My recently started blog - need suggestions

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
Post Reply
Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

My recently started blog - need suggestions

Post by Picard » Thu Aug 12, 2010 3:48 pm

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.
Last edited by Picard on Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: My recently started blog

Post by 2046 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 1:40 am

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.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog

Post by Picard » Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:33 am

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.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: My recently started blog

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Aug 13, 2010 4:46 pm

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

User avatar
Tyralak
Bridge Officer
Posts: 234
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:39 am
Contact:

Re: My recently started blog

Post by Tyralak » Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:37 pm

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.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: My recently started blog

Post by 2046 » Sat Aug 14, 2010 4:39 am

Source for that, please.

Opened thread here so as not to distract (more) from Picard.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog

Post by Picard » Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:19 pm

Thanks. I updated canonity page - Memory Alpha is moved in mixed canonity group.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog

Post by Picard » Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:37 pm

No suggestions?

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions

Post by Mike DiCenso » Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:29 pm

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

Kor_Dahar_Master
Starship Captain
Posts: 1246
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog

Post by Kor_Dahar_Master » Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:43 pm

Picard wrote:No suggestions?
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.

The image with the Klingon is a example of perhaps a third more exotic effect by the way:-

Image

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.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions

Post by Mike DiCenso » Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:12 pm

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.
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.
-Mike

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog

Post by Picard » Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:32 pm

Kor_Dahar_Master wrote:
Picard wrote:No suggestions?
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.

The image with the Klingon is a example of perhaps a third more exotic effect by the way:-

Image

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.
True. But I don't know what else it could be - maybe breaking down mollecular links?
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.
""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."

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.
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.
Agreed. Gonna include that in post.

P.S. Thanks for help so far, keep contributing. About my English... well, I'll just need to practice.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions

Post by Picard » Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:11 pm

BTW, does anyone know how many shots per second (of heavy and medium TL) can ISD pump out?

Kor_Dahar_Master
Starship Captain
Posts: 1246
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions

Post by Kor_Dahar_Master » Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:51 pm

Picard wrote:BTW. Does anyone know how many shots per second (of heavy and medium TL) can ISD pump out?
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.

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.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: My recently started blog - need suggestions

Post by Picard » Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:35 am

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

Post Reply