VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]
Subject: Re: Turbolaser vs. Phaser


Author:
TrekGOD
 		[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 08:57:28 09/05/02 Thu
Author Host/IP: NoHost/65.163.170.60
In reply to: capn hayes 's message, "Re: Turbolaser vs. Phaser" on 13:59:59 09/04/02 Wed
 >>>In all reason LASER stands for Light Amplification by
>>>the Stimulated Emission of Radiation. Please note
>the
>>>words "Light Amplification" add a turbo infront of
>>>that "TurboLASER" that basicly means "Greater Light
>>>Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of
>>>Radiation". Remember lasers CANNOT penitrate the
>main
>>>navigaion shields of any Trek ships. Something you
>>>warsies might contridict with in a star trek episode
>>>is:
>>>
>>>"Q Who"
>>>
>>>Worf: "A type of laser beam is cutting into the
>>>saucer section"
>>>
>>
>>At that point the E-D's shields were already down, so
>>this scene cannot be used to determine whether a laser
>>would normally get through.
>Don't here me arguing! Thank God star wars ships don't
>use lasers as weapons just gas exciters!

SO WHY ARE THEY CALLED TURBOLASERS THEN!! IF THEY ARE NOT LASERS THEY SHOULDN'T BE CALLED LASERS! catch my drift

I would attribute this to a "MAJOR" technical inconsitancy in George Lucas's ability to accuratly write a script. want another example? In ANH Han Solo says that the MF (Motha Fuka) made a run in less then 12 parsects (how nice) George measures a speed and time in a unit of distance.. which we are lead to inturpret as him using some miraculas power to shrink the distance between two points along one course. ("How Touching" Q) actually I think Q may be the only being in the 2 universes that can move planets closer together to decrease their distances (not saying that is why he would) ahh another major screw up for Lucas Films to ponder and live with.

*frowns*

I guess us trekies only have one MAJOR inconsistancy to live with, I call it "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" anything mentioned in the series is minor compared to these examples I have givin. These are good examples of bad writing skills on both sides in the RL. But impossible to explain in the movies.

If some yokle in some tavern said to me what Han did in that scene I would laugh and said "That's Impossible"
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
Subject Author Date
Re: Turbolaser vs. Phasercapn hayes17:29:44 09/05/02 Thu
Re: Turbolaser vs. PhaserThe Divine Shadow01:14:24 09/06/02 Fri

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+1
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.