ST-v-SW.net: Rise calcs

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
User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

ST-v-SW.net: Rise calcs

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:15 pm

On the ST kicks Asteroids page, notably in the "Objections" section about Rise, you present the following pictures, and comment them as such:
4. You scaled the asteroid wrong. First, torpedo glow doesn't increase after the torpedo exits the launcher. Second, you scaled the torpedo when it was at the greatest distance from the launch point, and you can't know how big the asteroid is from that.

The scaling is correct, within a reasonable margin of error. First, torpedo glow does indeed increase . . . it's a shield after all, and we can't assume it's raised to full strength the nanosecond the torpedo exits the tube.

In regards to the notion that I should've scaled the torpedo off of an earlier pic, let's take a look, using the "Hutt" methodology:

The pic I used for scaling:

Image

The one they think I should have used:

Image

The frame of the asteroid and torpedo used for scaling

Image

A comparison image:

Image

In the last pic above, there are two small squares and an itty-bitty square. The top-most two are, from the left, the frame they think I should have used, and the frame I did in fact use to scale the torpedo. Both have been reduced in size so that all the torpedoes are all the same size. Below the left frame, you can see a perspective-free schematic drawing of the 130-meter-wide Voyager, roughly (and conservatively) scaled to the navigational deflector of the scene above it. The width of the ship is 22 pixels . . . the length of the asteroid is (still) 78 pixels. Though the margin for error is greater using this method (especially given the small number of pixels we're dealing with), we still come up with a figure of 460 meters, 70 meters more than my figure. It would be even larger with a less conservatively-scaled schematic view. And, if torpedoes do not in fact seem to increase in size, and if we used the itty-bitty frame on the right for scaling, we'd end up with an asteroid a kilometer in length . . . and remember, the firepower would scale with the volume. Thus, we could quite easily end up beyond the 500 megaton "Skin of Evil"[TNG] territory, up into the 1.4 gigaton range.

So, what do you say we leave the scaling alone, and keep the conservative 100 megaton figure?
Shouldn't the part bolded in orange be read as follows:

"In the last pic above, there are two small squares and an itty-bitty square. The top-most two are, from the left, the frame I used to scale the torpedo, and the frame they think I should have used. "

Besides, aren't you interested in updating that page with higher quality shots?

Kane Starkiller
Jedi Knight
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:15 am

Post by Kane Starkiller » Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:59 pm

Ah man that's a classic. Why use the point of launch when you can use the frame when it comes closest to the camera so the size exaggeration will be the greatest. And then you claim that torpedo grows even though we know that torpedoes have a guidance system and we know they can change speed and heading which neatly explains the apparent glow.
Not to mention the looming question of why would Voyager's crew want to increase the torpedo shield diameter to 10 meters when smallest possible cross section will provide best penetration of asteroid.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Post by Praeothmin » Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:23 pm

Kane starkiller wrote:Not to mention the looming question of why would Voyager's crew want to increase the torpedo shield diameter to 10 meters when smallest possible cross section will provide best penetration of asteroid.
Which brings up this question:
Would a shield really allow for better penetration?
Wouldn't it rather stop the Torpedo from going too deep, no matter the cross section, since we've seen countless times how ST races use shields to protect themselves from physical dangers?
I thought the torpedoes' shield was to allow it ot reach the target unscated, or even help in penetrating the target's shield somehow (with, of course, a technobabbly way of bypassing the target's shields by modulating the torpedoes' shield, or something).

Kane Starkiller
Jedi Knight
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:15 am

Post by Kane Starkiller » Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Why would a shield cause torpedo to stop more than a physical shell of equal size? It is simply some kind of energy barrier that deflects energy an matter up to a point. For all intents and purposes it behaves as a solid wall. So if you wrap it as tightly as possible it will allow for greater penetration.
Obviously if you expand it to 10 meters it won't penetrate much if at all. There was absolutely no reason for them to increase torpedoes shield to such a large diameter.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:42 pm

Kane Starkiller wrote:Ah man that's a classic. Why use the point of launch when you can use the frame when it comes closest to the camera so the size exaggeration will be the greatest. And then you claim that torpedo grows even though we know that torpedoes have a guidance system and we know they can change speed and heading which neatly explains the apparent glow.
Not to mention the looming question of why would Voyager's crew want to increase the torpedo shield diameter to 10 meters when smallest possible cross section will provide best penetration of asteroid.
Mh, yes, I think I got messed up. The reason is that I was mislead about the torp glow width / Voyager size ratio.
I thought the small picture on the left was from the shot where the torp was near the left of the screen, and the smaller picture on the right, was taken when the torp just exited the tube.

But in fact, it's just so small that I see that what I could have understood as a torp glow might be nothing more than pixel cramming making the more luminous part of the hull look like a torp glow.

Well, that's for using ridiculously small images, instead of increasing the size of the picture which shows the asteroid.


Image

This is the image to use for the low end.

But it seems we can already see that the streaks and the aura around the torp are, anyway, already bigger than the structure that looks to be the tube's exit.

Then, from that picture, you first demonstrate that shield growth exists, which he does (but there are a couple of objections to make), and then you try to know by how much the torp saw its shield widen before reaching the asteroid.

That said, is this phenomenom always happening? That's the question. Did Robert make a mistake when geneealizing this effect, and claiming that it happened in Rise?

I can understand that immediately using this pic is not accepted by everybody, notably when he claims that it's a very stretching low end.
Above all, he uses it, after admiting (on the torp shield page), that on the "Rise" page, he chose to assume that the torpedo had been fired toward port, toward the camera (which in the absolute, as he says, will make the glow smaller than if the torp was fired straight on, dead ahead, along the forward axis). So fully knowing, and assuming that the glow looked wider because in that case, it was assumed to be due to proximity to the camera, he still used that shot by comparing the glow size to the Voyager size, like if the torp was actually close to the ship, contrary to his assumption.

Which means that when he needs to scale that picture to the asteroid, he needs to reduce it much more, and this makes the asteroid much larger.

However, despite the aboslute clumsiness of his argumentation, his shield glow page offers an absolute proof, in the existence of Hope and Fear, that the glow can dramatically widen while the torp still remains close to the ship, that is, fired dead ahead.

The whole question is to know, as for someone like me who don't see much Trek episodes, if this glow growth happens that often, and if somehow, it can be dialed up (or down), and if it's dependant of the torp's yield, for example.

Because this is where there's a problem with his page. He seems to assume that the glow did widen to one of the largest sizes possible.

It would be easy to know if the torps cast light upon the ventral hull of the "saucer" section, if we were provided pictures between the two frames shown on his site.

If we get a situation similar to Hope and Fear, then he was right to claim that the shield growth happened, and could easily use HaF or Rise directly for the largest shield glow.

However, if the hull is clearly not lit in any way, then we'll have to consider that it was exactly moving towards the camera, and that it's not easy to know how big the glow would be, and would end being between a glow like HaF, or Alliances.

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

Re: ST-v-SW.net: Rise calcs

Post by 2046 » Sat Sep 22, 2007 1:48 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Shouldn't the part bolded in orange be read as follows:

"In the last pic above, there are two small squares and an itty-bitty square. The top-most two are, from the left, the frame I used to scale the torpedo, and the frame they think I should have used. "
No. It is correct as stated . . . ah, as you've noticed:
Mh, yes, I think I got messed up. The reason is that I was mislead about the torp glow width / Voyager size ratio.
I thought the small picture on the left was from the shot where the torp was near the left of the screen, and the smaller picture on the right, was taken when the torp just exited the tube.

But in fact, it's just so small that I see that what I could have understood as a torp glow might be nothing more than pixel cramming making the more luminous part of the hull look like a torp glow.
Cool. No worries.
Besides, aren't you interested in updating that page with higher quality shots?
Yes. I've actually made the screenshots already . . . jeez, I think that was last year . . . but the page would require re-writes to integrate properly, and I haven't gotten around to it yet. After all, I am also interested in updating all my other pages with assorted "new" information (such as that from the SW SE DVDs, and/or the HD broadcasts), and in completing the many pages that are in the pipe. Indeed, I don't even know now how many partial pages I have.

As soon as an old-style patron magically appears who begs . . . BEGS, I SAY . . . for me to take a year off work at his expense so I can complete the site, I'll be one crazy-updatin'-mofo, and all my desires for the site will come to pass.

In the interim, comparatively-crappy old pics have to suffice.

Kazeite
Bridge Officer
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:45 pm
Location: Polish Commonwealth

Post by Kazeite » Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:29 pm

Oh, Rise argument! My favourite! :)

So, Kane, you still insist that this torpedo wasn't fired more or less straight ahead? I confess, I'm at loss why that torpedo would start ro accelerate and then turn sharply while decelerating, while maintaining apparent linear trajectory.

Wouldn't pointing Voyager more or less in the direction of the asteroid be simpler?

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Sep 22, 2007 11:21 pm

Kazeite wrote:Oh, Rise argument! My favourite! :)

So, Kane, you still insist that this torpedo wasn't fired more or less straight ahead? I confess, I'm at loss why that torpedo would start ro accelerate and then turn sharply while decelerating, while maintaining apparent linear trajectory.

Wouldn't pointing Voyager more or less in the direction of the asteroid be simpler?
Yes, but a simple look at the clip should fix that once for all.

First, seeing the torps in motion will make it easier to gauge the trajectory. But tricks can happen, still.

So looking at the hull and checking if it's lit will be the crucial proof, in a way or the other.

But then, if the torps are headed towards the camera, then it will be necessary to try to find how wide the glow really is. That's why I said that a glow size between that of Alliances and HaF will be likely.

That said, it should be simple, using each frame, to point out the position of the glow's center.
If we see that the trajectory is totally linear, it would really be a matter of extreme luck if the torpedo was moving towards the camera, and yet not seen following any seemingly surved trajectory.

Let's wait for the better frames and video clips.

Kazeite
Bridge Officer
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:45 pm
Location: Polish Commonwealth

Post by Kazeite » Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:55 am

Well, I kinda already did that...

Observe:

Image

I've overlayed Voyager model over the dvd caps in 3D program. Once I had reasonable fit, I've hid the ship and started fiddling with spheres, trying to place them over the subsequent glows (there are only three of those, unfortunately).

In Camera01 we see composite image in the background, showing all three glows.

The red spheres represent torpedo glow size placed with the assumption that torpedo was fired more or less straight forward. I was pleasantly surprised to discover that this assumption needs to be changed, since the torpedo seemed to be heading slightly downwards.

In top view, the smallest sphere is the one farthest from the camera in Camera01 view, the middle one is middle, etc. It's hard to make them out in Camera01 view because they're covered with green spheres, but they're there :) So what we have is nice linear acceleration, heading slightly downwards.

Now, the green spheres. They're the ones placed with the assumption that torpedo glow remains constant, as per Kanes "theory". In Camera01 view the apparent position of green and red spheres is the same, which is why they overlap each other.

But other view show us bare truth - if Kane is right, then this torpedo was fired to the left and then suddently started decelerating just as it was about to pass the camera. Now that I've looked at this picture again, except for starting change there's even no sign of any course correction for the third sphere.

So basically, Kane would like us to believe that torpedo immediately started flying left, towards the camera, slowing down as it neared its position. I find that highly unlikely.

So... did I made myself clear? Maybe I should put some numbers on the picture, to make sure you know what spheres I'm talking about? :)

Kane Starkiller
Jedi Knight
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:15 am

Post by Kane Starkiller » Sun Sep 23, 2007 1:10 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Then, from that picture, you first demonstrate that shield growth exists, which he does (but there are a couple of objections to make), and then you try to know by how much the torp saw its shield widen before reaching the asteroid.
Actually he posts pictures of 18 incidents most of which don't involve Voyager/DS9 torpedo types. The small yellow ones.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:However, despite the aboslute clumsiness of his argumentation, his shield glow page offers an absolute proof, in the existence of Hope and Fear, that the glow can dramatically widen while the torp still remains close to the ship, that is, fired dead ahead.
Actually it's hope and fear that devastates his argument. In that episode Voyager fired at a ship called Dauntless which was about 150m long an some 20-30 meters tall. Here is the very next scene:
Image
Image
Look at the windows on the Dauntless. That's 1-2 meters glow and he claims what, a 7-10 meters glow.

Kazeite wrote:But other view show us bare truth - if Kane is right, then this torpedo was fired to the left and then suddently started decelerating just as it was about to pass the camera. Now that I've looked at this picture again, except for starting change there's even no sign of any course correction for the third sphere.

So basically, Kane would like us to believe that torpedo immediately started flying left, towards the camera, slowing down as it neared its position. I find that highly unlikely.

So... did I made myself clear? Maybe I should put some numbers on the picture, to make sure you know what spheres I'm talking about? :)
Really! You find it more likely instead that, for some reason, torpedo started to increase in size? Even though we already know the torpedoes can accelerate, decelerate and change heading? I guess Starfleet likes to pump up their torpedoes to 10m diameter even though the goal is to achieve maximum penetration so as to increase the effectiveness of the energy release?
As for why the torpedo would decelerate a pretty simple explanation is that it slowed down to acquire or reacquire a more precise lock on the target or to adjust it's course.
I like your cute picture though.


Luckily I have some cute pictures of my own and these happen to be canon rather than figments of your imagination:
Image
DS9 torpedo just about to strike a Galor. 7.5 meters in diameter eh Darkstar?
Image
Another one.
Image
And another.


Obviously if one wishes to keep even a pretense of being honest he will not claim that assuming torpedo diameter of 10 meters results in "absolute I bent over backwards lower limit".

Kazeite
Bridge Officer
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:45 pm
Location: Polish Commonwealth

Post by Kazeite » Sun Sep 23, 2007 1:57 pm

Kane Starkiller wrote: Really! You find it more likely instead that, for some reason, torpedo started to increase in size?
Yes, because, as made blingingly obvious by your own examples you posted on Darkstars weblog, we do already know the torpedoes can change the size of their glow.

Which is simpler? Torpedo fired forward and showing nice, linear acceleraration, or torpedo fired to the left, which suddently starts decelerating for no apparent reason?
I guess Starfleet likes to pump up their torpedoes to 10m diameter even though the goal is to achieve maximum penetration so as to increase the effectiveness of the energy release?
And how exactly do you know that size of the glow is directly tied to penetration capability?
As for why the torpedo would decelerate a pretty simple explanation is that it slowed down to acquire or reacquire a more precise lock on the target or to adjust it's course.
More precise lock? It's a nice, big hunk of rock. We know Starfleet weapons are accurate. And since when "reacquiring more precise lock" requires slowing down, huh? Your hypothesis has no merit.
Luckily I have some cute pictures of my own and these happen to be canon rather than figments of your imagination:
Really, Kane, it's quite simple: No examples outside of "Rise" can overrule torpedo scaling from that episode. We do know that torpedoes have variable glow sizes; therefore, smaller torpedoes from episodes cannot possibly make bigger torpedoes from "Rise" invalid.

No matter how many examples you'll find, you won't be able to overrule "Rise" scaling that way.

Kane Starkiller
Jedi Knight
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:15 am

Post by Kane Starkiller » Sun Sep 23, 2007 2:46 pm

Kazeite wrote:Yes, because, as made blingingly obvious by your own examples you posted on Darkstars weblog, we do already know the torpedoes can change the size of their glow.
By all means provide evidence. Evidence that Voyager/DS9 era yellow torpedoes ever increased to 10 meters in diameter.

Kazeite wrote:Which is simpler? Torpedo fired forward and showing nice, linear acceleraration, or torpedo fired to the left, which suddently starts decelerating for no apparent reason?
Simpler than what? The theory that it grows for some reason. Yes it is simpler. Especially since there is nothing simple about aiming a 700,000 ton starship like a sniper and trying to hit an asteroid. Much easier to just fire it and let torpedo's guidance system to do it's job.

Kazeite wrote:And how exactly do you know that size of the glow is directly tied to penetration capability?
Because the greater the shield crossectional area the smaller the stress. That's why a needle will almost effortlessly puncture your skin.

Kazeite wrote:More precise lock? It's a nice, big hunk of rock. We know Starfleet weapons are accurate. And since when "reacquiring more precise lock" requires slowing down, huh? Your hypothesis has no merit.
A nice big hunk of rock how far away exactly? And what exactly is "accurate"? Some quantifications please since we know that DS9 torpedoes missed ships from a few km away in Way of the warrior and Call to arms.
Regardless slowing down gives torpedo more time to acquire a precise lock and simplifies things because it eliminates torpedoes own movement.
The theory certainly has more merit than "Starfleet likes to increase the size of it's torpedoes even if it would be much more useful to keep the torpedo shield as small as possible"

Kazeite wrote:Really, Kane, it's quite simple: No examples outside of "Rise" can overrule torpedo scaling from that episode. We do know that torpedoes have variable glow sizes; therefore, smaller torpedoes from episodes cannot possibly make bigger torpedoes from "Rise" invalid.
What scaling from Rise? Oh you mean your little modeling attempts in lightwave? Here is a hint: your models are not canon source so there is nothing to overrule.

Kazeite wrote:No matter how many examples you'll find, you won't be able to overrule "Rise" scaling that way.
And no matter how much you pretend that your models are somehow canon evidence it doesn't change the simple fact that you have no way of knowing how big the torpedoes from Rise were.

User avatar
l33telboi
Starship Captain
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am
Location: Finland

Post by l33telboi » Sun Sep 23, 2007 3:16 pm

Kane Starkiller wrote:Simpler than what?
Simpler then your theory that the torpedo suddenly slows down and veers off it's original trajectory in such a way that it still looks like it's going straight forward to the viewers.

Yes, it is a simpler explanation.

And if there really is previously established evidence that the glow increases after time, then what exactly is the problem with assuming this is the case here as well?
Because the greater the shield crossectional area the smaller the stress. That's why a needle will almost effortlessly puncture your skin.
That's assuming the shield expands with the glow. Do you have proof of this?
What scaling from Rise? Oh you mean your little modeling attempts in lightwave? Here is a hint: your models are not canon source so there is nothing to overrule.
Your arrogance is amusing, as always.

Trying to dismiss his models by simply saying "it's not canon" is nothing short of ludicrous. None of the calculations or scalings any one of us makes is canon, they are only tools that allow us to measure what canon tells us. Surely this is a concept simple enough for you to grasp?

Either you respond to the argument or you concede, those are the two options you are given. Handwaving it away is not an option.

Kazeite
Bridge Officer
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:45 pm
Location: Polish Commonwealth

Post by Kazeite » Sun Sep 23, 2007 3:30 pm

Kane Starkiller wrote: By all means provide evidence. Evidence that Voyager/DS9 era yellow torpedoes ever increased to 10 meters in diameter.
Certainly.
Simpler than what? The theory that it grows for some reason. Yes it is simpler. Especially since there is nothing simple about aiming a 700,000 ton starship like a sniper and trying to hit an asteroid.
Who said anything about aiming whole ship? :) Don't blame me for your strawmen, Kane.
Because the greater the shield crossectional area the smaller the stress. That's why a needle will almost effortlessly puncture your skin.
Would you care to explain how exactly your needle analogy is relevant?
A nice big hunk of rock how far away exactly?
Less than thousands of km, so it would be no problem whatsoever. And we do know Trek ships can fire at such distance.
Regardless slowing down gives torpedo more time to acquire a precise lock and simplifies things because it eliminates torpedoes own movement.
So, wait, you say rock was so far away it had to be reacquired, but at the same time, it was so close that torpedo had to slow down to reacquire its target? That's a very specific level of "fara away" :)
The theory certainly has more merit than "Starfleet likes to increase the size of it's torpedoes even if it would be much more useful to keep the torpedo shield as small as possible"
Both hypothesis are yours. Would you care to actually deal with mine?

What scaling from Rise? Oh you mean your little modeling attempts in lightwave? Here is a hint: your models are not canon source so there is nothing to overrule.
Funny.

So you believe that scaling objects from screenshots is actually an invalid method? :D
And no matter how much you pretend that your models are somehow canon evidence it doesn't change the simple fact that you have no way of knowing how big the torpedoes from Rise were.
Sure we do - We scaled torpedoes to the Voyager's hull. We know how long is Voyager, therefore we've arrived independently at similiar conclusion.

Kane Starkiller
Jedi Knight
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:15 am

Post by Kane Starkiller » Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:06 pm

Kazeite wrote:
Kane Starkiller wrote:By all means provide evidence. Evidence that Voyager/DS9 era yellow torpedoes ever increased to 10 meters in diameter.
Certainly.
A little pointer for you. Evidence would be a picture of the required event not you just posting a link to a 43,000 word exchange.

Kazeite wrote:Who said anything about aiming whole ship? :) Don't blame me for your strawmen, Kane.
So you are saying they don't aim the ship? Therefore they use the guidance system of the torpedo. Thank you for conceding. :)

Kazeite wrote:Would you care to explain how exactly your needle analogy is relevant?
Because every material has a yield stress which is defined as stress at which material begins to deform. Stress is defined as force per unit of area. Obviously the stress increases with increase of applied force and decrease of surface area. Hence if you decrease the surface area by, say two times, you will at the same time increase the pressure it applies to the target. This is why, when you poke someone with a finger no damage is done but do that with a needle and it will easily pierce the skin. You are using roughly the same force yet because the needle has thousands of times lesser surface are it generates thousands of times greater stress.
A 2m wide torpedo shield will have 25 time smaller crossectional area than 10m wide torpedo shield thus will generate 25 times greater stress to the target. Therefore it will punch deeper within the asteroid.
Now do you understand the analogy?
Kazeite wrote:Less than thousands of km, so it would be no problem whatsoever. And we do know Trek ships can fire at such distance.
Trek ships can fire from whatever distance they choose. Will they hit the target is the question. Seeing as how BoP missed a Galaxy class starship several times in Generations and from a distance of a few kilometers I somehow doubt your claim they can easily hit anything from 1000km.

Kazeite wrote:So, wait, you say rock was so far away it had to be reacquired, but at the same time, it was so close that torpedo had to slow down to reacquire its target? That's a very specific level of "fara away" :)
He he he you are a funny guy. You do realize that being too far away to precisely acquire the target is not the same as having a lot of time to get a lock at maximum speed? You will have enormous difficulty to acquire a target with a hand gun at 100m range. Does that mean the bullet will travel for a long time?
Kazeite wrote:
Kane Starkiller wrote:The theory certainly has more merit than "Starfleet likes to increase the size of it's torpedoes even if it would be much more useful to keep the torpedo shield as small as possible"
Both hypothesis are yours. Would you care to actually deal with mine?
Oh so you are NOT claiming that Starfleet chooses to increase the size of it's torpedoes? That's the second time you have conceded the point. Thank you.

Kazeite wrote:Funny.

So you believe that scaling objects from screenshots is actually an invalid method? :D
Except you have no idea how close the torpedo is to the camera do you? The only information are your little models. Extra points for effort but it won't fly. :)

Kazeite wrote:Sure we do - We scaled torpedoes to the Voyager's hull. We know how long is Voyager, therefore we've arrived independently at similiar conclusion.
But you don't know how close the torpedo is to the camera...unless we include your home made lightwave pictures as canon evidence.

Post Reply