My recently started blog - need suggestions
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
My recently started blog - need suggestions
http://picard578.blogspot.com/
Here is link. Tell me what you think about it, what I should calculate next and especially if I did something wrong. Thanks in advance.
Here is link. Tell me what you think about it, what I should calculate next and especially if I did something wrong. Thanks in advance.
Last edited by Picard on Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- 2046
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 2042
- Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: My recently started blog
Praytell, why is Memory Alpha said to be Trek canon? I would think it an acceptable research tool, but not itself canon, much like the old Trek Encyclopedia.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog
Memory Alpha is Star Trek Canon wiki, with only information from canon used for it. But yes, I would rather watch episode than use data given by Memory Alpha. So I put it under "canon" section.
-
- Security Officer
- Posts: 5837
- Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm
Re: My recently started blog
No, not quite. While Memory Alpha in general uses canon information, as opposed to Memory Beta. You still need to read carefully and check and double-check what is being written by people in the article as quite a bit of non-canon TNG and DS9 TM material make their way into them, as well as quite a bit of personal speculation. Just recently I saw in the MA article on antimatter, that someone had slipped in a bit of false information that in ST:TMP, when Kirk orders Scotty to ready the destruction of the Enterprise inside V'Ger, that the explosion would result in a 100 megaton yield, and therefore this ment that Constitution class starships only carried a few kilograms of antimatter. I knew it wasn't true, so I took the time to quote from the movie as well as the book in the discussion section, then edited out the false information.
In the same article's discussion section, I found a bunch of people discussing how Kirk is alleged to have stated "Obsession" that a pound of antimatter will destroy a star system, when he says no such thing. Again, it looks like people here are mixing up sources, possibly taking information from early script drafts, or the James Blish novelizations and so on, then somehow taking them to be canon. So the moral of the story is trust, but verify.
-Mike
In the same article's discussion section, I found a bunch of people discussing how Kirk is alleged to have stated "Obsession" that a pound of antimatter will destroy a star system, when he says no such thing. Again, it looks like people here are mixing up sources, possibly taking information from early script drafts, or the James Blish novelizations and so on, then somehow taking them to be canon. So the moral of the story is trust, but verify.
-Mike
- Tyralak
- Bridge Officer
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:39 am
- Contact:
Re: My recently started blog
Not only that, but for some bizarre reason they put Star Trek Online in Memory Beta. CBS has declared the storylines in STO to be canon.
- 2046
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 2042
- Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
- Contact:
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog
Thanks. I updated canonity page - Memory Alpha is moved in mixed canonity group.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog
No suggestions?
-
- Security Officer
- Posts: 5837
- Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm
Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions
Check your spelling and grammar, and have more links back to sources. Also, the ISD versus GCS post smacks too much of wishful thinking wank since there are no calculations or links back to sources to verfiy anything being stated there.
-Mike
-Mike
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog
In regards to you "hand phaser" bit and how phasers vaporise people and objects i was wondering where is the vapour?. A person almost instantly vaporised should create a very large area of steam, water expends by a factor of 135 when it is turned to stream so for every litre of water we get 135 litres of steam so a average sized person "vaporised" would be turned into about 10,000 litres of steam.Picard wrote:No suggestions?
The image with the Klingon is a example of perhaps a third more exotic effect by the way:-
The Klingon is hit by a phaser beam that knocks him 3-5ft into the air and about 30ft backwards likely killing him or at least knocking him out (either way he got left on the planet when they beamed up and it later exploded) while also lighting him up all over the way we see in your image.
It did not disintegrate him and for a thin beam to knock him back the way it did plus light him up all over his body something very funky and unusual is going on as it requires a considerable kinetic effect from a weapon with no recoil.
I see no reason why phasers do not have DET and chain reaction setting that can be used depending on the circumstances (and the multitude of effects we see do support both being available) so you may wish to rewrite it with just "disintegration" in the cases where they do not produce vapour.
The kinetic effects are a bit more problematic, but we are discussing tech that can accelerate a ship and those within it to thousands of times the speed of light in a few seconds without turning them into a fine mist due to inertial dampeners.
As such the lack of recoil on a weapon that imparts such KE on a target could be explained away by it containing some form of inertial dampener, considering contemporary weapons manufacturers put a lot of effort into making low recoil weapons a reasonable argument could be made for trek having a highly advanced form of such and inertial dampeners are not only canon but also in the ball park as far as ability is concerned.
Last edited by Kor_Dahar_Master on Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Security Officer
- Posts: 5837
- Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm
Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions
Actually we already have a canon statement from ST:ENT's "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part 2" where Mirror Archer essentially states that TOS phasers on their highest setting are a disintegration weapon.Kor_Dahar_Master wrote:I see no reason why phasers do not have DET and chain reaction setting that can be used depending on the circumstances (and the multitude of effects we see do support both being available) so you may wish to rewrite it with just "disintegration" in the cases where they do not produce vapour.
-Mike
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog
True. But I don't know what else it could be - maybe breaking down mollecular links?Kor_Dahar_Master wrote:In regards to you "hand phaser" bit and how phasers vaporise people and objects i was wondering where is the vapour?. A person almost instantly vaporised should create a very large area of steam.Picard wrote:No suggestions?
The image with the Klingon is a example of perhaps a third more exotic effect by the way:-
The Klingon is hit by a phaser beam that knocks him 3-5ft into the air and about 30ft backwards likely killing him or at least knocking him out (either way he got left on the planet when they beamed up and it later exploded) while also lighting him up all over the way we see in your image.
It did not disintegrate him and for a thin beam to knock him back the way it did plus light him up all over his body something very funky and unusual is going on as it requires a considerable kinetic effect from a weapon with no recoil.
""Chain reaction" seen in TNG phasers does nothing to disprove this - it is merely additional ability to conserve energy and make use of phasers realistically possible in CQC."Kor_Dahar_Master wrote:I see no reason why phasers do not have DET and chain reaction setting that can be used depending on the circumstances (and the multitude of effects we see do support both being available) so you may wish to rewrite it with just "disintegration" in the cases where they do not produce vapour.
That is sentence from end of my post that adressed DET/chain reaction issue. And thanks for bringing up vaporization/disintegration issue, but it is commonly called "vaporization" so I will leave it that vay - I did include note at end of post that adresses that.
Agreed. Gonna include that in post.Kor_Dahar_Master wrote:The kinetic effects are a bit more problematic, but we are discussing tech that can accelerate a ship and those within it to thousands of times the speed of light in a few seconds without turning them into a fine mist due to inertial dampeners.
As such the lack of recoil on a weapon that imparts such KE on a target could be explained away by it containing some form of inertial dampener, considering contemporary weapons manufacturers put a lot of effort into making low recoil weapons a reasonable argument could be made for trek having a highly advanced form of such and inertial dampeners are not only canon but also in the ball park as far as ability is concerned.
P.S. Thanks for help so far, keep contributing. About my English... well, I'll just need to practice.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions
BTW, does anyone know how many shots per second (of heavy and medium TL) can ISD pump out?
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions
I think it depends on how much power they put into a shot i believe, the more powerful the shots the greater the delay between them.Picard wrote:BTW. Does anyone know how many shots per second (of heavy and medium TL) can ISD pump out?
Doing so would mean that a ship in combat taking a lot of fire and using a lot of energy elsewhere would need to balance its rate of fire and the power of the shots depending on the target. For example if it were fighting lots of small ships it would likely want low power but a fast rate of fire, while against large ships it would want high piowered shots to punch through the shields so a low rate of fire.
A bit like in ST when we see in ST: Voyager "dragons teeth" taking out lots of small fighters with multiple short phaser bursts, or TNG: Conundrum where the E-D does the same to the sentry ships of the lysians.
Around 3 mins in
SW do not seem to use TOT techniques either for some reason, while we know that ST has several types of torpedo spreads for a variety of circumstances.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions
I was going for full-strength TL so I could estimate firepower-per-second value of ISD for comparation page. I just finished work with scaling of Death Stars - more or less confirmed Darkstar's work.
http://picard578.blogspot.com/2010/08/d ... -size.html
Here is Darkstar's page (I used some of his shots):
http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWdeathstarsizes.html
http://picard578.blogspot.com/2010/08/d ... -size.html
Here is Darkstar's page (I used some of his shots):
http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWdeathstarsizes.html