 That leaves only capital ships.  Since hyperspace is not safe within an unknown galaxy and Star Wars starships lack long range sensors, All federation ships could easily escape and see any fleet coming 30 lightyears away.

Bullshit.  Star Wars hyperdrives are faster than Star Trek FTL sensors.

Oh, and again, bullshit.  Star Wars does indeed have FTL sensors.  In fact, they're so advanced that said sensor waves or whatever they are could travel across the galaxy without any noticeable lag.  Seriously.  Star Wars technology may be somewhat made up super-magi-tech, which is why they win.
Uh huh...
Where is it stated the exact travel time between one end of the Galaxy to the other and the exact distance?  

And if it's super-magi-tech then they can win anything, even against itself.  And it's not somewhat, it's ALL of it.  Or all of what you're talking about anyway.

[/quote]

There are times where people in Star Wars were communicating from across the galaxy in real time.  Star Wars sensors use the same methods of sensing as hypercomn waves (or whatever they are) use.


Quote
Quote

And since they lack replicators, any damage dealt could not be repaired until they set up some kind of industrial processing on a planet or traveled between galaxies.

"Any damage dealt" - did you read my calculations?  Any damage dealt by the Federation would be completely insignificant.  Like, as much damage as a caveman with a stick would do to a tank.
Again, what are the hulls made of?  Hypersteel, capable of surviving almost any damage?  Why don't you just say what you want to say: Star Wars ships are invulnerable to anything except other Star Wars ships.
[/quote]

SHIELDS

Quote
Quote
Of course since hyperspace requires a tachyon based energy field, a simple tachyon pulse on the inverse wavelength would neutralize any hyperdrive.  In fact, flooding the ship with tachyons at an inverse frequency would probably neutralize their entire power grid since hypermatter is tachyon based.  That's something a standard federation deflector array could do.

Where did you get this?
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Tachyon
Quote
Hypermatter was composed of tachyonic particles and when these charged particles were exposed to the constraints of the lower dimensions of realspace produced near-limitless energy.
Of course since the energy is near-limitless SW wins due to ignoring the laws of physics.  So congrats:
SW wins based on magic.
[/quote]

Since when to tachyons have wavelenghs?  Since when do Star Wars shields have frequencies?  Are you using the typical Trekkie misconception that Star Wars shields also have frequencies?
« Last Edit: October 24, 2010, 02:28:12 PM by RoundEarthGuy »

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #39 on: October 24, 2010, 02:30:48 PM »
While you were writing all these massive replies over whether Star Wars would beat Star Trek I was out enjoying my life.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #40 on: October 24, 2010, 04:29:07 PM »
While you were writing all these massive replies over whether Star Wars would beat Star Trek I was out enjoying my life.

This man wins at life.

*

Lorddave

  • 18295
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #41 on: October 24, 2010, 07:34:33 PM »
Fuck it. I'm going to go have sex instead.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #42 on: October 25, 2010, 12:24:09 PM »
Fuck it. I'm going to go have sex instead.

Aka you lost the argument.

Concession accepted.  Star Wars wins!

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #43 on: October 25, 2010, 12:35:25 PM »
Concession accepted. RoundEarthGuy is a virgin.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

Lorddave

  • 18295
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #44 on: October 25, 2010, 12:40:29 PM »
Fuck it. I'm going to go have sex instead.

Aka you lost the argument.

Concession accepted.  Star Wars wins!

Hey, who am I to argue against magic?  Especially when the sex is soooo much better.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

Euclid

  • 943
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #45 on: October 25, 2010, 01:04:55 PM »
While you were writing all these massive replies over whether Star Wars would beat Star Trek I was out enjoying my life.

You're not enjoying your life in a Star Wars vs. Star Trek debate?   ???
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist
Yes, thanks to the tireless efforts of Euclid and a few other mathematically-inclined members, electromagnetic acceleration is fast moving into the forefront of FE research.
8)

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #46 on: October 25, 2010, 03:15:56 PM »
Fuck it. I'm going to go have sex instead.

Aka you lost the argument.

Concession accepted.  Star Wars wins!

Hey, who am I to argue against magic?  Especially when the sex is soooo much better.

So then admit that you've lost instead of trying to put the blame on me.

*

Lorddave

  • 18295
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #47 on: October 25, 2010, 11:02:56 PM »
Fuck it. I'm going to go have sex instead.

Aka you lost the argument.

Concession accepted.  Star Wars wins!

Hey, who am I to argue against magic?  Especially when the sex is soooo much better.

So then admit that you've lost instead of trying to put the blame on me.
Sure, whatever you want.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #48 on: October 26, 2010, 03:56:51 AM »
Why focuss on the hardware when the real power in the Star Wars universe comes from the Force - Jedi and Sith.

How does this compare to Star Trek?

?

Horatio

  • Official Member
  • 4016
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #49 on: October 26, 2010, 04:58:23 AM »
Fuck it. I'm going to go have sex instead.

Aka you lost the argument.

Concession accepted.  Star Wars wins!

Hey, who am I to argue against magic?  Especially when the sex is soooo much better.

Star Wars does not have Risa, though.
How dare you have the audacity to demand my deposition. I've never even heard of you.

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #50 on: October 26, 2010, 05:51:19 AM »
Why focuss on the hardware when the real power in the Star Wars universe comes from the Force - Jedi and Sith.

How does this compare to Star Trek?

Q

Time Travel

Alternate time lines to recruit from

Berny
Space
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12744
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #51 on: October 26, 2010, 06:28:47 AM »
How could I forget rule 87b part 3.5.8 of the "rules of imaginary battles between fictional individuals, species, factions, organisations or groups"?:

"All imaginary battles must take into account the relevant time-frames of each competitor and a specific time-frame for the battle must be set"


Fine ST wins by sending a fleet of 29th century timeships back into SW's past and wiping out the Empire before it was born...

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #52 on: October 26, 2010, 09:37:13 AM »
Why focuss on the hardware when the real power in the Star Wars universe comes from the Force - Jedi and Sith.

How does this compare to Star Trek?

Q

Time Travel

Alternate time lines to recruit from

Berny
Space

Why not just Q willing the Empire out of existence?
Snap! They're gone.

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #53 on: October 26, 2010, 12:16:29 PM »
Why focuss on the hardware when the real power in the Star Wars universe comes from the Force - Jedi and Sith.

How does this compare to Star Trek?

Actually, the real practical power that's relevant in a war in Star Wars is its ships.  Jedi and Sith are powerful, but how can they do anything without ships to transport them and defend them, or ground troops to fight the war, since there aren't enough Force users to single handedly wage a galactic war?

But yes, Force users would be another reason that Star Wars crushes Star Trek in a war, in addition to the HUGE tech gap.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

*

Lorddave

  • 18295
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #55 on: October 26, 2010, 01:55:44 PM »
Just a few questions:
What is storm trooper armor made of?
How much power is in a tie fighter's laser cannon?
What is a droid made of?
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #56 on: October 26, 2010, 02:01:47 PM »
I may have missed this but who is fighting this war? Would it be one galaxy vs the other or just Empire vs Federation?

Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #57 on: October 26, 2010, 06:21:58 PM »
Just a few questions:
What is storm trooper armor made of?

Plastoid

Quote
How much power is in a tie fighter's laser cannon?

That of a slave 1's laser cannon is 2 kt per shot, so a tie fighter's would probably be similar but a little smaller.

Quote
What is a droid made of?

Mostly durasteel.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #58 on: October 26, 2010, 06:56:34 PM »
Quote
How much power is in a tie fighter's laser cannon?

That of a slave 1's laser cannon is 2 kt per shot, so a tie fighter's would probably be similar but a little smaller.

WTF kind of unit is a kt?

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Scientific proof that Star Wars would crush Star Trek in any war
« Reply #59 on: October 26, 2010, 07:55:46 PM »
Quote
How much power is in a tie fighter's laser cannon?

That of a slave 1's laser cannon is 2 kt per shot, so a tie fighter's would probably be similar but a little smaller.

WTF kind of unit is a kt?

Hmm.. Google returned these results, but none of them seem to fit very well.
Molecular heat energy? Kiloton? Knot?
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.