Stargazer wrote:Granted. I do not dispute either of these points.
Good.
No. The shield aura theory is not simpler, because you have to come up with an explanation for why torpedo glow remains when torpedoes are fired in the Mutara Nebula.
The Nebula is addressed in point four for now we are merely concerning ourselves with orange aura of 24th century torpedoes.
I'm not sure I believe that your screencaps are from the remastered episode.
Here see for yourself. Trekcore HD, and therefore remastered, screencaps.
Here is your starship on the exact same page I collected the second image I presented to you.
Even if it is, this still does not prove that the torpedo glow is the shielding.
This was only to disprove your assertion a shield couldn't be made visible during "normal" noncontact operation, the shield=aura is dealt with on the greater point.
You are assuming that there must be an explanation for the glow, when really there doesn't have to be.
No there must be an explanation for the glow, something is generating it. We can either assume it is the same as what is generating the glow in the 24th century or invent a new device.
Do shields glowing blue when hit need an explanation?
There is an explanation regardless if we know or understand it.
Ultimately here is no evidence linking shielding to the glow, and in fact there is evidence against it.
I just listed a body of supportive evidence and logical deduction supporting it and your only evidence against it is the 23rd centuries torps glowed inside the Nebula during their scant existence. A single data point which may or may not even concern the torpedoes.
And the antimatter payload theory is not "needlessly complex". It fits better with the evidence, actually. We know for certain that all photon torpedoes and photonic torpedoes carry an antimatter payload, and they all glow
First anti-matter storage/warheads do not glow as I have demostated with two seperate examples and I can dig up at least a third if you want. So your theroy dies right then and there. Second it increases the complexity because your assuming there is both an invisble shield being projected over the torpedo and that there is an etheral radiant light being sheathed around it as well. Third your theory doesn't even explain what we see because the glow is outside on the casing of the torpedo not around the warhead which is inside the casing.
We do not know for certain that all photonic and 23rd century photon torpedoes have shields.
For certain? No but to assume against it requires needlessly complex assumptions.
Occam's Razor would favor the antimatter explanation, because we do not have to make a needlessly complex theory for why torpedo glow remains in the Mutara Nebula.
1. Your theory doesn't work as demostrated by anti-matter storage not glowing. Ergo your theory is wrong certifiably.
2. As I previously stated it doesn't explain what we see, a aura around the outside of the torpedo.
3. It makes it more complex because we have to assume a 24th century torpedo, possesing the same aura, has a protective forcefield and this magical magnetic radiant energy sheath.
They never say "the ship's shields". They say "shields will be useless".
In the context of the ship. What do you think they were trying to raise torpedo shields when they say "raise shields"? Now yes it doesn't mean it can't mean the torpedoes but it doesn't have too there is a difference. Your reasoning hinges upon it being mandatory.
You also have presented no reason that torpedo shields would be different than ship shields for that to even matter.
Actually their being short-lived high intensity shields as demostrated in the jounrey to Babel in addition to shielding a smaller volume would be valid reasons of the difference. But whatever it isn't ironclad the torpedoes would be affected and we have supporting evidence that what we see is a shield.
No, it's not logical at all. It is built on falsehoods and unproven conjecture.
You have demostrated nothing I have said is false, not one piece of evidence I have presented has been fabricated or lied about, and as to conjecture we will have to disagree. I made minimal assuptions and provided adequate evidence to support my claims to the best that is available.
We do know that GARDIAN is powerful enough to shoot down fighters and missiles.
quanitfy them then. Then quanitfy the photon torpedo.
We have no reason to think that torpedoes are more durable than normal missiles.
And no evidence that its not more durable. We do not have that information.
My syllogism earlier is still valid.
You syllogism assumes X, missiles from ME verse, equal Y, missiles from ST verse, without providing a lick of evidence.
I have already provided the evidence that GARDIAN is considered 100% accurate against anything short of relativistic projectiles, which torpedoes decisively are not.
Possibly 22nd torpedoes but regardless that was an example of an atribute the defense system would be dependent on in order to stop.
The burden falls to you to show that torpedoes are more durable than ordinary missiles.
If I did that I wouldn't be arguing we don't know but that the torps whould shoot through your ships like tissue paper.
We have no reason to assume that the torpedoes are any more durable than normal missiles, which GARDIAN can shoot down.
And no proof that its not. And we have no more reason to favor the gardian than we have to favor the photon torpedo both are equally wieghted possibilies until off set by evidence.