| Subject: Re: Galaxy class vrs Victory class. |
Author:
capn hayes
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 04:59:07 09/03/02 Tue
Author Host/IP: NoHost/207.14.48.2
In reply to:
PhysicsMAN
's message, "Re: Galaxy class vrs Victory class." on 16:04:26 08/31/02 Sat
>>>>>Well maybe.....if this thread was about fleets
>>rather
>>>>>than just two ships!
>>>>>
>>>>>Nice try....no cigar! :)
>>>>
>>>>Well try this on then, they wouldn't need the first
>>>>shots with sheilds and weapons that have no
>>>>modulations, thus offense and defense cannot be made
>>>>more or less effective through the use of techno
>>>>babble, the Empire will be Victorouis!
>>>
>>>Every type of energy operates on a frequency no
>matter
>>>how powerful.. it has to operate on specific
>>>frequencies for proper opertation.. The human brian
>>>for instance. Every here of "Brain Waves" well, this
>>>is the a mount of energy put off by the brain
>(usually
>>>in watts) that is combination of chemical reactions
>in
>>>your body.
>>>
>>> How does this relate you ask?
>>>
>>>If star trek ships can modulate their shields to
>block
>>>at certain frequencies, conceivably they can block
>all
>>>energy in the freqencies range. If the frequency of
>>>the energy being generated is beyond the capabilites
>>>then the ship will take normal damage from the power
>>>of the weapon of choice. Now if it is true that the
>>>borg can adapt to freqencies as rapidly displayed in
>>>the TV Shows and in some of the books, then they
>could
>>>modulate their sheilding to deflect that of star wars
>>>turbo lasers and blasters even if it has a trillion
>>>terrawatts of destructive nuclear force behind it, if
>>>they adapt it the freqency of weapon being fired then
>>>the sheilding will be able to block it. Unfortunatly
>>>for this though it goes both ways, they maybe able
>to
>>>block the attack but they would have to redirect
>power
>>>from different area's to the centeral proccessors to
>>>increase the freqencies at which there sheilding
>>>operates and reduce the fire power of their weapons
>so
>>>even if they won't get hurt, the still can't do much
>>>damage to the opposing vessels.
>>>
>>>(Just like overclocking a computer proccessor for a
>>>program that won't run right unless you do)
>>>
>>>If the power core of federation starships where ion
>>>reactors like that of a star destroyers and SSD's and
>>>so on it could generate enough power to deflect any
>>>bonbardment.
>>>
>>>This isn't techno babble.. this is real life science
>>>applied to this situation.
>>>
>>>A mushroom star base for example could deflect the
>>>fire power of a SSD if the sheild modulators can
>>>handle the power requirments, which on a the larger
>>>bases they should with no problems. Where as the
>>>smaller ones like the one in ST:III won't because
>they
>>>are about the size of SSD and they only generate
>power
>>>for ship refiting and self repair if needed.
>>>
>>>hope this puts things into a mach "Real Life"
>scenario
>>>for this discussion. please remember these points
>>>during your discussions about modulating sheilds.
>>>
>>>Just wanted to put in my 2 cents worth.
>>
>>Umm this is Trek-PhysicsMAN it already talks about all
>>this in the TNG tech manual. With enough power to
>>block certain EM frequencies Trek ship's do seem to
>>have impressive shields. But it doesn't help them with
>>suns does it. Now imagine that same raw power (scary
>>thing ain't it) being poored down a invisible straw
>>between a Turbolaser and the shield wall of a trek
>>ship (or any shielded star cruiser). The straw in trek
>>terms would be a annular confinment beam ACB. No a
>>Star Destroyer doesn't have the power matching a G
>>class star coming out its turbolaser gun port. But it
>>would have enough power to overwhelm a trek ships
>>shields with enough applied energy even with the
>>shields EM FM modulation blocking capability in place.
>>Why do say this? Because based on what you're saying
>>(which is discussed in the tech manual, if you choose
>>to accept that as cannon)the shields could block out
>>the energy given of by a sun and become immune to its
>>energy, heat, and radiation. The same things emmited
>>by a turbolaser, although not to that degree. We know
>>that this simply not true unless you're in the Sun
>>Crusher. Trek ship's can and do modulate their shields
>>to protest themselves from al sorts of EM and nuclear
>>radiation effects but this has limits. I'm quite sure
>>that both star wars & trek have ways around this that
>>our 21st century physics cannot comprehend. Artoo
>>would know what I'm saying. Right Artoo?
>
>every time you say RAW (which there is no such thing
>as RAW energy)(Umm, what would you call that stuff the Sun puts out, in simple terms!) I am apauled (Poor baby. Does someone need a hug?). it is impossible for
>every single energy frequency to exisit in the same
>medium. Energy frequencies range from negetives to
>positives. If a "turbolaser" contains all known
>frequencies they would negate and cancel each other.
>Ex: -1+1=0 (Ahh, according to "real life" science, but this isn't reality. Its Fantasy!)
>
>Energy output in star trek is measured in Hertz..
>(incorrect) by their reference it should be referenced
>in cochrans. Star Trek: Generations.
>
>As for the sun. Being a natural phenomina. Refer to
>Star Trek IV when they slung shot around the sun with
>the shields up.. Which do recall in Deja Q that the
>Enterprise entered the Atmosphere w/o shields. Now at
>relativistic speeds of any where from .12c to .32c the
>hull would have reached around 38 to 40 million
>degrees in a matter of seconds, which is nearly double
>that of the surface of the sun and the biggest concern
>of the crew was getting out of the atmosphere because
>they wouldn't have been able to stop.
>
>Remember I said if the Star Trek Universe used ION
>reactors(POWERFUL) not the Matter Anti-Matter power cores (WEAK) they
>use now they could generate the power needed for
>producing the shielding that we are talking about.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 