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: 12[3]4 ]
Subject: Re: Turbolaser vs. Phaser


Author:
The Divine Shadow
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 17:36:02 09/07/02 Sat
Author Host/IP: 1Cust121.tnt1.morton.il.da.uu.net/63.28.243.121
In reply to: TrekGOD 's message, "Re: Turbolaser vs. Phaser" on 08:43:56 09/07/02 Sat

>>In ALL canon sources we see, SEE!, the turbolaser
>>pulse, which is impossible to see in a vacuum if it is
>>a laser. The bolt, which we can see, travels slowwer
>>than the speed of light. And it can and has caused
>>objects to explode before the visible portion arrives
>>at its target.
>>
>>Lasers do none of these things. Therefor they are not
>>lasers, they do not deal their damage through the
>>effects of photons heating and expanding molocules.
>>
>
>>Now stop this asinine bull about turbolasers being
>>simple photon projection weapons, because they
>>obviously aren't!
>
>have you ever heard of Laser Eye-Correction Surgery
>what do you think the laser does, it heats the
>molecular structer of your retena so the lens can be
>repaired without pulling out the butcher knives.
>Also, you ever heard of not shining a laser into your
>eyes because it may cause you to go blind? Think
>about that. Lasers can be used as weapons, not very
>effective ones if you can just hold up a mirror and
>deflect it way from you. And if you come back to me
>again and say they are not lasers, I will ask you
>"WHY???!???!!!!? are they called LASERS" if they ain't
>lasers?? I am a little confused here.

Reread the above stuff, the stuff behind ">>"
There is the evedince, compeling and sensible evidence that says, without doubt, that they are not lasers! You can't see lasers in the vacuum of space! Lasers travel at the speed of light, TL bolts don't! Before the visible tracer hits the target it explodes, why?, because it could be plasme that is so hot the heat before the head of bolt is so extreme it causes the instant vaporization of a nickle iron asteroid, We have canon evidence of that, ESB, so don't even try to argue with it.

Blasters, lasers cannons, and Turbolasers, are not true L.A.S.A.R.s, they operate differently, THEY DON'T SHOOT LIGHT!, the discharge of visible light is secondary and proof that they aren't true L.A.S.A.R.s

It is a term that doesn't explain the operating principle, just like the photon torpedo, the name dosn't say it.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
Subject Author Date
Re: Turbolaser vs. PhaserTrekGOD17:02:40 09/09/02 Mon


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.